NH Mask Mandate in Effect

[JoshandBaron]

I think it only suggests that people aren't following the mandates. Studies show people in rural areas are less likely to wear masks. Despite the mandate in ND, ND and SD have the same percentages of people wearing masks. These measures are only effective if people follow them. It's usually the ones not following them saying they don't work. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[TCD]

...ND and SD have the same percentages of people wearing masks...

Do we actually know this? Or is this conjecture?

 

[Mike]

https://www.nbcboston.com/news/loca...itting-at-hikers-during-mask-dispute/2240440/

 

[egilbe]

Does anyone have a link to the science?
all I hear is "trust the science". I have yet to see any data that is science. If you think I trust anything government agencies say, I have a bridge in a desert to sell you.

It behooves you to be skeptical. Form your own opinions. Do you think studies funded by the very people who would benefit from the studies are to be trusted, believed? Tell me you are not that naive.

Show me the science. Let me make choices for myself.
"Live free or die" state, indeed. More like "follow me, sheep!"

 

[skiguy]

Does anyone have a link to the science?
all I hear is "trust the science". I have yet to see any data that is science. If you think I trust anything government agencies say, I have a bridge in a desert to sell you.

It behooves you to be skeptical. Form your own opinions. Do you think studies funded by the very people who would benefit from the studies are to be trusted, believed? Tell me you are not that naive.

Show me the science. Let me make choices for myself.
"Live free or die" state, indeed. More like "follow me, sheep!"

Do I need to bring my snowshoes?

 

[rocket21]

Does anyone have a link to the science?
all I hear is "trust the science". I have yet to see any data that is science. If you think I trust anything government agencies say, I have a bridge in a desert to sell you.

Surely a cloth face mask will save us from a virus! The same government told us that "duck and cover" will save us from a nuclear bomb!

 

[ChrisB]

Does anyone have a link to the science?
all I hear is "trust the science". I have yet to see any data that is science. If you think I trust anything government agencies say, I have a bridge in a desert to sell you.

It behooves you to be skeptical. Form your own opinions. Do you think studies funded by the very people who would benefit from the studies are to be trusted, believed? Tell me you are not that naive.

Show me the science. Let me make choices for myself.
"Live free or die" state, indeed. More like "follow me, sheep!"

You have the "right to remain silent" too!! haha

 

[expat]

None of the actions taken seem to be based on science. Why would the state close hiking trails but still maintain sales of lottery tickets and keep liquor stores open?

 

[JoshandBaron]

None of the actions taken seem to be based on science. Why would the state close hiking trails but still maintain sales of lottery tickets and keep liquor stores open?

Because they value economic health above human health

 

[Rainman]

None of the actions taken seem to be based on science. Why would the state close hiking trails but still maintain sales of lottery tickets and keep liquor stores open?

The state did not close trails. The USFS did (actually only closed parking lots).
The State kept the liquor stores and lottery open.
Different people making different decisions.

 

[JoshandBaron]

Do we actually know this? Or is this conjecture?

https://covidcast.cmu.edu/?sensor=f...ding=color&mode=overview&compare=WI&region=SD

This is the best I could find. 2 weeks ago, which is what the infection stats usually reflect, it was 76% and 80%. Current use is closer to 80 and 90%.

 

[rocket21]

https://covidcast.cmu.edu/?sensor=f...ding=color&mode=overview&compare=WI&region=SD

This is the best I could find. 2 weeks ago, which is what the infection stats usually reflect, it was 76% and 80%. Current use is closer to 80 and 90%.

"Percentage of people who wear a mask most or all of the time while in public, based on surveys of Facebook users"

 

[NHClimber]

Does anyone have a link to the science?
all I hear is "trust the science". I have yet to see any data that is science. If you think I trust anything government agencies say, I have a bridge in a desert to sell you.

It behooves you to be skeptical. Form your own opinions. Do you think studies funded by the very people who would benefit from the studies are to be trusted, believed? Tell me you are not that naive.

Show me the science. Let me make choices for myself.
"Live free or die" state, indeed. More like "follow me, sheep!"

Very few people are skeptical precisely because they make decisions based on emotion and not based on science, analytics and facts, and they are programmed to believe the media, the vast majority of which has no foundation in science or the scientific method. Our educational system has of course failed in this regard, as there is not enough focus IMO on science. People don’t want to think for themselves or be personally accountable.

For the mask debate, you start with science. From there, in any society there are going to be further decisions based on other factors, such as economics and necessity. And then, fundamentally, we have to decide whether we are going to compromise our individual liberty vs be like China (to use an extreme example). The answers are not easy for sure.

 

[richard]

I’m skeptical. I have my reasons, beliefs and opinions why, but I’ll keep them to myself because I’d rather not upset some of you more than I’m sure I already have.

 

[JoshandBaron]

"Percentage of people who wear a mask most or all of the time while in public, based on surveys of Facebook users"

Admittedly, it made me cringe too. But facebook users are people too. And there's a lot of them.

 

[TCD]

"Facebook survey" data are self selected and self reported. The sample, and the actual information reliability from each respondent are poor. I would not consider it to be in any way representative of "the true state of nature." So it's not really a strong enough premise on which to hang an argument. So while Rocket21's data may be open to several interpretations regarding causality, I think we have to take those data at face value. The Health Departments' case data, and the fact of the mask mandate on a particular date in one state and not the other, are fairly reliable inputs.

 

[TEO]

Well, the two infectious disease researchers that I've met—I'm pretty sure that they're scientists—and are close friends of someone I know well, and have been advising some of the biggest sports professional sports leagues in the world and governments of some of the largest countries in the world in regard to COVID, who prior to this pandemic had goals such as eliminating malaria from a continent this year, both wear face masks and socially distance. In mid-February they told us everything that would likely happen, and indeed it did. This summer they told us when the surge would happen this fall, lo and behold, it did.

If you don't understand that wearing a mask makes a difference and/or think that it somehow infringes upon your freedoms, you are selfish and stupid. If my high-school-aged nephew can play an entire season of soccer wearing a face mask, then you can put one on when you are around people hiking or otherwise.

 

[rocket21]

In mid-February they told us everything that would likely happen, and indeed it did. This summer they told us when the surge would happen this fall, lo and behold, it did.

The "experts" told us in March that 2.2 million Americans would be dead by August 2020, and that there would be virtually no more deaths come October 2020.



The "experts" also told us in March not to wear a mask. Let us not forget Dr. Fauci on 60 Minutes on March 8, 2020: "There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And often, there are unintended consequences, people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face."

 

[JoshandBaron]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm going to go with the most recent science, not what was said when virtually nothing was known about the virus. Remember when smoking didn't cause cancer?

No one is saying a mask provides 100% protection. That doesn't mean they don't do anything. The mask guidance at the beginning was approached from a different perspective than we have been approaching it from since April. Guidance at the beginning was focused on how effective a mask is at preventing the virus from being inhaled. We now know the mask's effectiveness lies in its ability to prevent the virus from becoming airborne in the first place.

 

[maineguy]

Unless you are wearing a N95 mask or equivalent you are just kidding yourself. I think that most tests have shown that it is petty effective. Cloth masks, not so much. And when your mask fogs up your glasses, you know that air and airborne particles are escaping your mask. With regards to the mandates, these "rules" should be coming from the legislatures of the states in question. No more governor edicts. There has been plenty of time to do this. Let these politicians from local districts go on record with rules like you can't go to church but you can to a liquor store, as an extreme example. I think it will foster more sane rules. Stupid rules cause citizens to act defiantly (some might say selfishly) and causes nothing but discord.