Free COVID Masks?

By an edhat reader

Get your free masks. But not free at CVS. CVS continues to have non-free masks at $10.45 for 3. You might try Walgreen or Rite Aid. Does anyone know for sure?

Avatar

Written by Anonymous

What do you think?

Comments

24 Comments deleted by Administrator

Leave a Review or Comment

43 Comments

  1. I literally just Googled your question and found multiple results with the answer. As early as today does not mean today….
    “CVS Health told TODAY they will begin offering free N95 masks at CVS Pharmacy stores and pharmacies inside Target and Schnucks as early as Thursday, Jan. 27.” “In a statement shared with TODAY the company said they anticipate free N95 masks will be available in some stores later this week, with all stores receiving them by early February.” “Free masks at Walgreens locations are not yet available, but will be in some locations starting on Friday, Jan. 28, a spokesperson told NBC Chicago. ”

  2. When a business asks you to put a mask on, it’s much more impactful to explain you don’t wear masks and go elsewhere. I appreciate businesses that respect my personal choice not to wear a mask and I go out of my way to spend my money with them.

  3. CHIP, that’s great and guess what…it’s a county ordinance. You won’t be allowed into any business in the county without a mask on and if they don’t request it, chances are they are in serious violation of various health codes and mandates. Also, i’d be happy to bounce you out of the store with that sort of attitude

  4. That’s alright zero, I’ll be happy to shop elsewhere. I would ask one thing from you however. If sufficient research is conducted and published in the future to prove that masks made little or no difference, I would appreciate an apology.

  5. CHIP – “little or no difference?” No. We all know and have all seen the science proving mask are somewhat effective, even if “just a little.” So, no apologies until it shows they were not effective at all. That means 0%.

  6. CHIP – ah yes, pulling that one out again. “Inconclusive” means they don’t know for sure. Further, this is a study of classroom situations. We’re talking about masks in general being at least somewhat effective. Keep trying.

  7. 867/Sac- if they’re mandating I wear their useless mask to enter, they can pay for it. I consider it a tax for not having a spine.
    Chip- right there with you! I have a whole list of places I frequent that don’t require it. All my extra Biden-flation dollars go to them instead.

  8. CONSERVATIVE – Yes. If they were .01% effective, I would wear them around certain people, like for instance my brother in law who is undergoing cancer treatment and is immunocompromised. I wouldn’t and don’t wear them outside, but in some situations, like the aforementioned, I would continue wearing one. Why wouldn’t I?

  9. Yay! Free masks! I thought the science said cloth masks protected everyone? Oh, wait surgical masks… oh wait… Yeah, just as everyone knew from the start it’s only N95 the protect! Gotta love the [political] “science”! lol P.S. Couldn’t find how much these “free” masks are costing us, but hey, who cares!

  10. Sac – that’s the whole point!!!! They only make sense in certain scenarios… this blanket rule/mandate is ridiculous! It’s leads people like 4pm to be justified in their minds for reporting businesses who let people run on a treadmill without a mask. It’s madness!!

  11. It’s idiotic to expect the health recommendations given in the first months of a novel virus to be the same as the recommendations given for a variant of that virus a year or more down the line. Things change. Try to keep up.

  12. As people who aren’t right wing ignoramuses understand, all masks offer *some* protection, but the level differs for different types of masks. And no right winger understands economics … aside from the reduction in costs to society of people getting ill, and the jobs made available, the masks are being paid for out of COVID funds already allocated by Congress. Those funds in excess of tax revenue–which is greatly reduced due the the Trump/GOP tax bill that stole money out of your pocket and handed it to corporations and the uber wealthy– are paid for out of government bonds issued by the treasury. Is that a problem? Well, not really, when the GDP under Biden has seen its largest increase since 1984.

  13. Off topic Marcelk but Trump put a small cap on the SALT deduction which effectively is a tax increase on the rich. The Dems tried to significantly increase the cap in their Build Back Better agenda, effectively reducing the taxes on the rich. One of many examples of the Dems saying one thing during elections, then doing something completely different while in office. Wake up, they don’t care about you, just your vote!

  14. Nice dishonest cherry pick there. The Trump tax bill massively reduced taxes for the wealthy. The SALT cap was Trump sticking it to CA and NY … while it has a small effect on the uber rich, raising the cap is mostly a benefit to small businesses and the middle class.

Cannabis Project Next to Pence Vineyards is Withdrawn

Earthquake Hits Near Grapevine Early Thursday