Politics of The Mask


If I may ...
If I may ...

I just wonder how many people died because this little squirt Faucci refused to let people be treated with Ivermectin of HCQ. Pretty sure it's a lot of people.
I wonder how many people died because of the shity american diet they ate and lack of exercise, along with insulin resistance and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, being overweight, etc., (body inflammations), caused by their diet? I would wager a super majority.

Though I do agree, Faucci should see the dark hole of a solitary cell.


PREMO Member
The Study That Convinced the CDC To Support Mask Mandates in Schools Is Junk Science

The significance of that finding should have raised eyebrows, according to The Atlantic's David Zweig. "A number of the experts interviewed for this article said the size of the effect should have caused everyone involved in preparing, publishing, and publicizing the paper to tap the brakes," he wrote in a new article that explores the study's significant flaws. "Instead, they hit the gas."

His article demonstrates quite convincingly that the study's results are suspect:

But the Arizona study at the center of the CDC's back-to-school blitz turns out to have been profoundly misleading. "You can't learn anything about the effects of school mask mandates from this study," Jonathan Ketcham, a public-health economist at Arizona State University, told me. His view echoed the assessment of eight other experts who reviewed the research, and with whom I spoke for this article. Masks may well help prevent the spread of COVID, some of these experts told me, and there may well be contexts in which they should be required in schools. But the data being touted by the CDC—which showed a dramatic more-than-tripling of risk for unmasked students—ought to be excluded from this debate. The Arizona study's lead authors stand by their work, and so does the CDC. But the critics were forthright in their harsh assessments. Noah Haber, an interdisciplinary scientist and a co-author of a systematic review of COVID-19 mitigation policies, called the research "so unreliable that it probably should not have been entered into the public discourse."
It turns out that there were numerous problems with the study. Many of the schools that comprise its data set weren't even open at the time the study was completed; it counted outbreaks instead of cases; it did not control for vaccination status; it included schools that didn't fit the criteria. For these and other reasons, Zweig argues that the study ought to be ignored entirely: Masking in schools may or may not be a good idea, but this study doesn't help answer the question. Any public official—including and especially Walensky—who purports to follow the science should toss this one in the trash.



They call me ... Sarcasmo
The Biden end around using OSHA to mandate mask use at workplaces goes into effect on Monday the 10th. This is lifted from the email I received dark and early this morning.
Monday, January 10, 2022

  • All face coverings need to be double layer and fit snugly over the nose, mouth, and chin with no large gaps on the outside of the face. Face shields are not permitted*. Please see the link to the Q&A at the end of this communication for more information.
Very excited to enter this next phase of flattening the curve. JoeyB is gonna crush this virus any day now.


Well-Known Member
I saw something yesterday that stated the time limit on masks.
I believe the time limit for cloth masks was about half hour and then you should get a new one because in a half hour the Covid had penetrated the mask.


PREMO Member
Mask Mandates Are USELESS ....

Not to mention the county level comparisons, such as in Los Angeles and Orange County, where LA has done worse than Orange every single day since reinstating their mask mandate in mid-July:

A trend that was noticed months ago by Eric Ting at SFGate:

Orange County — a non-mask-mandate county — had a very similar outcome to neighboring Los Angeles County, the first California county to bring back indoor masking in response to delta. Not only were the hospitalization figures identical, but Orange County actually had a lower case rate. Orange County has a similar vaccination rate to Los Angeles County (Los Angeles County's rate for the total population is 61%, just two percentage points lower than Orange County's), which makes it much easier to compare the two counties to one another than it is to compare Solano County to the other Bay Area counties.
San Diego, Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura counties had near-identical hospitalization outcomes despite different mask policies.
Hilariously, Gavin Newsom also had previously declined to reinstate a mask mandate over the summer, despite the Delta variant, saying that vaccinations were more important:

When Gov. Gavin Newsom was pressed over the summer on implementing a statewide indoor mask mandate in response delta, he demurred and said that vaccination is the more important intervention.
"If we continue to get people vaccinated that'll be unnecessary and this is the call that anyone who hasn't been vaccinated get vaccinated," he said.


PREMO Member

Appealing to the CDC’s recommendations to justify the mask mandate is dangerously incompetent.

The CDC recommends masking if case rates exceed 50 new cases per 100,000 over seven days. What is that based on? Why 50? There’s no justification or explanation for why they chose that number. Why would anyone follow their recommendations when there’s no evidence given for why they exist in the first place?

Not to mention the incomprehensibly large amount of evidence that mask mandates do not matter, such as a comprehensive preprint study that found the below:

Results Earlier mask mandates were not associated with lower total cases or lower maximum growth rates. Earlier mandates were weakly associated with lower minimum COVID-19 growth rates. Mask use predicted lower minimum but not lower maximum growth rates. Growth rates and total growth were comparable between US states in the first and last mask use quintiles during the Fall-Winter wave. These observations persisted for both natural logarithmic and fold growth models and when adjusting for differences in US state population density.
Conclusions We did not observe association between mask mandates or use and reduced COVID-19 spread in US states. COVID-19 mitigation requires further research and use of existing efficacious strategies, most notably vaccination.
Yet this is what the CDC says about masking (emphasis added):

Wearing a mask is one of the most important ways to reduce the risk of getting and spreading COVID-19. This document describes the types of masks available and strategies that can be used to better protect the wearer and the people they interact with. Wearing any type of mask correctly is better than not wearing a mask at all.
This guidance should be used to help inform people’s choice of mask and level of protection. CDC recommends that people consistently and correctly wear masks in all public settings
Reactions: TPD


PREMO Member
Dane County Tells Fed-Up Residents ‘Because I Said So’ Is A Good Enough Reason For Never-Ending Mask Mandates

MADISON, Wis. — Dozens of Dane County residents queued up to make their voices heard before the county Board of Supervisors on Thursday night regarding a resolution to halt the health director’s endless mask mandate “until public input and the consent of the governed has been achieved.”

After lengthy public comment and debate among the supervisors, the board rejected the resolution on a 29-4 vote, with Supervisors Jeff Weigand, Tim Rockwell, Dave Ripp, and Tim Kiefer supporting the resolution. Supervisor Michele Doolan absurdly called the resolution to halt the unscientific mandate “government overreach,” and Health Director Janel Heinrich, who was on the call, refused to grant any more transparency.

The mask order was handed down by this unelected director of public health in Madison and Dane County in August, renewed in September, October, twice in November through December, and was extended again before the New Year into February.

Well then you need to vote these mask mandaters out of office


PREMO Member
Non-pharmaceutical public health measures for mitigating the risk and impact of epidemic and pandemic influenza

4.3. Face masks

Summary of evidence

Ten relevant RCTs were identified for this review and meta-analysis to quantify the efficacy of community-based use of face masks, including more than 6000 participants in total (42-47, 50, 68- 70). Most trials combined face masks with improved hand hygiene, and examined the use of face masks in infected individuals (source control) and in susceptible individuals. In the pooled analysis, although the point estimates suggested a relative risk reduction in laboratory-confirmed influenza of 22% (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.51–1.20, I2=30%, P=0.25) in the face mask group, and a reduction of 8% in the face mask group regardless of whether or not hand hygiene was also enhanced (RR: 0.92, 95% CI=0.75–1.12, I2=30%, P=0.40), the evidence was insufficient to exclude chance as an explanation for the reduced risk of transmission. Some studies reported that low compliance in face mask use could reduce their effectiveness. A study suggested that surgical and N95 (respirator) masks were effective in preventing the spread of influenza (71).


1. Ten RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, and there was no evidence that face masks are effective in reducing transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.

Summary of considerations of members of the guideline development group for determining the direction and strength of the recommendations

The guideline development group, with the support of the steering group, formulated recommendations that were informed by the evidence presented and took into account quality of evidence, values and preferences, balance of benefits and harms, resource implications, ethical considerations, acceptability and feasibility, as outlined below.

Quality of evidence

There is a moderate overall quality of evidence that face masks do not have a substantial effect on transmission of influenza.

Values and preferences

Face mask use is common to prevent transmission of infections in health care settings around the world, and a widely used measure in some communities, particularly in South-East Asia.

Balance of benefits and harms

There are no major adverse effects of face mask use. There might be issues with allergies in some individuals, and prolonged use of face masks can be uncomfortable or inconvenient.

Resource implications

Reusable cloth face masks are not recommended. Medical face masks are generally not reusable, and an adequate supply would be essential if the use of face masks was recommended. If worn by a symptomatic case, that person might require multiple masks per day for multiple days of illness.

Ethical considerations

There are no major ethical considerations in the use of face masks. Masks may be more culturally acceptable in some locations, and other health behaviours may affect compliance (72).


Face masks are widely used in health care settings to prevent transmission of infections, and are used in the community in some parts of the world (65). They are likely to be acceptable if recommended, particularly in more severe epidemics and pandemics. However, face masks are not appropriate under some circumstances (e.g. during sleep). The guideline development group also considered that compliance may not be high in some areas and populations.


Twenty-eight Member States have included the use of face masks in their national influenza preparedness plan (65). Feasibility can be enhanced by education campaigns to improve usage and compliance. The guideline development group believed that this intervention is feasible, especially for symptomatic individuals.


Face masks worn by asymptomatic people are conditionally recommended in severe epidemics or pandemics, to reduce transmission in the community. Disposable, surgical masks are recommended to be worn at all times by symptomatic individuals when in contact with other individuals. Although there is no evidence that this is effective in reducing transmission, there is mechanistic plausibility for the potential effectiveness of this measure.


Population with symptomatic individuals; and general public for protection

When to apply:

At all times for symptomatic individuals (disposable surgical mask), and in severe epidemics or pandemics for public protection (face masks)


We cannot prove masks are effective vs the Flu, but wear then any3way ..... you will feel better


PREMO Member
If Masks Work, Why Didn't We Plan to Use Them?

So let’s begin with this quote:

“It draws from the findings of nearly 200 journal articles written between 1990 and 2016.”

Got that? Their Community Mitigation Guidelines to Prevent Pandemic Influenza, was based on nearly 200 journal articles. Theoretically, this should be the gold standard, right? They reviewed 200 scientific articles on how to respond to a pandemic respiratory virus and then created their guidelines. Let’s move on:

“Personal NPIs which include personal protective measures you can take every day and personal protective measures reserved for pandemics.”

So these are things individuals can do to protect themselves and their loved ones during a pandemic respiratory virus. Sounds like this would be where they go all in on masks, right? Not exactly:

“Personal protective measures reserved for pandemics include voluntary home quarantine of household members who have been exposed to someone they live with who is sick.”

Ah! Well…uh…that is…that’s not masks. That’s not forced quarantining of healthy people. That’s not “masks are better protection than a vaccine.” That says voluntary home quarantine for people who have sick family members. That’s it. That’s what the gold standard, the best prepared pandemic influenza planning document in the world, based on 200 journal articles over 26 years, said to do to protect yourself and loved ones. No masks. Just stay home, if you feel like it, if someone in your household is sick and you’ve been exposed.


PREMO Member
Big Surprise! Wisconsin Records Request Reveals No Data On Dane County Mask Mandate Efficacy

“Public Health needs to show data that the mask mandates are preventing Covid19, How Many cases were Prevented from Transmission and data showing how many cases would exist if there was no mask mandate,” the resident wrote, according to documentation in Jicha’s response letter. “This data should be readily available and quick to give out if Public Health is issuing their mandates on science and data.”

This is what Dane County residents have been saying for two years, but especially since August, when unelected health director Janel Heinrich reimposed the “temporary” mask mandate that she’s extended every month since. It was recently extended yet again to February.

Dane County was one of the most vaccinated counties in the entire country at the time the mandate was enacted, and according to the health department’s own numbers (which they since appear to have hidden from their website), herd immunity here was considered to be as high as 90 percent in October. When Heinrich first issued the mandate in August, weekly average deaths had been steady at zero since the middle of May.