GimmetheSauceySauce
101806
1814
143
Jun 30, 2020 4:18 PM
GimmetheSauceySauce
101806
1814
143
xxTedCxx
Where all of the statistics are made up... 60% of the time, it works everytime.
battlepants
Not shown: Me staying the fuck home with a 0% transmission rate.
RobWidner
KleptoKea
Americans won't understand or give a shit, even when you draw simple diagrams for them like this.
Spootanany
Making up statistics only harms the message you're trying to put out there. Fuck your made up shit. Cite some sources you fuck.
JustYourAverageNerd
Please provide sources for these kinds of posts so people can verify and ensure they're well informed.
Lycanthian
I’m very pro mask but why the fuck are the percentages so different every time one of these infographics is put out ? Is there a source
SodaSamtg
If someone is refusing to wear a mask at this point nothing will convince them to and will it will need to be mandated.
panccini
The irony of OP leaving out the source...
headloser
Both wearing a mask, 100% chance of not getting a blow job.
kwil
What's the percentage with noses out? (So many people out there with the mask on wrong, uuugh)
anotherprosaicusername
Where's control? I'm not sure I buy 100% transmission without a mask. https://images.app.goo.gl/oaLw8XBmPR8C5Dsd7
pillageandplunder
Its pretty simple if you ask me
FURIOUSBOVINE
Dominator497
.
CANADIANMIST
Why would I pee on myself when I can pee on someone else?
pleasesaysike
And wearing your mask on your chin is like wearing pants but pulling your dick through the zipper
jetah
so soaking pissed pants or just a wet leg... leg can easily be cleaned with water/soap but you have to go somewhere else to wash the pants.
GrayWhiteWolf
Don't threaten me with good times.
MaterNyx
Haha thx. Best I've seen so far ?
ImplodingPumpkin
But our president loves golden showers.
insertrandomword
I think I would prefer pee directly on my skin instead of my pants.
ThatLurker
illegalacorn
ok, my place or yours?
Oteneo
possibly?
zebulorg
definitelyapeeslut
iMirrelephant
RennegaddeFoxxe
These numbers are different in every infographic.
Caramster
Made up numbers makes up for 85% of the interwebz
ProbablyPoe
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
tenaciousjeebs
Obligatory comment from lord nergal about OP’s ass. He sure has a thing for OP.
Caramster
It's a probability calculation. It's mathematical guesswork.
ProbablyPoe
First part true, second part not. That's what the CI is for
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
ProbablyPoe
Yea, I had seen this infograph a few weeks ago and this was the best I could find in relation to
Caramster
Sorry I deleted the chain of replies I was writing.
somt
658 infected / 4,300,000 people Leaves chances of the person next to you being infected at less then 0.0015%
somt
In Alberta Canada... Your regions covid carriers in public are likely much higher.
FirstFloor4Life
I’m pro mask. It these numbers change everyone something like this is posted.
JT1984
This is an excellent graphic, but where is the Saucy Sauce.
Trondheim
I think so many people assume they are not carriers and forget how long this can be asymptomatic for
irregularExpression
Given your name and all ... sauce?
Arcian
Just wearing a mask isn't enough, it has to be worn properly to provide adequate protection. Lots of people don't wear theirs properly.
MTsumi
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/covid-19-mask-efficacy-chart/
deadshotwolf
“Mostly false”
ProbablyPoe
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
deadshotwolf
Can we get sources for these things? I agree to wear a mask but not citing any information makes this arbitrary...
ProbablyPoe
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
deadshotwolf
Thanks for sharing. It’s not a controlled study but a meta analysis which is at least useful for the time being.
ProbablyPoe
Yeah it's the closest thing I could find, I saw this infograph a few weeks ago and spent some time searching for the study it came from
TheFishFace
It's made up. Literally "for illustrative purposes" but the creator didn't fucking put that on the graphic
joot
It doesn’t help I’ve seen the same image with different percentages. Last one I saw said 40% for unmasked to masked transmission.
joot
Also, relevant factors like mask material and distance between people are not even mentioned. It’s clearly bullshit.
LordNergal
Source: OP's ass.
puffyjacket69
Surgeons wear face masks during surgery for no reason. More on fox 5 after commercials.
hereforthegoodies
https://www.wired.com/story/the-face-mask-debate-reveals-a-scientific-double-standard/
AnnaVonOesterreich
https://apnews.com/afs:Content:8795470456
jeebus333
Give me the saucy sauce
tchoukiwalimou
Im not pro but 0.75x0.05 is different than o.015
Jotaux
Yeah I get 3.75%
tchoukiwalimou
Imcurious of that effect
LordNergal
The numbers are made up. However, infection also doesn't necessarily work multiplicatively. For example, I have been repeatedly exposed 1/
LordNergal
to COVID-19, yet I show no antibodies, symptoms, and no one I've been around afterward has shown any sign of infection at any time after 2/
LordNergal
contact. There's a lot more variables involved than just the masks, so it's never a straight percentage chance of transmission. 3/3
Xenarion
While the concept is true, those numbers look pretty fake. Where do they come from?
LordNergal
They come from OP's ass.
ProbablyPoe
They are off a little: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
Xenarion
"n=2647; aOR 0·15, 95% CI 0·07 to 0·34, RD −14·3%, −15·9 to −10·7" I have no idea how to interpret those numbers, but thanks anyway.
ProbablyPoe
There's a table summary near the end that is a little bit clearer to understand
ProbablyPoe
N is your sample number, CI is your confidence interval, I'll have to double check on the others
MemeMyselfnI
Should I ask? Source?
LordNergal
OP's ass.
ProbablyPoe
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext
MemeMyselfnI
Funny. Did you read this 'source'? Meta study, of 'observational' studies. Explains why distances are random around the world.
ProbablyPoe
I did, its the closest thing to providing those %s for the different measures. That's why they have confidence intervals, I can help you 1/2
ProbablyPoe
2/2 understand the statistics if you like.
MemeMyselfnI
No, I've been there n if you're honest, you know that metas are for shite. And uncontrolled.
ProbablyPoe
I'm not purporting it to be a scientific study. They say as much in the abstract.
Casually
This illustrates why people aren't wearing masks. It doesn't protect the mask wearer and too many people only think about themselves.
KleptoKea
This is something Americans can't seem to grasp. I've been through three countries where mask wearing is simply not a debatable issue.
Ninjainslippers
I think the reason they don't wear masks is far dumber and less complicated.
drangir
It assumes they studied covid enough to know that
maximilianfragglebottom
chrismofer
the biggest mistake was actually telling everyone not to wear masks and making many lose faith in the experts right away.
Wallrat
Even in the illustration I’m reducing my risk by 25%. Enough? No but more than none. Wear a mask. Period.
beasttubbs
"If you're scared just stay home!!1!!1" /s
chrismofer
hippiejesus420
i'm lucky enough to be in NZ for this pandemic. people generally care about their neighbors and it helped quash Covid as much as anything.
cepacolusmaximus
It's a visible representation of who among us think of themselves as a member of society, and who only think of themselves.
hangar
Masks do protect you extensively. The difference between 5% and 1.5% is huge and shows that we need put more money in education...
bound4doom
Actually the Atlantic had a really good article about this. I never thought of it this way. Comparing wearing condoms during aids crisis.
bound4doom
It was actually interesting made me think different. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/dudes-who-wont-wear-masks/613375/
RetailCat
This is exactly what I was thinking. It’s not a good train of thought to be on.
Rhianmnop
But it does protect the mask wearer. Why do people continue saying this. Transmission down hella when wearing a mask.
NeoGenus59
Not true: multiply probabilities of mask wearers separate and you get 3 1/2% but the truth is that odds are only half that!!!
AnythingMuchShorter
It pisses me off. In my apartment building I'm wearing a mask but each time I have to go out no one else is. Putting my family and I at risk
GenXHippie
We should have told people they’d make your dick bigger or make you an influencer. People would be all over that.
TrueNorthernLights
This
TsunamiJohn
They aren't wearing masks because they don't want to draw attention to themselves. The desire to blend in is strong everywhere.
PippisLongStockings
See...but here’s the thing (prepare to be AMAZED): If EVERYBODY is wearing a mask, then NOT wearing one draws attention.
PippisLongStockings
I live in Denver, CO & spend a lot of time in Boulder/‘burbs; +90% of the people I see are wearing masks—those who DON’T, stand out.
TsunamiJohn
That's why we need mandates, not this "if you cared about people you'd wear masks." It's completely justified but won't convince everyone.
MeowAllTheTime
We should have lied and told them it protects the wearer only.
lostsoulmumei
This post actually left out one panel. There was a panel with neither wearing a mask that said transmission 90%.
Larirari
I honestly think even if it protected themselves people still wouldn't.
fredh67
Un/under-developed brains do not access risk the same way a mature brain does.
certainlynotaserialkiller
americans are not equipped for a crisis where the basic rule of survival is being midly considerate.
mobiusm1
aint that the fuckin truth. They were all ready for some imaginary nuclear holocaust where they could kill everyone else instead.
blackrosesheart
Americans aren't really equipped for a non-crisis where the basic rule is being mildly considerate either.
AlwaysUpvoteBrockIsARapist
This is why most of my survival strategies involve a fortified bunker, and you all thought I was nuts for that. But seriously Americans can
AlwaysUpvoteBrockIsARapist
1 know they have been exposed to an STD and still go raw-dogging it for a month because the test is not in yet.
StarscreamAndHutch
They changed the narrative to not protect yourself, protect others. We should have stuck with protect yourself. It would have worked better.
Casually
But been factually incorrect in a way that can be proven. That is just setting up for failure.
caduto11
its not factually incorrect, it does still reduce the chance of catching it slightly, just not as much than if the covid carrier had a mask
youcouldbedrinkingwholeifyouwantedto
Is it? Have you seen our current level of discourse or common sense?
StarscreamAndHutch
Right. Normal people will wear a mask regardless because it's a smart thing to do now. Dumb people will wear it to save themselves. win/win.