Holcomb was so committed to getting his message across Wednesday that even when Indiana Department of Transportation Commissioner Joe McGinnis delivered a report that focused on roadways with no discussion of facial coverings, Holcomb responded with this line: “You did say masks are working. I just want to get that in there for the third time.”
Welcome new people.
The two articles and corresponding charts above already prove my point. Those results are duplicated globally.
Let me put a couple of things to bed right away since I already know how some of you will react.
I’m not anti-mask. I’m pro-science.
I wear my mask all the time to put people at ease, not because it’s effective.
COVID is real and no one is actually denying its existence beyond a few online. This is a childish red herring argument used when you are desperate.
My goal has always been to inform my audience of the actual clinical facts so they can protect themselves. There is no other motivation.
I started regular coverage of the virus in December 2019.
I started daily coverage on January 14, 2020. This is long before anyone in US media I’m aware of (for daily coverage), and far sooner than almost any politician considered COVID a threat.
I promoted the masks early on before we knew the virus was airborne while reminding everyone to only use their mask once.
I’ve been reminding everyone about the single-use of the mask from the very beginning. Reusing a contaminated mask defeats the purpose and can spread infection.
My opinions about masks or mask fines don’t come from my politics or my ideology. They come from peer-reviewed clinical research, not preliminary lab results with problematic methodology, which have never been considered scientifically valid in any scientific field. As well as real-world data.
Everything I said in this interview is backed up with scientific research and real-world data. None of it is baseless opinion. None of it is taken from unsubstantiated posts from social media, or some conspiracy website yapping about Bill Gates.
While many of you may be new here, I’ve already addressed the issues you’ll likely post … many, many times. I simply don’t have time to go over 12 months of work I’ve done on this in a single interview or post.
The reality … officials are in a tough spot. They don’t have any answers. They can’t stop the virus. It’s career suicide to say that out loud so they must come up with, what I call, ‘busy work’ to make it seem like they are trying. Often, as is the case with fines, this busy work pushes the blame on an innocent population in order to pass the buck and buy time.
The experts went from correctly telling you a mask was your last hail mary to prevent infection but wasn’t all that effective. Every other step is more important in prevention but the mask is the least effective tool in your tool chest. Now, they’ve all but abandoned those other steps in favor of indoctrinating people into the Cult of Mask with a form of religious dogma that masks are the most important and effective tool you have. Cases continue to spike and they keep neglecting to tell people to only use their mask once.
Consider this … everywhere mask mandates have been in effect, where COVID is an issue, has now been hit by a new spike in cases. This includes places with universal compliance like Japan. If masks worked the way the dogma currently dictates, the spike would be impossible.
Everywhere that installed mask mandate fines on businesses and/or individuals hasn’t reduced their number of cases. The policy is ineffective and causes unnecessary tension, strife, and hardship with zero tangible results. It’s just throwing matches on a powder keg.
We had lockdowns because the Imperial College released a study showing hundreds of millions might die. Oxford proved their study wrong and the IC retracted it, but lockdowns remained.
We have mask mandates because we thought the virus was spread through droplets alone and asymptomatic people were superspreaders. We now know it’s airborne and all of the research shows asymptomatic spread, while possible, is not a major source of infections.
I’ve included just a few links to get you started on your journey if you really want to dive in.
Prior to the pandemic, there was a mountain of research showing masks of all kinds don’t prevent aerosol viral spread. This research has now been completely abandoned and ignored in favor of preliminary lab results that are never considered scientifically acceptable to draw conclusions from. I can’t include all of the links to those studies but some are mixed in below.
Dr. Brosseau is a national expert on respiratory protection and infectious diseases and professor (retired), University of Illinois at Chicago. Dr. Sietsema is also an expert on respiratory protection and an assistant professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
“The evidence from…laboratory filtration studies suggests that such fabric masks may reduce the transmission of larger respiratory droplets. There is little evidence regarding the transmission of small aerosolized particulates of the size potentially exhaled by asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals with COVID-19.”
We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility (Figure 2). However, as with hand hygiene, face masks might be able to reduce the transmission of other infections and therefore have value in an influenza pandemic when healthcare resources are stretched.
Tom Jefferson is a senior associate tutor and honorary research fellow, Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford. Disclosure statement is here
Carl Heneghan is Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and Editor in Chief of BMJ EBM
In 2010, at the end of the last influenza pandemic, there were six published randomised controlled trials with 4,147 participants focusing on the benefits of different types of masks. 2 Two were done in healthcare workers and four in family or student clusters. The face mask trials for influenza-like illness (ILI) reported poor compliance, rarely reported harms and revealed the pressing need for future trials.
Despite the clear requirement to carry out further large, pragmatic trials a decade later, only six had been published: five in healthcare workers and one in pilgrims. 3 This recent crop of trials added 9,112 participants to the total randomised denominator of 13,259 and showed that masks alone have no significant effect in interrupting the spread of ILI or influenza in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.
A study conducted by Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in cooperation with the Naval Medical Research Center sought to test lockdowns along with testing and isolation.
What were the results? The virus still spread, though 90% of those who tested positive were without symptoms. Incredibly, 2% of the CHARM recruits still contracted the virus, even if all but one remained asymptomatic. “Our study showed that in a group of predominantly young male military recruits, approximately 2% became positive for SARS-CoV-2, as determined by qPCR assay, during a 2-week, strictly enforced quarantine.”
The study actually suggests the quarantine may increase the spread of the virus.
Our results suggest that the recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in mask wearers in a setting where social distancing and other public health measures were in effect, mask recommendations were not among those measures, and community use of masks was uncommon. Yet, the findings were inconclusive and cannot definitively exclude a 46% reduction to a 23% increase in infection of mask wearers in such a setting.
The use of masks only makes sense in confined places, where it is not possible to have certainty and guarantee necessary physical distancing or outdoors when physical distancing is not possible. I tried to look for scientific evidence on the use of open air mask and potential benefits of virus transmission, but I couldn’t find any.
Making the mask mandatory across Italy outdoors without any distinction between the higher and lower endemic circulation areas is wrong.
Conclusions: This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs (Health Care Workers), particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.
Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 – 419. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19216002
N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
“There were 17 eligible studies. … None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”
Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016 https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567
“We identified six clinical studies … . In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.”
Contrary to popular opinion on social media, in our tribalist political arena, news media, or local officials … Americans actually wear masks and comply with mask mandates much higher than much of the world. Over 80% wear their mask now. The latest spike in the U.S. started September 14 when 77% of Americans were adhering to the mask mandates. That number is exactly the same as July 31 when U.S. COVID cases began to decline drastically and before the AP and Gov. Holcomb credited masks for the decline in cases.
In other words … the same percentage of Americans who wore masks during the big decline in COVID cases over the summer were also wearing masks at the beginning of the latest surge in cases. There was no change, no fluctuation at all in the number of Americans wearing masks during a decline and a surge in COVID cases. The number of people wearing masks had no effect on the number of cases of the virus.
I said the same thing three times, three different ways so everyone understands the actual data on mask-wearing. Sorry about being redundant.
I know you all just came here to listen to the interview with Mayor Roberson. You weren’t expecting all this to be thrown at you. However, it’s important that you know what I said during that interview is factually correct. While I can appreciate the Mayor is just taking the advice of his advisors, those advisors have no actual data backing up their policies. I do.
The mandates we are being given by public officials are unscientific and, dare I say, emotional.
Lockdowns didn’t work and the preponderance of research says they are ineffective and actually worse for people long-term.
Mask mandates simply don’t work.
Blaming innocent people for those two failed policies with fines simply because you’ve run out of ideas and are trying to hold on until the vaccine/herd immunity happens is not a legitimate way to govern. It’s tyrannical. While Mayor Roberson may not be seeking to be tyrannical, the end product is just that.
Elkhart County (Indiana) Sheriff Jeff Siegel won’t get his deputies involved in enforcing the recent COVID-19 mask fine ordinance.
Here’s his post on the issue:
On December 2, Elkhart followed St. Joseph County (Indiana) in passing an ordinance that would issue fines to businesses who fail to enforce the county mask ordinance. The fines apply to both customers and employees. The business can be fined for the actions of both parties.
Mask ordinances, particularly those with fines, have real constitutional issues. Many legal and constitutional experts have weighed in on this in recent months. Indiana Attorney General Curtis Hill also believes there are constitutional issues.
Beyond the legal arguments, issuing fines for violating mask ordinances has proven completely ineffective everywhere in the United States. For example, New Mexico has had a state mandate to wear masks since May. Mandatory fines were announced on July 1, 2020. Since then, the daily cumulative number of COVID-19 cases in the state has gone from about 12,000 a day to 108,000 a day. The mandate and the fines haven’t worked at all.
Quite literally, all the fines do is piss people off and cause tension between citizens and government officials. It’s more ‘busy work’ for politicians to make it seem like they are trying everything they can to control the virus. In politics, if you can’t fix a problem, you blame someone else for making it impossible for you to fix it. That sums up our entire COVID response and strategy right now. In reality, there’s nothing they can do. There’s nothing any of us can do, except take solace in the fact that the overwhelming majority of us aren’t at serious risk from the virus, and try to protect those who are as best we can.
Mask fines haven’t worked throughout the US because mask mandates haven’t worked in the US or anywhere else in the world for that matter. The same goes for Michiana. Not because people aren’t wearing their mask, but because masks don’t work against an airborne virus. I’ve proven this for months with peer-reviewed science on the issue going back to 2009.
People in Elkhart are wearing their masks. Very few don’t. The virus is still spreading. Just as it’s still spreading everywhere in the world where people wear their masks all the time without fail.
The government, however, has no answer on how to make things better. So they blame a fictional boogeyman … the non-mask wearer in order to avert public outcry directed at them. ‘If only those three people would wear a mask!’
The Sheriff doesn’t want his deputies in the middle of a political fight with cult-like dogma being hurled in every direction. I don’t blame him.
Beyond that, not allowing his department to become the Thinkpol of Oceania should settle citizen worries of police abuse, at least in the county.
I predicted the blue checkmark brigade would circle the wagons and claim James O’Keefe listening in on CNN meetings and posting a video where he asked Jeff Zucker a question in that meeting was somehow wrong, immoral, or illegal.
Not surprisingly, social media is ablaze with those frivolous accusations.
Any, so-called, ‘journalist’ who is upset with O’Keefe’s actions here is a dishonest and untrustworthy waste of your time.
I live stream my radio show on 95.3 MNC every afternoon at 3pm ET.
I was asked to write a letter to the St. Joseph County Commission (Indiana) ahead of their vote on mask mandate fines for local businesses. This is what I sent them.
Commissioners,
Most of you know who I am. I wanted to send you just a small sample of actual scientific research on masks and their effectiveness on viral spread as well as real-world data ahead of your vote on the mask fine ordinance.
My goal is to present a small sample of the abundant research showing masks aren’t nearly as effective as many suggest. I ask that you set aside any confirmation bias you may already hold and just look at what I’ve included here.
I suppose the first thing is to look at the real-world data.
Experts originally opposed mask requirements because people would inevitably not use them correctly. They would abandon the other, more effective, measures to prevent infection. They would no longer wash their hands or socially distance themselves or stay home. Those warnings have all come true.
In early March, Dr. Anthony Fauci told “60 Minutes” face masks were not necessary for the general population, noting that while masks might make people “feel a little bit better,” they don’t provide the protection folks believe they do and might create “unintended consequences.”
Fauci wasn’t alone. I covered dozens of infectious disease experts at the time who said the same thing. Virologist Dmitry Lvov is another expert to look at. He said in March you can wear them but they don’t provide much protection. I don’t want to provide a list of experts who don’t buy into the mask hype. My point is that there is no scientific consensus on masks being effective.
A great starting point is to look at this study by Dr. Brosseau, a national expert on respiratory protection and infectious diseases and professor (retired), University of Illinois at Chicago. Dr. Sietsema is also an expert on respiratory protection and an assistant professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Masks went from the least important, least effective measure you can take to becoming the primary means of preventing yourself from getting infected. The CDC’s own data shows that the overwhelming number of people who get COVID wear the mask in accordance with mask mandates in the US. If masks worked the way some local health officials have said, the infection rate for mask wearers shouldn’t be so high (over 3/4 of those infected wear masks regularly).
In August, the AP said declining COVID cases in the U.S. were due to mask mandates. Gov. Holcomb said the same about Indiana. Look what’s happened since then. Massive spikes. That shouldn’t be possible according to the mask hype from local health officials. A study showing masks reduced COVID infections was just retracted because the areas used in the study all had spikes after the study was completed.
It’s not just the United States. Mask mandates have been in effect going back to January of 2020 in some countries. All have spikes in COVID infections. Below are the countries having spikes and when their mask mandate went into effect:
Germany – mask mandate went into effect April 22
France – mask mandate May 10
Italy – mask mandate went into effect August 16
South Korea – mandate May 26
Rwanda spike – mandate April 9
Switzerland spike – mandate first week of June
Japan has had near 100% mask-wearing from the beginning of the outbreak but have a huge spike now. NYT headline on June 6: Japan’s coronavirus numbers are low, are masks the reason why?
Austria spike – mandate April 6
Venezuela has a massive spike but was one of the first countries to have a mask mandate
Israel spike – mandate April 12 and had some of the strictest quarantine policies in the world.
Spain spike – mandate May 20
Here’s some visual graphs to illustrate the data above. All of which you can confirm with a simple internet search in a few seconds.
In other words, everywhere in the world that mask mandates have been in effect, the virus has continued to spread. Why? Because COVID is airborne. We originally didn’t think it was and focused on droplets. Masks can work on droplets by reducing the distance a droplet travels. No mask, not even N95, work on airborne viruses. The CDC’s website even states that masks don’t filter the COVID virus. They also sent a statement to Tucker Carlson in October saying: “At no time has CDC guidance suggested that masks were intended to protect the wearers.”
During the recent wildfires in California, people were using their COVID masks as protection from the smoke particles. The CDC had to point out cloth masks don’t work on those particles. The size of those particles are .4 to .7 microns in size. COVID is .12 microns in size.
Some recent studies on masks and viral transmission:
Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) – Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
Cowling, B. et al. (2010) – None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask to prevent spread of influenze, in either HCW or community members in households.
bin-Reza et al. (2012) – “There were 17 eligible studies. … None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”
Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) – “Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. … Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
There are others, but you get the idea. Up until this pandemic, the scientific community understood that masks of all kinds do not prevent viral spread or infection. Suddenly, without real evidence, they do now.
There exists no peer-reviewed clinical trial showing masks are effective. Only preliminary lab results, some of which have problematic methodology. Never in history has a preliminary lab result been considered scientifically viable evidence. Until now.
I don’t write to you to debate the efficacy of masks. I write you to point out that, without a doubt, masks have not worked as some had portrayed them to. In Michiana, people are abiding by mask mandates en masse with very few exceptions. Not only is it not based on sound science or the real-world data to enforce mask mandates under penalty of law, but it is counterproductive considering the widespread adherence to the mandates in place now.
Furthermore, violating a business’s property rights to require them to be an enforcer of these mandates under penalty of fines would be a gross abuse of power. Encroaching on their rights in this fashion would always be problematic, but to do so knowing the ordinance is enforcing, with penalties, mandates that have proven beyond the shadow of the doubt to be ineffective would be a dereliction of duty.
I understand the immense pressure government and public health officials are under to make it seem like they are trying to fight this virus and protect citizens. I understand it is easier to just go along to get along so you can say at least you tried at election time. However, to allow such government abuse over a mandate that isn’t working under the false guise that it would somehow magically start working now because there are penalties would be a violation of your oath of office. Surely, there is another way without setting the government up to abuse citizens just to appease the mob that has produced no evidence this would work to begin with.
Sincerely,
Casey Hendrickson
Radio Talk Show Host – 95.3 MNC
UPDATE: Corrected some grammatical errors since I was rushing to get this letter sent before my show.
UPDATE 2: Added context of why I wrote this letter to the top of the post.
At this point, we can start mocking every Blue Checkmark moron who desperately used false equivalence to smear Rudy Giuliani in order to make his revelations about Hunter Biden’s alleged inappropriate behavior with a 14-year-old go away.
Yes, an adult woman was flirting with Rudy.
Yes, a single adult man was flirting back.
Rudy always thought she was an adult, which she is.
She removes his mic.
He tucks his shirt back in after she does.
You usually have the pro mount and remove your lav mic. You often have to retuck your shirt when it’s removed. Any professional who wears mics routinely will tell you that.
The original article in The Daily Beast made it clear days ago that, at no point, was Rudy under the impression this 24-year-old actress was underage. It started off as a non-story and was whipped into a story by fake news outlets and ‘journalists’ in order to minimize the Hunter Biden story.
There’s nothing illegal or scandalous here at all.
Hunter Biden, however, has the top child porn FBI agent investigating him. His laptop allegedly has up to 50 inappropriate photos of a 14-year-old girl. We have text messages from Hunter discussing his putting this young girl in a hostile environment. That story. That real story, is being ignored by the people who tried to make this Rudy story just as scandalous as the Hunter story. Coving up actual child endangerment while fabricating fake child endangerment stories to win an election does, in fact, make any participant the enemy of the people.
Jeffrey Toobin masturbated in front of coworkers. That’s indefensible. Literally, everyone knew that already, but just in case the #MeToo movement put all that to bed.
So imagine a newspaper in America taking the position that it’s YOU who has the problem with masturbation. Enter the New York Daily News.
OPINION: Jeffrey Toobin’s history of bad sexual judgment is really about our unease with masturbation.
But I’m guessing you do the same, dear reader. Maybe you should stop feeling weird and guilty about that, @PennGSE's Jonathan Zimmerman writes.https://t.co/vLjlds8HWE
The article starts with a tone-deaf disconnect with reality.
So let’s suppose Jeffrey Toobin had been caught on camera having sex with a partner instead of touching himself. Would he be the most mocked man in the United States right now?
Yes, of course he would have been. The author naively suggests otherwise. That really isn’t the point though, is it? Toobin masturbated in front of coworkers, during a meeting. That’s not remotely the same as accidentally getting caught having sex with a partner.
During a meeting, Toobin CHOSE to take out his penis and masturbate. He CHOSE to angle the camera to frame his penis while masturbating. Beyond that, the details are moot.
The article ends just as ludicrous as it began:
News flash: Toobin masturbates. But I’m guessing that you do the same, dear reader. Maybe you should stop feeling weird and guilty about that. Then we can all stop making fun of Jeffrey Toobin.
News flash: that isn’t the point and it’s completely irrelevant to the story.
The author also mentioned Toobin’s old affair but left some of the horrible bits out. They failed to mention that Toobin also has a laundry list of sexual harassment allegations too. In other words, there’s a history of disturbing behavior.
Here’s an example:
According to one of the women (apparently book editor and publisher Judith Regan), Toobin tried to force his way into her hotel room, telling her, “You know you want it,” and he left “several sick messages” on her voicemail.
I also found this article to particularly interesting because the New York Daily News wasn’t this kind to Louis C.K. during his masturbation scandal. Friendly reminder, Louis C.K. had permission from the women to masturbate in front of them. Toobin did not.
The NY Daily News said Louis C.K. was “creepy” and committed “sexual misconduct.”
I’d assume a paper that took that position just two years ago would have the same values today. Especially after the #MeToo movement. Apparently not.
An editor of a major paper allowing a published piece excusing and defending undeniable sexual misconduct in this day and age is inexcusable and a firable offense.
