Skip to main content

Lies from South Carolina

By August 18, 2020Commentary

The maskos feel no shame about manipulating data and outright lying to justify mask mandates that have no effect on transmission.  A few weeks ago the Kansas health department got caught faking data comparing counties with and without mask mandates.  Now South Carolina, which had a surge in cases for a few weeks, claimed that cases declined more in counties with mask requirements.  Andy Slavitt was re-peddling this untruth.  Unfortunately for them, by the time the mandates went into effect cases had already peaked and as you can see from the charts below, there is no apparent difference in trend for counties with and without mandates.  In fact, it looks like counties with more cases enacted mandates in response to the higher cases, but it made no difference in the rate of growth or decline.  If anything, the counties with mask mandates had higher growth rates.   Thanks to Twitter for the charts.


Join the discussion 5 Comments

  • Ellen says:


  • Harley says:

    As the BLM yard signs inform us, “Science is real”.

    Unless the science doesn’t support the narrative, then lies are better.

  • South Carolina Fan says:

    Good to know.

    I thought this was a Minnesota blog?

  • Ted Demas says:

    Charleston county council just voted to increase fines and eliminate warnings for the maskless. I should have moved to Greenville when I had the chance.

  • Ted Demas says:

    SCDHEC came out with an update to this and their new data supposedly supports their first assertion from 8/14. Key passage in the news release:

    “- When comparing the jurisdictions that have mask requirements in place to those that don’t, the jurisdictions with mask requirements have shown a 44.2 percent greater decrease in the total number of cases during the five weeks after the requirements were implemented.
    – Those jurisdictions with mask requirements in place have seen an overall decrease of 43 percent of total cases for the five weeks after the requirements were implemented compared to before the requirements were in place. This is an overall decrease of 99.2 cases per 100,000 people from before the mask requirements to after.
    – Jurisdictions without mask requirements have experienced an overall increase in total cases of 1.2 percent when compared to jurisdictions with a mask requirement in place.”

    I would be very interested to follow the methodology they used to arrive at these figures. I suspect there is some convenient manipulation of data going on.

Leave a comment