Basically the Kansas Governor instituted a mask mandate for the State in July and then the State Legislature cut the legs out from under the Governor's authority to issue such a mandate state wide and essentially left it up to individual counties to decide for themselves.

Of the approximately 105 counties in Kansas, 20 of them did institute a Mask Mandate and the other 80+ did not institute a mask mandate. This set up a natural experiment over the course of the last 3 months to see whether or not Mask Mandates play a role in helping mitigate the number of COVID-19 cases in those Mask Mandated counties.

University of Kansas Mask Study Shows significant Differences in Kansas Counties with vs. without Mask Mandates

KU study concludes county mask mandates in Kansas have stalled major rise in COVID-19


Probably a better explanation of the study here (Graphic Data from the counties shown)...




ADDENDUM (10/28/2020 8:45PM):
Vanderbilt University School of Medicine study shows correlation between hospitalizations and mask mandates.

Masks are effective.

Are they 100%? No.

Are they better than not wearing them? Yes.

They are likely more effective as barriers to spreading infection than they are as barriers to infection.

So, the wearing of mask is to help others, not to help yourself so much. Thus, the refusal to wear a mask is a selfish and self-centered action.

We don't speed in school zones so as to avoid running over small children. We should wear masks so as to help prevent the infection of those at risk.

Good to see some empirical evidence supporting masks.

AgE Doc said:

---

PDF File from the actual study for those that want to look through it without the perceived biases of any particular media echo chamber.

---

An r-squared of less than 0.25 suggestions other variables are likely effecting the outcome, no?

So that study shows that it cut cases per 100K from 0.0004 w/o Mask to 0.0002 w/ Mask? That 50% decrease in cases is huge impact, could have been catastrophic.

Little Bill said:

---

Masks are effective.

Are they 100%? No.

Are they better than not wearing them? Yes.

They are likely more effective as barriers to spreading infection than they are as barriers to infection.

So, the wearing of mask is to help others, not to help yourself so much. Thus, the refusal to wear a mask is a selfish and self-centered action.

We don't speed in school zones so as to avoid running over small children. We should wear masks so as to help prevent the infection of those at risk.

Good to see some empirical evidence supporting masks.

---

Again, this type of language is the #1 way to ensure people won't wear masks. Have some grace, empathy and understanding when it comes to this issue, on both "sides" as it is the only way one can fully appreciate the actions we are asked to do. Plus, the level of danger of not wearing a mask is no where near that of speeding through a school zone. Bad comparison.

Also, to me the mask is most effective at limiting the viral load, for the non infected wearer. So it does potentially protect the wearer. Again, this study is not proof by any means as there are so many variables regarding the viral spread but it does make a good case for it, and I am the typical person that cannot wait until the regular normal is back and I can throw this damn thing away for good. The goal isn't to make masks a "new normal" but at most a temporary thing. I am not so sure advocates for masks believe that. Still a long way to go and more study needed. For instance, areas with strict mask mandates and enforcement that have seen spikes recently of covid positive cases.

Wichita, Kansas is not located in Wichita County. Not even close. That's my big takeaway so far.


The two counties they primarily compare to the rest of the state include Wichita and basically Kansas City. I'm not real up on my Kansas geography, but I imagine those areas are vastly different than a large geographical proportion of that state. More urban, developed, different racial and socioeconomic demographics, etc. I just feel like there is a little too much apples to oranges going on.

What is the "other side" other than not wanting to and freedom? I have yet to see someone present a logical reason for not wearing a mask. I have heard, "there is no evidence they are effective," "Freedom/America," "God will protect me," "I don't want to," and "I have a health condition." Other than the last one, what excuse not to wear them has any validity for folks to be so understanding about?

Little Bill said:

---

Masks are effective.

Are they 100%? No.

Are they better than not wearing them? Yes.

They are likely more effective as barriers to spreading infection than they are as barriers to infection.

So, the wearing of mask is to help others, not to help yourself so much. Thus, the refusal to wear a mask is a selfish and self-centered action.

We don't speed in school zones so as to avoid running over small children. We should wear masks so as to help prevent the infection of those at risk.

Good to see some empirical evidence supporting masks.

---

I see the logic with this 100%. My one question is, is there an end? This about masks and respiratory diseases has always been true. Albeit in the recent past they haven't been as serious or we have understood how to treat them better such as the common cold and the flu. That being said these diseases like the flu have killed people in the past and will continue to kill people. Hopefully we eradicate COVID-19, but it's entirely likely it will continue on as well.

Now that we have worn masks to save lives, is there an acceptable amount of lives it must save to make it worth while? We never wore masks for the flu and no one was called selfish. If we get COVID-19 down to a death rate that equals the flu will we remove masks as a societal norm/expectation, or are they here to stay to continue to prevent future disease spread?

TomFoolery said:

---

Little Bill said:

---

Masks are effective.

Are they 100%? No.

Are they better than not wearing them? Yes.

They are likely more effective as barriers to spreading infection than they are as barriers to infection.

So, the wearing of mask is to help others, not to help yourself so much. Thus, the refusal to wear a mask is a selfish and self-centered action.

We don't speed in school zones so as to avoid running over small children. We should wear masks so as to help prevent the infection of those at risk.

Good to see some empirical evidence supporting masks.

---

I see the logic with this 100%. My one question is, is there an end? This about masks and respiratory diseases has always been true. Albeit in the recent past they haven't been as serious or we have understood how to treat them better such as the common cold and the flu. That being said these diseases like the flu have killed people in the past and will continue to kill people. Hopefully we eradicate COVID-19, but it's entirely likely it will continue on as well.

Now that we have worn masks to save lives, is there an acceptable amount of lives it must save to make it worth while? We never wore masks for the flu and no one was called selfish. If we get COVID-19 down to a death rate that equals the flu will we remove masks as a societal norm/expectation, or are they here to stay to continue to prevent future disease spread?

---

lol

That ain't happening. We have to learn to live with this virus.

Hence why I followed it up with "it's entirely likely to continue"

Federale01 said:

---

I have yet to see someone present a logical reason for not wearing a mask.

---

How about, "I've already been infected" or "I've existing 10-day isolation with no symptoms" or " I received a negative test today"?

Is there a reason why a person that has already been infected should be required to wear after receiving a negative test or after symptoms have ceased?

I won't pretend to even have a guess of where things will go but as a supporter of the masks in general I will give my thoughts on where it should. To start with, COVID is unique from the other respiratory viruses in that to my knowledge there is not evidence that pre-symptomatic/asymptomatic spread is a meaningful percentage of transmission like it is with COVID. This is the driver behind the "everyone wear masks" because you could be contagious as much as several days before you even know you are sick. With other respiratory viruses I would love to see things move to a cultural mindset of "stay home if you are sick, and if you have to go out, wear a mask". This would be a feasible way to move because most others you start feeling sick about when you become contagious. Just my 2 cents but no one really asked me.


I for one am tired of people playing hero and coming into the office hacking all over because of you can't do you're job from home, you are not so important the company can't afford to miss you for a day or two. [/rant]

zachsccr said:

---

Wichita, Kansas is not located in Wichita County. Not even close. That's my big takeaway so far.


The two counties they primarily compare to the rest of the state include Wichita and basically Kansas City. I'm not real up on my Kansas geography, but I imagine those areas are vastly different than a large geographical proportion of that state. More urban, developed, different racial and socioeconomic demographics, etc. I just feel like there is a little too much apples to oranges going on.

---

And they fail to address the GIANT spike in no-mask areas prior to enforcing masks. That was much more significant than the marginal difference using current data.

And we're talking about cases / 100k, which is highly dependent upon the number of tests, type of tests, and other measures.

This isn't an "experiment". It's post-processing limited data and trying to fit a preconceived outcome.

Little Bill said:

---

Masks are effective.

Are they 100%? No.

Are they better than not wearing them? Yes.

They are likely more effective as barriers to spreading infection than they are as barriers to infection.

So, the wearing of mask is to help others, not to help yourself so much. Thus, the refusal to wear a mask is a selfish and self-centered action.

We don't speed in school zones so as to avoid running over small children. We should wear masks so as to help prevent the infection of those at risk.

Good to see some empirical evidence supporting masks.

---

Actually there is risk of damage from wearing masks improperly, not washing them, constantly touching them, and them being a collector of germs. So in some cases not wearing might be better.

They aren't barriers. They are filters with varying levels of filtration (if any), in the same way that a fence isn't a barrier to mosquitoes until the openings get small enough.

And we don't drive 20mph everywhere, anytime we get on the road. It's for a few blocks, for a limited time period. Masks have been going on for 7 months, when you are around large groups of people. And there's actual data showing how many lives are saved from slow speed limits on streets and around schools. There's none of that data for masks, and this study isn't real data or science. So that's a poor comparison.

Those who are actually at risk should wear full-body PPE and real masks if they want to go in public and not risk getting covid. Use government resources for that, not shutting down society.

Federale01 said:

---

What is the "other side" other than not wanting to and freedom? I have yet to see someone present a logical reason for not wearing a mask. I have heard, "there is no evidence they are effective," "Freedom/America," "God will protect me," "I don't want to," and "I have a health condition." Other than the last one, what excuse not to wear them has any validity for folks to be so understanding about?

---

The validity is being human and freedom of choice. Requiring masks reduces those with no evidence that it actually works. And it's annoying, and makes it hard to communicate, and they get contaminated with food and other germs.

It makes as much sense as requiring everyone to wear tin hats because they might protect against EMI, solar flares, and 5G towers. Yes metal cages prevent EMI, and yes your brain is sensitive EMI, and yes the sun and 5G towers emit EMI. As such, let's require everyone to wear tin hats to prevent the possibility of brain tumors or dementia. I mean, it's not that uncomfortable, and doesn't affect your breathing or anything.

Can't hurt,right?

TomFoolery said:

---

Little Bill said:

---

Masks are effective.

Are they 100%? No.

Are they better than not wearing them? Yes.

They are likely more effective as barriers to spreading infection than they are as barriers to infection.

So, the wearing of mask is to help others, not to help yourself so much. Thus, the refusal to wear a mask is a selfish and self-centered action.

We don't speed in school zones so as to avoid running over small children. We should wear masks so as to help prevent the infection of those at risk.

Good to see some empirical evidence supporting masks.

---

I see the logic with this 100%. My one question is, is there an end? This about masks and respiratory diseases has always been true. Albeit in the recent past they haven't been as serious or we have understood how to treat them better such as the common cold and the flu. That being said these diseases like the flu have killed people in the past and will continue to kill people. Hopefully we eradicate COVID-19, but it's entirely likely it will continue on as well.

Now that we have worn masks to save lives, is there an acceptable amount of lives it must save to make it worth while? We never wore masks for the flu and no one was called selfish. If we get COVID-19 down to a death rate that equals the flu will we remove masks as a societal norm/expectation, or are they here to stay to continue to prevent future disease spread?

---

It's beneficial to always wear sunscreen.

When it's scorching hot outside most people will wear it.

When it's not so hot, they won't.

I get that people have a fear of government control and I think when it comes to businesses closing, capacity limits, contact tracing and the like many of those are completely justified.

But I don't think the mask industry has so much influence at the highest level of governments that will have us still requiring the use of masks once the main threat has been decreased to a negligible level. Nobody likes wearing masks.

If masks work, then people who want to wear them can wear them and people who do not should be able to choose not to.

The mask truthers should be happy with this, because, after all, their masks are working, right?

NASAg03 said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

What is the "other side" other than not wanting to and freedom? I have yet to see someone present a logical reason for not wearing a mask. I have heard, "there is no evidence they are effective," "Freedom/America," "God will protect me," "I don't want to," and "I have a health condition." Other than the last one, what excuse not to wear them has any validity for folks to be so understanding about?

---

The validity is being human and freedom of choice. Requiring masks reduces those with no evidence that it actually works. And it's annoying, and makes it hard to communicate, and they get contaminated with food and other germs.

It makes as much sense as requiring everyone to wear tin hats because they might protect against EMI, solar flares, and 5G towers. Yes metal cages prevent EMI, and yes your brain is sensitive EMI, and yes the sun and 5G towers emit EMI. As such, let's require everyone to wear tin hats to prevent the possibility of brain tumors or dementia. I mean, it's not that uncomfortable, and doesn't affect your breathing or anything.

Can't hurt,right?

---

That analogy would be valid if EMI, solar flares and 5G towers were a transmittable disease.

cone said:

---

I don't see any real scientific evidence to support masks as a pandemic mitigation effort in and of itself, especially compared to effective social distancing

that said, i won't go out in public without one. I don't need a RCT to understand can't hurt might help very cheap

I find mask evangelists just as silly as mask refusers. just know we're in the dark. plan accordingly.

---

This.

What I don't understand is the almost religious zeal against wearing masks. It reminds me of those who are extremely anti-vaccinations.

Wearing a mask isn't a giant imposition on personal freedom. It doesn't prevent you from going out, living your life, or running your business. It is much better than the asinine government-ordered shut downs that destroy the economy.

Is the scientific evidence 100% in support? No.

Is there strong evidence in support? Yes.

Wearing a mask is part of our civic duty while we muddle our way through this fiasco/pandemic. Wearing masks is a good way to be a helpful and patriotic member of society and to help those who are more vulnerable.

If there is a 50/50 chance that wearing a mask saves your neighbor or grandparent, why wouldn't you do it?

If it were really a 50/50 chance of saving someone's life, pretty much everybody would comply. But it isn't. Say homemade masks help 20%. There is less than a 1% chance I am contagious right now. Even if I were, social distancing would protect everyone from me except for the rare times I need to be close to somebody.

There are downsides that a lot of people don't think about. Some people touch their face more frequently with a mask on. Most people don't wear them properly. For me, a big negative is mental health and social development. Especially for children. They need to see people's faces.

But then again, I realize I am biased. They make me hot and uncomfortable and claustrophobic. I have 4 little kids and enough to keep track of as it is. And I live in a place that requires them for everyone 2 years and up, outside and inside, distancing or not. Even little children while exercising. People wear them hiking, for goodness sake.

I don't think there is 'strong evidence'. Maybe, if worn properly, there can be a small help. Maybe. But certainly not strong evidence it helps much for community spread. Maybe our definitions of strong just differ.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on personal freedoms. What you may see is free may differ from ours. Not to go off on a tangent, but I couldn't care less if a woman has the right to abort their baby. To me, that isn't 'freedom', but to her, she sees it as such. Okay, to each their own we'll have to agree to disagree on it. Masks creates a horrible, un-fun, emotionless atmosphere. It's not good for mental health imo. If there is only a small benefit, they aren't worth it to me. If they are the difference in saving 250k lives? Okay, sure. But on the other hand, there are some of us that also buy into the herd immunity among the young and healthy. So if I'm not around the elderly, I see wearing masks as a delay to normalcy. You may(and likely do by your posts) disagree. Either way, if wearing masks were so easy and such a minor inconvenience, we might as well do it for life. You never know who you might save and from what disease moving forward.

50/50 chance? That's dramatic. No where close to that. As AggieSarah said, there's less than a 1% chance I have it and am contagious, and if lucky, maybe a 10-20% chance the masks actually prevents me from spreading it. More like a 1/10,000 chance for me to comply and wear the mask correctly as stated to actually save someone by wearing one, if that. You could make the argument is that drive to the gym worth the 1/10,000 chance I might end someone's life? It's not essential I go. Okay, hyperbole, but you get the point. Also, we are all wired differently. My 70 year old parents would slap the mask off my face if I tried to wear one around them.

FWIW, I wear a mask at all required businesses. Hell, my company requires it and I have to wear one about 45 hours a week. Maybe that's what sours me on them so much. They suck complete ass, pardon my french. No, I will not wear one at your request or if threatened by someone else for being selfish or claiming it's my civic duty. Don't get near me. Simple as that. And no, I do not think the government should be able to mandate/enforce it. It should be up to each business and each person, and if you aren't comfortable with a businesses mask or social distancing policy, don't go. Or if I get to in your face when you are worried about it? Then in the ass*** of course. But I'll keep my distance from anyone who doesn't want me around them without a mask on.

Maybe I find people who try to enforce this and impose this on others as being selfish.

Little Bill said:

---

What I don't understand is the almost religious zeal against wearing masks. It reminds me of those who are extremely anti-vaccinations.

Wearing a mask isn't a giant imposition on personal freedom. It doesn't prevent you from going out, living your life, or running your business. It is much better than the asinine government-ordered shut downs that destroy the economy.

Is the scientific evidence 100% in support? No.

Is there strong evidence in support? Yes.

Wearing a mask is part of our civic duty while we muddle our way through this fiasco/pandemic. Wearing masks is a good way to be a helpful and patriotic member of society and to help those who are more vulnerable.

If there is a 50/50 chance that wearing a mask saves your neighbor or grandparent, why wouldn't you do it?

---

So let me replay this post for you:

• You paint people opposed to wearing masks as being fringe lunatics who are anti-science
• Then you make a veiled threat: Wear a mask otherwise we will shut everything down again
• Then you make an emotional plea to people's "civic duty" and "patriotism". With no regard to bill of right's or anything that is remotely civic or patriotic
• Then you make the ultimate emotional plea that you have a 50% chance to save grandma

My follow up to you is this.

• If someone has already had covid and recovered why should they wear a mask? Please be as scientific as possible in your explanation.
• What is the "math" behind that 50/50 chance reduction?
• Will you admit that your argument for wearing a mask is largely based on emotion and not logic?
• Do you have an agreeable or disagreeable personality? I would bet the overwhelming number of mask pumpers have agreeable personalities and a strong desire to be liked. People who are "anti mask" create a direct conflict with agreeable personalities because no matter what they do is going to be seen as "wrong" to some people. So an agreeable personality is likely to choose to slander one side while appealing using centrist overtones. In this case a disagreeable person but pro mask wouldn't argue it is a civic or patriotic duty to wear a mask, they would choose a more hardline extreme argument.

tysker said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

I have yet to see someone present a logical reason for not wearing a mask.

---

How about, "I've already been infected" or "I've existing 10-day isolation with no symptoms" or " I received a negative test today"?

Is there a reason why a person that has already been infected should be required to wear after receiving a negative test or after symptoms have ceased?

---

Because in a public place, there is no way to know if you are being honest. Do you want to carry a doctors note?

My gosh, I don't enjoy wearing a mask but I do it without complaint because it's the most effective way for me to participate in the solution rather then just focusing on myself.

It's such an over the top reaction to say we'll have to wear them forever. It's just an excuse to avoid owning a refusal to help others.

Crouching Jackass said:

---

If masks work, then people who want to wear them can wear them and people who do not should be able to choose not to.

The mask truthers should be happy with this, because, after all, their masks are working, right?

---

I'd be embarrassed to admit after after 9 months I still don't know why people wear masks. Hint, it's not to protect themselves.

bay fan said:

---

tysker said:

---

Federale01 said:

---

I have yet to see someone present a logical reason for not wearing a mask.

---

How about, "I've already been infected" or "I've existing 10-day isolation with no symptoms" or " I received a negative test today"?

Is there a reason why a person that has already been infected should be required to wear after receiving a negative test or after symptoms have ceased?

---

Because in a public place, there is no way to know if you are being honest. Do you want to carry a doctors note?

My gosh, I don't enjoy wearing a mask but I do it without complaint because it's the most effective way for me to participate in the solution rather then just focusing on myself.

It's such an over the top reaction to say we'll have to wear them forever. It's just an excuse to avoid owning a refusal to help others.

---

If carrying around my covid positive test results allowed me to go without a mask, hell yeah I'd do it.

I also bet a number of people would willingly get covid just to avoid masks.

Little Bill said:

---

Is there strong evidence in support? Yes.

---

Prove it, because this "evidence" posted isn't proof.

And YouTube videos with flamethrowers and studies with iPhone cameras fail to capture the reality of how people use masks.

I've seen just as many articles from mask experts and other scientists refuting the worth of masks, and poking holes in the theory that they "can't hurt".

Fact is, majority of people:

• Leave masks in cars unwashed
• Wear for extensive periods of time
• Constantly touch them
• Must go closer and speak louder to communicate
• Remove them / pull them down to clarify communication
• Use mask materials that aren't effective at anything other than hiding the mouth