@soothfast saidIf goobermint said the virus doesn't exist below 1m you'd crawl around on your hands and knees.
Oh ho ho! *face palm*
Get outta town, dude...
You're ridiculous. Truly.
"Sixteen states recommend, but do not require, its residents to wear masks in public. In those states, new coronavirus cases have risen by 84% over the last two weeks. In the 11 states that mandate wearing masks in public, new cases have fallen by 25% over the last two weeks."
https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-face-masks-infection-rates-20200624.html
This is how you do it, when you have a functioning government:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/germany-requires-everyone-to-wear-a-face-mask-as-coronavirus-spreads-2020-04-23
Germany, just to name one working democracy in the world among many, requires masks everywhere. In public transport, while shopping, anywhere you're near others in public. And behold: Germany has a strong handle on the virus.
Mott says "Data shows areas where masks are mandatory the infection rate is highest." And the implication (considering the messenger) is clear: Masks are actually helping spread the virus. But is Mott's thesis supported in Germany? No. What about South Korea, Japan, or China? There's heavy, heavy mask use in those nations, and yet the virus is well under control.
Do I really have to connect the two dots, Mott? Do I really have to explain the cause-and-effect relationship here? Here goes, then: What typically happens is that the virus breaks loose in a region first, and it is the outbreak that subsequently prompts the greater use of masks. It's not the other way around.
So no, masks are not increasing the transmission rate of the virus, though it is often the case that masks are used most frequently by people in those parts of the US where the virus hit the hardest earlier in the year.
Sweet Mary, mother of mercy. Where are the quality, thinking right-wingers at? This place is the pits.