Archive | October, 2020

No, the CDC didn’t report that masks are ineffective against COVID-19

16 Oct

Let’s put this another way. Masks don’t work if you wear them “all the time” but not when you are in the most risky situations. Imagine sitting down to drinks with your friends and saying, “Hey, I wore a mask all day. So I’m safe drinking my beer and talking to you all while in this room filled with other people who aren’t wearing masks”.

Do you wear a mask? How would you characterize your mask wearing? By that I mean, do you wear your mask all the time? Often?

Let’s say you said “all the time”. A lot of people, heck the majority of people say that. Do you wear your mask when you sleep? When you eat? All the time when you are at home? Of course not. You assume by “all the time” to mean “all the time when I’m out and about” or something like that.

Keep that in mind.

Most Americans do wear masks. One recent survey claimed 95% of Americans claim to wear masks. In that survey, 44% said they “always” wear masks.

In a Gallup survey, taken between June 29 and July 5, results showed nine in 10 people said they had worn a face mask at some point in the last week. However, regular adoption was lacking, with 14 percent saying they never wore them and four percent saying they rarely used and 11 percent saying they sometimes used them. Twenty eight percent said they “often” wore them, while 44 percent said they wore them all the time.

–Gallup Survey

The CDC are very interested in what causes the novel coronavirus to spread. And, since they expect masks to have an impact, you wouldn’t be surprised if they asked about mask wearing behavior when they do their studies.

Such is the case in the recent CDC study: Community and Close Contact Exposures Associated with COVID-19 Among Symptomatic Adults ≥18 Years in 11 Outpatient Health Care Facilities —United States, July 2020.

The CDC led team interviewed people who were sick (sick enough to show symptoms) and people who weren’t. They found three important factors differed between those who were sick and those who weren’t:

  • Sick people were more likely to have a close contact who was also sick
  • Sick people were more likely to have gone to a restaurant
  • Sick people were more likely to have gone to a bar or coffee shop

These were big effects. Those who fell ill were about 3 times as likely to report a close contact who was also ill. And often that close contact was a family member.

Close contact with one or more persons with known COVID-19 was reported by 42% of case patients compared with 14% of control-participants (p<0.01), and most (51%) close contacts were family members.

–CDC MMWR

If you asked me, I’d tell you I wear a mask all the time. Am I wearing one now? No, I’m at home with my family. Was I wearing one 8 hours ago? No I was asleep. If someone here is infected, I’m exposed. Even though I wear a mask “all the time”. Because I understand the question to be not literal “all the time”. If I’m outside, especially when other people are present, I wear it all the time.

People who got sick were also much more likely to have gone to a bar, coffee shop or restaurant. Again, this isn’t a small effect. People were 2-4 times more likely to get sick if they went out like this.

First off there is the obvious: if you are in a bar or a restaurant you are probably not wearing your mask, even if you tell a researcher you wear them “all the time”. All the time may mean to you “well, of course not when I’m eating”.

But there’s another factor in play here. If you are at a restaurant you are around other people who are taking their masks off. They are eating too. The CDC asked the people in the study if the other people in the bars/coffee shops/restaurants were wearing masks and social distancing. Here’s that table (click to enlarge):

table from CDC study
Table from CDC report

People who went to restaurants where other people followed social distancing (perhaps seating people farther apart) and mask recommendations (perhaps wearing a mask while not eating/driking) were less likely to get sick.

Let’s put this another way. Masks don’t work if you wear them “all the time” but not when you are in the most risky situations. Imagine sitting down to drinks with your friends and saying, “Hey, I wore a mask all day. So I’m safe drinking my beer and talking to you all while in this room filled with other people who aren’t wearing masks”.

Sadly masks have become a political talking point, and people are and will die because of it. I first saw this in “The Federalist” which chose to misinterpretation of a CDC study to claim that “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.”

Since then, the President was heard repeating the misinformation. With that in mind it was clear it had become a talking point so I checked with an old friend of the blog, Ginger Taylor. She’s an anti-vaccine activist who has been following that movement’s drift into becoming an arm of the alt-right. I knew she’d be on this. It’s misinformation and it’s dangerous and it’s an alt-right talking point. And I wasn’t disapointed. Here she is sharing the story by Tucker Carlson (Fox News entertainment personality). I know understanding scientific reports is not something Ginger does well, but after years of complaining that no study is a real “vaxxed vs unvaxxed” study, you’d think she’d know this isn’t a “masked vs unmasked” study. But, then again, perhaps she does understand it. The truth is not Ginger’s best friend.


So, yeah, this bit of misinformation is now a talking point. An anti-mask talking point. It’s a lie, but for some reason masks are a political statement.

That said, masks work. They prevent the spread of airborne diseases. Let’s take the time to point out this includes spit droplet born diseases. Keep that in mind, you ingest other people’s spit often. We all do when we are talking to each other. Most of the time this isn’t such a big deal, but really, we are talking about a simple way to keep droplets of spit with coronavirus in them from travelling from your mouth to another person’s mouth. Explain to me exactly why that’s a bad thing? Or so difficult to understand?

Hey Ginger? I wonder how many times over the past 20 years you’ve invoked the story of Semmelweis teaching us that germs spread through contact and washing hands prevents disease spread? But, hey, let’s abandon germ theory now, right? And that whole cry of , “let’s find non pharmaceutical ways to keep people healthy?” A mask vs. a hospital stay…gee, even you can do that math and work out which involves more involvement of “big pharma”. Seriously, if masks were being promoted by other anti vaccine activists, you’d never criticize their use. I’ve never seen you show that sort of backbone.

Hey Tucker? I know we aren’t supposed to take your show as fact and all. Your own lawyers say so (You Literally Can’t Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox’s Lawyers). But, really, is this the hill you want your audience to die on?

I’ll leave with this one observation that apparently also didn’t register with the likes of Tucker Carlson. The vast majority of Americans wear masks. Over 80% report wearing masks often or all the time. How often do Americans agree on anything to that level these days? Why are you guys fighting against the choice of the American people?

Anti-vaccine activist on the Proud Boys: “They seemed like really good guys”

7 Oct

Over the past four years many extremist and conspiracy theorist groups have been connecting and even forming alliances. The pandemic and the shelter in place orders have probably increased this trend, with anti-vaccine activists and other conspiracy groups joining with extremist groups in protests online and in person.

This isn’t entirely new. Recall a few years back when Andrew Wakefield’s faux-documentary (propaganda film, really) Vaxxed was touring the U.S.. One spokesperson they collected on the way was a holocaust denialist (Why are Robert Kennedy Jr. and Wakefield’s Vaxxed team allying with someone who spreads holocaust denialism?).

With that in mind, one shouldn’t be surprised to see that a prominent anti-vaccine activist has come forward to defend the Proud Boys. In case you haven’t heard of the Proud Boys, they made big news (always a win for extremists/fringe groups) when they were mentioned during the Presidential Debate recently. Donald Trump, stalling on calling out white supremacists, asked for a specific group to be named. Joe Biden obliged and named the Proud Boys (read about the Proud Boys on the Southern Poverty Law Center website here ).

Here is a post from the Facebook feed of Joshua Coleman (click to enlarge). He states:


They [the Proud Boys] seemed like really good guys. Over the last few years I’ve met many more and seen them at events they either organized or attended.

–Joshua Coleman



It’s unclear why he was at the events the Proud Boys organized or attended. But a key word there is “organized”. It’s not just “hey, look who showed up? Those really good guys the Proud Boys are here!”. No, it’s “I’m going to this event the Proud Boys have organized.

Ok, but who is this Joshua Coleman guy anyway? There are many anti-vaccine activists out there, who is he? He was part of the Vaxxed tour, driving around with Polly Tommey touting Andrew Wakefield’s monstrosity of a film. Since then he’s been a very active part of the anti-vaccine movement, arranging events and protests. I won’t link to them as I’ve given him enough attention, and, as I noted above, extremists love attention. A quick online search will get you a lot of information.

So, we have part of Wakefield’s team, a leader in the anti-vaccine movement attending “events” organized by the “really good guys” the Proud Boys.

I keep thinking I’m done losing respect for these people and this movement. And they keep going lower and proving me wrong.

By Matt Carey

Mr Trump, Mr Azar, your inaction is hurting autistic people

1 Oct

You took credit for it, but it is meaningless if it isn’t implemented. You are short changing people with disabilities.

Mr. Trump, a year ago you signed the Autism Cares Act into law. September 30, 2019. That law calls for the formation of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (the IACC). Which has yet to be named and start work.

That is clearly your responsibility. Both of you, President Trump and Secretary Azar, both of you. I know, I served previously on the IACC. I was appointed by then Secretary Sebelius.

Six months after signing that bill, you took credit for it. You noted the IACC in your press release.

Last year, I was proud to sign into law legislation reauthorizing the Autism CARES Act, approving more than $1.8 billion in funding over 5 years to research and develop new treatments and therapies, and enhancing support services for those with ASD throughout their entire lives. This legislation also expanded the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee to include representatives from 17 Federal agencies and stakeholders from throughout the autism community. The enhanced public-private partnerships made possible by these efforts are providing support to those with ASD.

It has been another six months and still nothing has been done to form the IACC and push forward the mission of the Autism Cares Act.

I am sincerely grateful that you and Congress put that law into the books. You took credit for it, but it is meaningless if it isn’t implemented. You are short changing people with disabilities.

Mr. Trump, Secretary Azar, select the new IACC. Get them started right away.


By Matt Carey

Trump’s strategy in the debate was to abuse Biden’s disability. That should sicken any real American.

1 Oct

Biden is a stutterer. He’s learned how to communicate clearly but that involves focus. There’s a great story in The Atlantic on this: John Hendrickson’s What Joe Biden Can’t Bring Himself to Say. Here is one paragraph discussing possible ongoing strategies Biden has:

Eric S. Jackson, an assistant professor of communicative sciences and dis­orders at NYU, told me he believes that Biden’s eye movements—the blinks, the downward glances—are part of his ongoing efforts to manage his stutter. “As kids we figure out: Oh, if I move parts of my body not associated with the speech system, sometimes it helps me get through these blocks faster,” Jackson, a stutterer himself, explained.

I watched the start of the presidential debate last night, and watched more segments through the night. Everyone could see the interruptions and it’s natural to assume that this was Trump’s attempt to dominate the conversation. And Trump wanted to appear stronger than Biden, to be bullying him. And, of course, to try to get Biden angry. All of these are probably true.

But there’s another aspect to this. Watch Biden, he clearly focuses on what he’s saying to get through the stuttering. Trump’s team clearly saw this and saw this as a way to derail Biden. So the strategy emerged: keep interrupting, keep chattering while Biden is talking. This will throw Biden off. If Biden interrupts in kind, as he did some times, it won’t work as well because, frankly, Trump doesn’t think while he talks. And it is a way to get under Biden’s skin. Keep poking at that stutter–without being completely obvious–and Biden will get angry.

As I read John Hendrickson’s piece I realized a few things. I realized how lucky I am. Lucky that my speech issues were caught early, and that since special education had started being offered in schools, I was able to get help early. But I also realized how I need focus to speak on important issues, and how interruptions make that so difficult.

So, yeah, I think this is real. Team Trump saw an opening. A disability in an opponent. And they planned their attack to use that disability.

These are the people running the country today. This is why I can’t sit back and watch 2016 happen again.


By Matt Carey