3 ms·
> I suspect that in locations with a higher prevalence of masking the population is generally more vigilant: more hand washing, more social distance, stay at ho
by asabjorn 5y ago
> I suspect that in locations with a higher prevalence of masking the population is generally more vigilant: more hand washing, more social distance, stay at home when ill, avoid obviously ill people, and so on. May be a case of correlation, not causation.
The states with the highest mask use (NYC, CA) has some of the highest covid positive rates, so the data does not seem to back up your assertion.
- kelnos 5y agoYou seem to be repeating this in several comments, but that's just not true. CA's total per-capita case counts and recent new-case rate is lower than, say, both Texas and Florida. NYC is not a state, so you can't directly compare it.
- asabjorn 5y agoThe confirmed cases to population is 10.3% for NY (not NYC- 2.08m cases to 19.4m population), 9.5% for CA (3.77m cases over 39.5m population), 10.1% for texas (2.93m cases over 29m population), 10.6% for Florida (2.29/21.48). Deaths to confirmed cases is about 1.6% for all except NY. NY death to cases is 2.6% (52k deaths over 2m cases). However, this way of computing deaths is only indicative as you do not capture untested cases. > Florida 2.3M cumulative cases & 3,007 case/day 7-day average vs 21.5M population. That's about 10.6%. > FL and TX are worse on per capita cumulative cases, and much worse on current per capita new cases than California. With the total cases being about the same so this does not support your conclusion that masks "drastically reduce spread".