I've written about the virtue-signalling of wearing masks before and I'll do it again, quoting someone else who knows more about the topic than either you or I do:
Yet the evidence is hardly strong enough to elevate mask-wearing into the epitome of moral behavior. Doing so reflects a greater preoccupation with the psychological effect of masks—perhaps as a restoration of control in the face of an unseen and often perplexing enemy with no cure and no prophylaxis—than with their scientific reality. Americans should demand evidence-based decision-making and policies driven by soundly attested facts, not assumptions or psychological palliatives.
Oh, and there's this:
Chris von Csefalvay is an epidemiologist specializing in bat-borne viruses. He is currently VP of Special Projects at Starschema.
4 comments:
What a world it would be if only a well-picked cherry could outweigh the well-established consensus.
There are a few of you living in that Bizzaro World. Those of us living in The Real World are amused by your posts. Keep up the lolz.
It seems even your Dear Leader is abandoning you. Never mind that, clearly is deep state handlers are forcing that flip flop on him. We know that once you’re dug in, no mountain of factual evidence will move you.
You *really* don't like it when people disagree with you, do you, "anonymous"?
You're big into the "science". Is "consensus" how science works?
If you're so sure of yourself, so convinced of your righteousness, why do you hide behind a keyboard and a screen?
We all know why.
BTW, as I pointed out, the author knows a lot more about this topic than you do. I encourage you to share your wisdom with him, tell him why he's wrong.
Michael Osterholm has a similar viewpoint, although you have to scroll down to page 21 before he gets to it:
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/sites/default/files/public/downloads/special_episode_masks_6.2.20_0.pdf
This is from page 21:
In fact, in countries experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks many other control measures were put in place at the same time that mask use may have increased. I believe their example for the impact of cloth masking reflects the age-old elephant sign phenomenon; I can declare to you with all sincerity that when I put a sign in my front yard in the Twin Cities area years ago that no elephants are allowed, guess what happened? Not one elephant has showed up in my front lawn since I put up that sign. Not one. And this is the same phenomena that occurs with saying mask use was responsible for stopping widespread SARS-CoV-2 transmission in countries that were putting into place a myriad of control measures such as widespread testing, extensive contact tracing programs and quarantine measures. Finally the MASKS4ALL group claims that laws appear to be highly effective in increasing compliance in slowing or stopping the spread of COVID-19. There is simply no credible data to support the claim.
What was even more telling, regarding the MASKS4ALL letter was the fact that over a hundred prominent experts called for this mask requirement. I contacted five of them who I know well, all are close friends. Four of them were “surprised to shocked” when I shared the information I just with shared with you regarding the body of data or lack thereof, supporting the effectiveness of cloth masks in preventing viral respiratory-transmitted agents. They had just assumed that the summary information was accurate. The fifth one was honest enough to say to me, "Well , I signed it because of pressure from peers.” I don't know how many of the other signers of the letter had a similar experience.
So, it's a post hoc situation.
Post a Comment