New York Times: Trump's Corona Policy WORKED

[Nostra]

The original NYT article praises Moncef Slaoui, Operation Warp Speed’s chief scientific adviser for coordinating the $11B program to get the drug companies working on a vaccine.
Not Donald Trump's policies.
The link in the O/P post is to a BLOG, folks.
Sorry, always go to THE SOURCE.

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

Operation Warp Speed was implemented by Trump, you moron.

 

[Nostra]

"Clearly, the pandemic has not ended. So far some 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to the coronavirus, and reliable estimates suggest that the number could reach 400,000. Health experts agree that, with stronger leadership, the death toll would have been far lower."

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

“It is highly likely that there would be significant spontaneous changes in population behavior even in the absence of government-mandated interventions.”

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy, keeping distance from one other and wearing masks.


Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved. The next step is pharmaceutical interventions.

Facemasks, shutting down businesses could only be done on a state level. Blame them for the slow response, blame them for the economy, blame governors for sending the elderly to nursing homes to die.

True and appropriate. However, it's the federal government's job to offer clear, consistent, science based guidelines - consistent being key. Governors of both parties, as well private industry were desperate for consistent guidelines. The administration fell far short in that arena.

When you have a new virus that nobody knows anything about, and the scientist keep changing recommendations based on what they learn, you have to change your guidelines, Dummy.

 

[Coyote]

"Clearly, the pandemic has not ended. So far some 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to the coronavirus, and reliable estimates suggest that the number could reach 400,000. Health experts agree that, with stronger leadership, the death toll would have been far lower."

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

“It is highly likely that there would be significant spontaneous changes in population behavior even in the absence of government-mandated interventions.”

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy, keeping distance from one other and wearing masks.


Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved. The next step is pharmaceutical interventions.

Facemasks, shutting down businesses could only be done on a state level. Blame them for the slow response, blame them for the economy, blame governors for sending the elderly to nursing homes to die.

True and appropriate. However, it's the federal government's job to offer clear, consistent, science based guidelines - consistent being key. Governors of both parties, as well private industry were desperate for consistent guidelines. The administration fell far short in that arena.

When you have a new virus that nobody knows anything about, and the scientist keep changing recommendations based on what they learn, you have to change your guidelines, Dummy.

Bravo - you finally grasp an important concept in how science works (a refreshing change from the constant criticism of CDC and public health officials for "getting it wrong"). However...the issue is not "changing guidelines", it's the frequent disconnect from what public health experts advise and what the government says.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

 

[Nostra]

"Clearly, the pandemic has not ended. So far some 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to the coronavirus, and reliable estimates suggest that the number could reach 400,000. Health experts agree that, with stronger leadership, the death toll would have been far lower."

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

“It is highly likely that there would be significant spontaneous changes in population behavior even in the absence of government-mandated interventions.”

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy, keeping distance from one other and wearing masks.


Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved. The next step is pharmaceutical interventions.

Facemasks, shutting down businesses could only be done on a state level. Blame them for the slow response, blame them for the economy, blame governors for sending the elderly to nursing homes to die.

True and appropriate. However, it's the federal government's job to offer clear, consistent, science based guidelines - consistent being key. Governors of both parties, as well private industry were desperate for consistent guidelines. The administration fell far short in that arena.

When you have a new virus that nobody knows anything about, and the scientist keep changing recommendations based on what they learn, you have to change your guidelines, Dummy.

Bravo - you finally grasp an important concept in how science works (a refreshing change from the constant criticism of CDC and public health officials for "getting it wrong"). However...the issue is not "changing guidelines", it's the frequent disconnect from what public health experts advise and what the government says.

Show this disconnect with links, not your lefty talking points.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

That's how hydroxychloroquin became political. Trump supported it.

 

[Nostra]

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

That's how hydroxychloroquin became political. Trump supported it.

As soon as Trump uttered the name, it immediately became dangerous, untested, and lethal...........despite it being used safely for about 60 years.

 

[easyt65]

Does anyone really believe a virus can't get through a thin cotton rag in front of your nose/mouth?


Virus gets on the surface of your mask - you touch the mask then touch your eyes, nose/mouth taking it off-putting it on again and again.

If the virus gets on the outside of your mask, what keeps it from staying on the outside surface of the mask? Is there something special about the mask that prevents the virus from getting on the inside once you roll it up and shove it in your pocket / your purse when you get outside of the shop/building/business you were just in?

For you to smell anything tiny particles of what you smell must reach the inside of your nose. Does wearing a mask prevent you from smelling things? If tiny particles from things you smell reach the inside of your nose, why can't a microscopic virus do the same thing?

If I wear a mask to get gas, get out of my car, grab the pump handle and fill up my tank, get back in the car, use my hands to take off the mask and then touch my face, did the mask really help?

Things that make you go 'Hmmmm'.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

That's how hydroxychloroquin became political. Trump supported it.

As soon as Trump uttered the name, it immediately became dangerous, untested, and lethal...........despite it being used safely for about 60 years.

As U.S. tops global tally of coronavirus cases, Trump is at odds with reality We have now surpassed China for Coronavirus cases and our population is lower. Go figure. Just proves how well their leadership has tackled this virus with their mandatory quarantines and preparedness. The lack of interest in this pandemic by Trump has taken its toll with loss of life, coupled with all the lies that lead the people in the wrong direction with their preparedness. He told his base it was a hoax for Gods sake, and they said it doesn't exist. Add that with the failure to not declare the defense production act, 9/11 and Pearl Harbor are going to look like a scratch in comparison, if Trump doesn't act, or gets the hell out of the way. Having bidding wars with companies to make masks is insane for example. They are bidding over making money, while people die. To hell with that failure. The defense production act has to happen yesterday. Trump with this ultimate failure of his, has done enough damage already. Can you believe it, he wants everybody to get together to go find the easter bunny, a few Sundays from now because it will be beautiful. In the mean time, people are dropping like flies, because we either are in short supply, or have no masks, gloves, or ventilators. But ha, let's all walk out of church together on easter Sunday and have an easter egg hunt. What a sick, selfish. monster he is.

Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC | Watch Rachel Maddow Live

More about the MSNBC Rachel Maddow Show airing weeknights at 9 PM. Watch Rachel Maddow tonight or online with updated video & episodes at MSNBC.

www.msnbc.com

States fight for supplies in absence of federal coordination

Rachel Maddow looks at how the lack of federal leadership on seeing to the medical equipment needs of the states has states competing against each other and even other countries, driving up prices.

www.msnbc.com

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

That's how hydroxychloroquin became political. Trump supported it.

There is no helping the Trump hating cultist

 

[Coyote]

kl

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

We aren't cultists who believe a president's word is God's.

I choose to follow what leading public health experts and agencies recommend.

 

[Coyote]

"Clearly, the pandemic has not ended. So far some 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to the coronavirus, and reliable estimates suggest that the number could reach 400,000. Health experts agree that, with stronger leadership, the death toll would have been far lower."

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

“It is highly likely that there would be significant spontaneous changes in population behavior even in the absence of government-mandated interventions.”

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy, keeping distance from one other and wearing masks.


Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved. The next step is pharmaceutical interventions.

Facemasks, shutting down businesses could only be done on a state level. Blame them for the slow response, blame them for the economy, blame governors for sending the elderly to nursing homes to die.

True and appropriate. However, it's the federal government's job to offer clear, consistent, science based guidelines - consistent being key. Governors of both parties, as well private industry were desperate for consistent guidelines. The administration fell far short in that arena.

When you have a new virus that nobody knows anything about, and the scientist keep changing recommendations based on what they learn, you have to change your guidelines, Dummy.

Bravo - you finally grasp an important concept in how science works (a refreshing change from the constant criticism of CDC and public health officials for "getting it wrong"). However...the issue is not "changing guidelines", it's the frequent disconnect from what public health experts advise and what the government says.

Show this disconnect with links, not your lefty talking points.

Sure.

White House-CDC tensions explode as Trump contradicts its leadership

Congressional testimony by health experts is overruled hours later by the president.

arstechnica.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/growing-friction-between-white-house-cdc-hobbles-pandemic-response/2020/05/15/0e63978e-9537-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html

White House Blocked C.D.C. From Mandating Masks on Public Transit (Published 2020)

A judge upheld New York’s restrictions on houses of worship. Pandemic fatigue is complicating efforts to thwart outbreaks. Confusion reigns as stimulus talks continue.

www.nytimes.com

The Latest: Trump contradicts CDC director on vaccine, masks

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Latest on the 2020 presidential campaign (all times local): 7:25 p.m. President Donald Trump is contradicting the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the potential availability of a coronavirus vaccine to the general public and on mask wearing.

apnews.com

I will wait. as you engage your automatic Trump Defense System.

 

[Nostra]

"Clearly, the pandemic has not ended. So far some 215,000 Americans have lost their lives to the coronavirus, and reliable estimates suggest that the number could reach 400,000. Health experts agree that, with stronger leadership, the death toll would have been far lower."

A Dose of Optimism, as the Pandemic Rages On (Published 2020)

The months ahead will be difficult. But the medical cavalry is coming, and the rest of us know what we need to do.

www.nytimes.com

“It is highly likely that there would be significant spontaneous changes in population behavior even in the absence of government-mandated interventions.”

That prediction proved true, as millions of Americans agreed, however reluctantly, to accept the sacrifices involved in shutting down parts of the economy, keeping distance from one other and wearing masks.


Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved. The next step is pharmaceutical interventions.

Facemasks, shutting down businesses could only be done on a state level. Blame them for the slow response, blame them for the economy, blame governors for sending the elderly to nursing homes to die.

True and appropriate. However, it's the federal government's job to offer clear, consistent, science based guidelines - consistent being key. Governors of both parties, as well private industry were desperate for consistent guidelines. The administration fell far short in that arena.

When you have a new virus that nobody knows anything about, and the scientist keep changing recommendations based on what they learn, you have to change your guidelines, Dummy.

Bravo - you finally grasp an important concept in how science works (a refreshing change from the constant criticism of CDC and public health officials for "getting it wrong"). However...the issue is not "changing guidelines", it's the frequent disconnect from what public health experts advise and what the government says.

Show this disconnect with links, not your lefty talking points.

Sure.

White House-CDC tensions explode as Trump contradicts its leadership

Congressional testimony by health experts is overruled hours later by the president.

arstechnica.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/growing-friction-between-white-house-cdc-hobbles-pandemic-response/2020/05/15/0e63978e-9537-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html

White House Blocked C.D.C. From Mandating Masks on Public Transit (Published 2020)

A judge upheld New York’s restrictions on houses of worship. Pandemic fatigue is complicating efforts to thwart outbreaks. Confusion reigns as stimulus talks continue.

www.nytimes.com

The Latest: Trump contradicts CDC director on vaccine, masks

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Latest on the 2020 presidential campaign (all times local): 7:25 p.m. President Donald Trump is contradicting the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the potential availability of a coronavirus vaccine to the general public and on mask wearing.

apnews.com

I will wait. as you engage your automatic Trump Defense System.

First link...............Not Trump. Someone he appointed to a position.

Fail #1

Second link: CDC never wanted to "mandate" mask wearing.

Fail #2

Third link: Trump was right. CDC and WHO admit masks don't work.

New CDC Report Shows Wearing Masks Didn't Help for July.

www.redstate.com

Fail #3

 

[Seawytch]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

Let’s test that theory. Convince the Oompa Loompa Oligarch to wear one.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

kl

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

We aren't cultists who believe a president's word is God's.

I choose to follow what leading public health experts and agencies recommend.

No you're cultist that believe he's the devil

 

[bigrebnc1775]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

Let’s test that theory. Convince the Oompa Loompa Oligarch to wear one.

Is that the church you cultist worship at?

 

[Nostra]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

Let’s test that theory. Convince the Oompa Loompa Oligarch to wear one.

 

[Seawytch]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

A Centers for Disease Control report released in September shows that masks and face coverings are not effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19, even for those people who consistently wear them.

CDC Study Finds Overwhelming Majority Of People Getting Coronavirus Wore Masks

Over 70 percent of the case-patients who were contaminated with the virus fell ill despite "always" wearing a mask.

thefederalist.com

Why not link to the actual report that says:

I did

No, you linked to the federalist and their mischaracterization of what the report said.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/pdfs/mm6936a5-H.pdf

Thanks, but I already found the link. That's how I knew that the Federalist mischaracterized their findings. This is the summary of that report. (nothing about masks being ineffective)

Summary
What is already known about the topic? Community and close contact exposures contribute to the spread of COVID-19.
What is added by this report? Findings from a case-control investigation of symptomatic outpatients from 11 U.S. health care facilities found that close contact with persons with known COVID-19 or going to locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options were associated with COVID-19 positivity. Adults with positive SARS-CoV-2 test results were approximately twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than were those with negative SARS-CoV-2 test results.
What are the implications for public health practice? Eating and drinking on-site at locations that offer such options might be important risk factors associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Efforts to reduce possible exposures where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, such as when eating and drinking, should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities.

Here's what we actually know about mask. If the president had supported wearing them you Trump haters would be opposing wearing them.

Let’s test that theory. Convince the Oompa Loompa Oligarch to wear one.

View attachment 401564

All the time. Oh, and encourage others to do the same.

Trump supporter: I would wear a mask if Trump asked - CNN Video

CNN's Gary Tuchman speaks to Trump supporters at the President's rally in Sanford, Florida, about masks and the coronavirus.

www.cnn.com

Do you think if a doctor told her she had a tumor but Trump told her she didn’t, she wouldn’t get operated on? Sure seems that way...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Do you think if a doctor told her she had a tumor but Trump told her she didn’t, she wouldn’t get operated on? Sure seems that way...

The question was specific to the rally, not everyday living. Yes, if Trump asked people to wear a mask at his rallies, his supporters probably would oblige.

 

[WTH_Progs?]

From the original Times article....

Today, and despite the president’s own resistance, masks are widely accepted. Various polls show that the number of Americans who wear them, at least when entering stores, went from near zero in March to about 65 percent in early summer to 85 percent or even 90 percent in October. Seeing the president and many White House staffers stricken by the virus may convince yet more Americans to wear masks.

The slow but relentless acceptance of what epidemiologists call “non-pharmaceutical interventions” has made a huge difference in lives saved.

New CDC Study Finds Majority of Those Infected with COVID-19 ‘Always’ Wore Masks

New CDC Study Finds Majority of Those Infected with COVID-19 ‘Always’ Wore Masks – California Globe

californiaglobe.com

 

[Seawytch]

Do you think if a doctor told her she had a tumor but Trump told her she didn’t, she wouldn’t get operated on? Sure seems that way...

The question was specific to the rally, not everyday living. Yes, if Trump asked people to wear a mask at his rallies, his supporters probably would oblige.

View attachment 401590

Oh please. This is where the biggest sycophants post. We know that if dear leader asked them to wear a mask they would. You can’t hide, we see you.