The Patriot Post® · In Brief: Pro-Science, Anti-Mask
Jennifer Sey is not a scientist. She’s a former Levi’s executive forced out of the company for “wrongthink” about COVID. Oddly enough, she was more right than Dr. Science Himself, as evidenced by the recently released massive study on masking.
I’m not exactly sure what an anti-science person is. But that’s not me. I’m pro-science. And that’s why I’m anti-mask.
Given the findings from the recent Cochrane study, a meta-analysis summarizing seventy-eight studies including a million people, the science is now clear: “Face coverings make little to no difference” in Covid infection and fatality rates. Even when the hallowed N95 is worn.
The analysis acknowledges that “adherence” to mask-wearing was low in many studies. Harms were poorly measured and reported, but discomfort wearing medical/surgical masks or N95 respirators was mentioned in several studies.
If an intervention does not work in the real world, it doesn’t work, even if models and lab tests on mannequins say it does.
Contrary to all the people yelling “shut up because science,” Sey points to actual scientific inquiry.
I believe in the scientific method: make an observation. Ask a question. Form a hypothesis. Test the hypothesis. Listen to the answer. Insisting on the answer before pursuing this methodological approach is not science, it is propaganda.
And “masks work” was never more than propaganda — rooted in mechanical plausibility, not actual science — furthered by public health officials, left-leaning government leaders, the press and the party faithful starting in 2020 and continuing to the present day. …
And, on February 8, CDC director Rochelle Walensky explained to Congress why no random controlled trials (RCTs — the gold standard of scientific inquiry and evidence) were conducted to determine if masks prevent Covid:
I’m not sure anybody would have proposed a clinical trial because, in fact, there wasn’t equipoise to the question anymore.
Walensky’s view: we didn’t conduct any scientific inquiries because it was obvious that masks work.
This is not only circular logic, it is the antithesis of the scientific method. Belief in the effectiveness of masks has never been scientific, it was always religious in nature.
Sey goes on at length to discuss some of the history, including her own, battling these religious zealots. Rather than debate, they labeled her with the usual hate tags and silenced her. They do this because they have deep faith in their own “goodness.” She concludes:
Those who claim to be on the side of “the Science” will continue to push unscientific policies in order to prove that they were right all along. This is the sunk cost fallacy writ large. Don’t admit mistakes. Ignore the actual science in favor of “the Science.” And continue to punish those who challenge. As well as those most vulnerable who simply aren’t in a position to challenge at all.
“Science” has apparently been rebranded by the left. It is now a slogan — a tagline — shouted at heretics to signify one’s moral superiority and loyalty to the party. What we have now is “science” that ignores the scientific method, which means “the science” is a cult. And a dangerous one at that.