Missouri Gov. Mike Parson delivers the State of the State address in Jefferson City in January 2021. AP Photo/Jeff Roberson, File
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson’s office asked the state health department to analyze data on mask effectiveness, according to the Missouri Independent and the Documenting COVID-19 project.
The data showed masks were effective, particularly during the spread of the Delta variant of the coronavirus.
But the governor’s office never publicly released the findings, the report said.
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson’s office in November commissioned the state health department to analyze data on mask effectiveness but didn’t release the information publicly after it showed they worked to stem COVID-19, according to a report form the Missouri Independent and the Documenting COVID-19 project.
According to the report, published Wednesday, Parson’s office asked the state health department to commission the study in November. Days later, officials returned data showing comparing the infection and death rates in St. Louis, St. Louis County, Kansas City, and Jackson County with the rest of Missouri, according to the report.
The data showed masks were effective, particularly during the spread of the Delta variant of the coronavirus in the state, according to the report. The analysis was requested by Alex Tuttle, Parson’s liaison to the health department, emails show, according to the report.
The Independent and the Documenting COVID-19 project obtained the emails by making a request for them using a Missouri Sunshine Law.
“I think we can say with great confidence reviewing the public health literature and then looking at the results in your study that communities where masks were required had a lower positivity rate per 100,000 and experienced lower death rates,” wrote Donald Kauerauf, the director of the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, in a November 3 email, according to the report.
Kauerauf noted that there were a number of other factors that could also contribute to the data, but said it was clear masks were effective, the report said. Public-health experts since the beginning of the pandemic have encouraged face masks as a means to stem the spread of COVID-19.
Scientists from the UK, Australia, and China, recently analyzed more than 70 published studies from across the world and found that, besides vaccination, mask wearing seemed to be the most effective public health measure for combating the coronavirus.
From the end of April through October, the areas in Missouri with mask mandates experienced an average of 15.8 cases per day for every 100,000 residents compared to 21.7 cases per day for every 100,000 residents in areas that did not have mask requirements, the data showed, according to the report.
Parson, a Republican, has fiercely opposed both mask mandates and vaccination mandates as tools to curb the spread of COVID-19.
In response to the Missouri Independent report, Parson posted a statement to Facebook on Thursday calling the author of the report, Rudi Keller, the deputy editor Missouri Independent, a “political blogger.”
Parson said Keller “wrote a purposefully misleading article.”
“He handpicked information from a Sunshine request then took the data out of context in order to fit his narrative. He left out important information that provides context for the whole story,” Parson wrote. “This type of ‘so called’ reporting is unethical and needs to stop because it misleads the public and poses a danger to the credibility of our institutions.”
“There is no definite evidence that proves mandates solely saved lives and prevented COVID-19 infections in Missouri’s biggest cities,” he added.
Parson said the data used to create the analysis had been “publicly available on our dashboard for more than a year” and doubled-down on his opposition to mask mandates but said he wasn’t “anti-mask.”
The_Lonely_Satirist on December 4th, 2021 at 20:07 UTC »
These fanatic anti-maskers are incorrigible. Countless halfwits, particularly online, still support the notion that masks simply don’t work, aren’t effective against Covid, some believe they even do more harm than good.
But multiple sources of high quality evidence suggests otherwise. Several lab tests conclude that masks are indeed effective at blocking exhaled respiratory droplets, widely considered to be a primary method of spread.
Several analyses have also shown mask wearing to be associated with reduced risk of infection.
Furthermore, several studies have consistently shown an association between self reported mask wearing, reduced spread within certain communities, and a correlation between mask mandates and declining rates of infection. Sure, these types of studies can have their limitations, but along with this data and concurrent supporting research comes the collective sentiment from most experts that mask wearing is an effective measure. Some research even suggests that face masks can protect the user as well.
Masks, like practically all safety measures, are not 100% effective. That's not how this works, get that notion out of your head. While a proper definition of safety concerns itself with benefits vs risks, in the case of masks, the benefits exponentially outweigh non-existent risks to begin with.
A popular talking point around masks has been one that categorizes Dr Fauci as a villain, as a flip flopping boogeyman. Claims are usually centered around Dr Fauci either dismissing or discouraging the use of masks, then later going on to suggest their use, this or that mask instead, double masks, etc. Claims often begin with “Fauci said masks DONT WORK!”, which is taken out of context to say the least.
Fauci has said that he was concerned that there wouldn’t be enough protective equipment for health care workers. This was also early in the pandemic before public health experts were made fully aware of the contagiousness/infectiousness of Covid and it's primary methods of spread.
Fauci explained that at that time, “we were not aware that 40 to 45% of people were asymptomatic, nor were we aware that a substantial proportion of people who get infected get infected from people who are without symptoms. That makes it overwhelmingly important for everyone to wear a mask.”
“So when people say, ‘Well, why did you change your stance? And why are you emphasizing masks so much now when back then you didn't -- and in fact you even said you shouldn't because there was a shortage of masks?’ Well the data now are very, very clear,” Fauci said, "we need to put that nonsense behind us about ‘well, they keep changing their minds"
Fauci consistently advised Americans to follow CDC guidelines and remarked that things could change, they did. Here’s the issue, throughout the pandemic, it's ignorance that's been most contagious. When you see the world through such a lens, where everything is so black and white, left vs right, you intentionally fail to acknowledge context. It makes it simple to reiterate, “FAUCI SAID NOT TO WEAR MASKS” when you don’t comprehend the factors involved. It also helps if you’re looking to validate your outrage through a seething, toxic right wing culture war hell bent on demonizing Dr Fauci.
And while masks are hardly a mild inconvenience, they've become uncompromisingly politicized, radically opposed, at the very center of a culture war's grievance and outrage, the subject of fist fights, divisive arguments, disturbing viral videos, familial strife, even death threats and fatal attacks! It’s absurd.
Knowledge around masks has changed considerably since the beginning of the pandemic, especially knowledge pertaining to how Covid spreads, it’s contagiousness/infectiousness, it’s symptoms, risks from the asymptomatic, among other things that influence decisions on guidelines like mask wearing.
Early on, the CDC recommended masks only for infected and medical providers treating them, but as time went on those guidelines changed. In April 2020, the guidance changed to recommending everyone wear face coverings in public, citing new data that showed a significant portion of individuals infected with Covid can still spread it, whether or not they’re asymptomatic.
Several lab studies went on to show that masks could prevent respiratory droplets from spreading while also potentially protecting the wearer. One study showed that n95 respirators performed best, blocking up to 99% of the particles, while medical masks blocked around 59% and cloth masks 51%. Our knowledge evolved, hence why some might claim that CDC guidance and statements from experts like Fauci changed
Mask use can help to reduce transmission, but masks aren’t some comprehensive end all be all defense, multiple measures have to be taken. That’s why mask wearing has been recommended in accordance with various other mitigating measures to improve overall chances of reduced spread. But this doesn’t mean masks are ineffective or worthless.
Effectiveness of even cloth masks has a lot to do with the quality of the mask as well, tighter fitting and filtered / braced masks tend to be more effective than "ordinary" masks. The wearer's proper or improper use of their mask impacts efficacy as well. Think about how many cheap, poor fitting, low quality masks have been worn and distributed throughout the pandemic, think about how many people wear their masks improperly or inappropriately. Then think about how this impacts efficacy.
In another experiment, researchers in Japan evaluated how well different masks on two mannequins that faced one other reduced exposure to the coronavirus. Cotton or surgical masks on the mannequin releasing the virus cut the amount of exposure to the other by 50% or more. If only the exposed mannequin wore such a mask, the protective effect was smaller, but if both wore a mask, transmission decreased by 60% to 70%.
According to a study of 124 households in Beijing, China, mask-wearing prior to when an infected family member fell ill was associated with a 79% lower risk of spreading the virus to others in the household.
In an analysis of more than 1,000 people in Thailand who had been in contact with someone with COVID-19, those who reported wearing a mask at all times during that contact were 77% less likely to become infected than those who did not wear masks.
In one study in the U.S of 15 states and Washington DC, there ended up being a small drop in cases weeks following mask mandates.
In Kansas, which instituted a mask mandate in July but allowed counties to opt out, the number of new COVID-19 cases per capita fell by 6% in areas with mask mandates, but rose by 100% in those without.
A randomized control trial including hundreds of thousands of participants found that the use of surgical masks by adults in rural Bangladesh was effective at limiting the spread of Covid. Researchers encouraged mask use in the non-control group of over 170,000 people. Mask use went up by almost 30% in the group, and over the course of 10-12 weeks, there were reductions in both Covid cases and reports of Covid symptoms in the group comparatively.
Yes these type of studies can have their limitations, but the broader view here, and a view communicated by experts and researchers, and well... Sensible people, is that masks are effective when it comes to spread and transmission.
A recent study that was tossed around online between anti maskers, highlighted a claim that masks are both ineffective AND HARMFUL to the wearer. But this was purely misinformation. The study was linked to Standford University and has since been retracted. This is a perfect example of how misinformation spreads online. It was found that the study was actually NOT connected with Stanford, while some far right websites continued to reference it thereafter. The author of the misinformation lists himself as linked to Stanford, but upon investigation and as announced by Stanford university, there was no affiliation.
Claims have continued to arise around masks causing carbon dioxide poisoning. First off, viral particles aren't typically floating around by their lonesome, they’re attached to larger particulates dubbed “respiratory droplets”, even “aerosols”, so the assertion that “masks aren’t capable of blocking virus particles" is one that's fundamentally flawed, they don’t necessarily have to block virus particles themselves, but droplets. Moreover, if you’re taking the stance that masks can't block viral particles, but they can block and trap molecules from gases like oxygen and CO2, you’re looking at two contradicting sentiments. In any case masks are NOT harmful to the wearer in this regard.
Posts like these have also been debunked, refuted, and retracted many times over. The publishing medical journal that this post references eventually retracted the study discouraging mask wearing for children.
I shouldn't have to even post something like this. But despite masks being a mild inconvenience at best, we live in a reality where they inflame an endless outrage. And make no mistake, it only comes from a place of ignorance, victimhood, contempt and fear.
it_vexes_me_so on December 4th, 2021 at 19:10 UTC »
This kinda reminds me of when Nixon ordered a commission to study marijuana and make recommendations for its legality and control.
The report essentially found that marijuana makes its users happy, hungry and tired. It recommended marijuana should be decriminalized and be viewed similarly to alcohol.
That report was ignored, and marijuana continued to be classified as a Schedule I narcotic.
-HigherThanTheSun- on December 4th, 2021 at 18:43 UTC »
So he made the state pay for data that he easily could have just googled?