"Science, Politics, And COVID: Will Truth Prevail?"

No.

Start quote.
"This is the reality: those who insist that universal mask usage has absolutely
proven effective at controlling the spread of the COVID virus and is universally
recommended according to “the science” are deliberately ignoring the evidence
to the contrary. It is they who are propagating false and misleading information.

Those who say it is unethical, even dangerous, to question broad population mask
mandates must also explain why many top infectious disease scientists and public
health organizations question the efficacy of general population masking. Tom
Jefferson and Carl Heneghan of the University of Oxford’s Centre for
Evidence-Based Medicine, for instance, wrote that “despite two decades of
pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of
wearing masks.” Oxford epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta says there is no need
for masks unless one is elderly or high risk. Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya has
said that “mask mandates are not supported by the scientific data. . . . There
is no scientific evidence that mask mandates work to slow the spread of the
disease.”
End quote

Science, Politics, and COVID: Will Truth Prevail? - Imprimis (hillsdale.edu)


_________________


You can feast on these 8 reasons why you ought NOT to wear a mask:
8 Reasons Why I Don’t Wear A Mask And You Probably Shouldn’t Either by Scott Morefield (townhall.com)


JAG


``

 

False.
Worse: False nonsense.

JAG

 

Yeah. Doctors do it just so they will look cool in pictures.

 

Scott Atlas!

Trump's herd mentality guy? Holy ****!

WHO-

Masks should be used as part of a comprehensive strategy of measures to suppress transmission and save lives; the use of a mask alone is not sufficient to provide an adequate level of protection against COVID-19.
CDC-
Masks may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus to others. The CDC recommends people wear face masks in public settings, especially when other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain. Wearing a face mask may limit exposure to respiratory droplets and large particles and may help prevent people who have COVID-19 from spreading the virus.Nov 24, 2020

 

Read the f**ing study smart ass

 

Witch one?
The one that talks about doctors not scrubbed in for surgery or the one from Mr. herd mentality?

 

No, doctors wear masks in the sterile environment of the operating theater to preserve that sterile environment, to protect the opened up body from any germs the doctor may exhale on it.

 

Kind of like somebody with Covid sneezing and the germs going up your nose.

 

Tom Jefferson of Oxford is not Atlas. see below.
Carl Heneghan of Oxford is not Atlas. see below
Sunetra Gupta of Oxford is not Atlas, see below.
Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford is not Atlas. see below


"This is the reality: those who insist that universal mask usage has absolutely
proven effective at controlling the spread of the COVID virus and is universally
recommended according to “the science” are deliberately ignoring the evidence
to the contrary. It is they who are propagating false and misleading information.

Those who say it is unethical, even dangerous, to question broad population mask
mandates must also explain why many top infectious disease scientists and public
health organizations question the efficacy of general population masking. Tom
Jefferson and Carl Heneghan of the University of Oxford’s Centre for
Evidence-Based Medicine, for instance, wrote that “despite two decades of
pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of
wearing masks.” Oxford epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta says there is no need
for masks unless one is elderly or high risk. Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya has
said that “mask mandates are not supported by the scientific data. . . . There
is no scientific evidence that mask mandates work to slow the spread of the
disease.”

Science, Politics, and COVID: Will Truth Prevail? - Imprimis (hillsdale.edu)


_________________


You can re-feast on these 8 reasons why you ought NOT to wear a mask:
8 Reasons Why I Don’t Wear A Mask And You Probably Shouldn’t Either by Scott Morefield (townhall.com)

__________

I notice in going to restaurants and shopping malls that
more and more people are NOT wearing masks. They don't
have the innate desire to be the obedient slave-servants of
Big Brother or to bow down to the Health Nazis and the
Befuddled Self-Contradicting Medical "Experts" or to bow
down in submission to Dr. Foochie.


JAG


``

 

In 2009, Jefferson was hired by the governments of Britain and Australia to update a systematic review of oseltamivir.[4] Initially he had a great deal of trouble getting results of the original trials.[4] Previous researchers had published trials without seeing the underlying data and it appeared that some of the published papers used ghost writers.[4] As the company, Roche, that did the trials refused to provide data for independent analysis, their conclusions in 2009 were that benefits could not be shown.[4]

In 2011, Jefferson's team was provided 22,000 pages of data from the European Medicines Agency and Roche eventually provided 3,000 pages of data.[4] In 2012, Jefferson was the lead author of another Cochrane review of this data which concluded that oseltamivir did not reduce the number of hospitalizations caused by influenza. Jefferson said that this review also found no evidence that oseltamivir stopped complications from the disease.[5]

His views about the effectiveness of influenza vaccines and his outspokenness about them are also controversial; at a 2007 meeting on pandemic preparedness he was shunned by other vaccine researchers and ate alone.[1] Reviews led by Jefferson have concluded that there is insufficient evidence to show that influenza vaccines reduce mortality or infection rates.[6] He has said that the studies claiming large reductions in mortality rates as a result of the influenza vaccine are "rubbish",[1] and that "influenza vaccines are about marketing and not science".[7] He has called repeatedly for placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials to prove the efficacy of flu vaccines, a position that most in the field hold as unethical.[1] His views on flu vaccines are opposed by the medical establishment.[1]

On 5 July 2020, Jefferson claimed in an interview with The Telegraph that the COVID-19 coronavirus may not have originated in China.[8][9] His theory was that a virus may simply lie dormant for years before suddenly emerging. As an example of this possibility, he pointed to the isolation of Western Samoa, which lost 22% of its population to Spanish flu in 1918, and claimed the islands had no contact with the outside world. However, it is well documented that Spanish flu arrived on board the SS Talune on 7 November, 1918, when six infected passengers from New Zealand were allowed ashore.[10][11]

Publications


COVID-19[edit]
Further information: Great Barrington Declaration
Gupta is a critic of the lockdown approach to the COVID-19 pandemic, and was one of the primary authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated a focused response to the COVID-19 pandemic based on levels of individual risk.[10][11] The World Health Organization, as well as other numerous academic and public-health bodies, have stated that the strategy proposed by the Declaration is dangerous, unethical, and lacks a sound scientific basis.[12][13] The American Public Health Association and 13 other public-health groups in the United States warned in a joint open letter that the Great Barrington Declaration "is not a strategy, it is a political statement. It ignores sound public health expertise. It preys on a frustrated populace. Instead of selling false hope that will predictably backfire, we must focus on how to manage this pandemic in a safe, responsible, and equitable way

Evidently Jay couldn't convince the school. His economics bias gave him away.
FSI | CHP/PCOR - COVID19: Can Masks Help with Reopening the Economy? (stanford.edu)


The UK tried it then rejected Heneghan.

On 21 September 2020, Heneghan alongside Sunetra Gupta, Karol Sikora and 28 signatories wrote an open letter to the UK prime minister, chancellor and chief medical officers asking for a rethink of the government's COVID-19 strategy. They argued in favour of a targeted approach to lockdowns advising that only over-65s and the vulnerable should be shielded

But not to worry. Biden almost has it whipped.

 

What kind of moron would compare a surgeon working over an open body for hours to a passing sneeze in a store? Truly stupid and lazy analogy.

 

Claim: we must continue to wear masks or covid 19 cases will surge
Action: Texas drop mask mandate
Expectation: Covid cases will surge
Result: Covid cases do not increase
Conclusion: Masks are either not providing the claimed protection or the number of immune people is large enough that wearing a mask is no longer necessary.

 

Truth?
Truth is unscientific by definition.
You believe in truth, you don't need to prove it.
Reality is well better: you need to prove it.

About wearing masks in Texas.
I wonder if pubs, cinemas, theaters, clubs ... and similar are open in Texas.
When you are in the open air contagion is a remote possibility. It's in close rooms that contagion becomes possible [it's about saturation, but this is technical].

To avoid contagion you need to wear a mask on a bus, on a train, in a shop, in a pub, in a bar [the problem is that you cannot drink a bear wearing a mask!].

In any case, in Texas Dallas is not exactly in great conditions about this pandemic ... https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/us-map

 

And you swing and miss. Care to try again?

 

Why even bother with this stupid ass sh**? If you think I'm wrong then you need to say why. It's kinda how this whole message board thingy works.

 

I did already. The problem is the masks are to slow down the spread of the next wave that’s going to pop up thanks to variants of the disease which the vaccine doesn’t protect against. Give the medical system time to reorient and recover before people go back being sick again.

 

That's a distinction without a difference.

 

perhaps to an idiot

 

I'm sure there is a job for you in a hospital somewhere treating covid patients without a mask.

 

So you conflate doctors attending to known sick patients at close range with walking through the store where almost everyone is infection free with the number of sick decreasing every day. Are you completely disingenuous or are you just to dim to see the difference?

 

When this first started how many people had it? Far fewer than today, and yet here we are 1/2 million dead and many that were hospitalized. So yes, yes I do conflate the two.

 

The difference, of course, is that when this first started no one had immunity. That is a very different scenario compared to today. Masks made some sense in the beginning although the protection, especially given the way that normal citizens were going to wear masks and the types of masks they were going to wear, was greatly exaggerated. Today it makes almost no sense at all to wear those dirty rags around your face. The data is bearing that out.

 

Ahh, he's coming around.

 

https://conservativechoicecampaign....-happening-with-covid-19-pandemic-its-murder/

 

Oh dear, another conscientious nurse whistleblower. She does her country a great service and should receive public recognition instead of being criticized.