(Video) Journalist Sues Governor Whitmer Over Nursing Home Deaths
What is she hiding?
Well, you know the answer to that. I know the answer to that. We all know the answer to that.
What is she hiding?
Well, you know the answer to that. I know the answer to that. We all know the answer to that.
The Lancet, a respected online medical journal, issued an apology to its readers in an edition last year after the retraction. “We deeply apologize to you, the editors, and the journal readership for any embarrassment or inconvenience that this may have caused,” the publishers of The Lancet said.
The Lancet’s endorsement of the study was withdrawn because the Surgisphere Corporation, the company that provided data, refused to provide full access to the information it based its study on. Peer review medical journals typically engage in third-party peer review to validate the findings.
I hate to break it to you, John Wick is fake as hell. It’s awesome but fake.
Most of the opposition to suppressors come from people who’ve never heard a real one. They believe the Hollywood fakery on how much sound they put out and actually think you can kill someone in a crowded room without anyone hearing.
There are countless examples of people making this claim as the suppressor debate raged in 2016. There was a narrative that Trump would make suppressors easy to access and cheap if he became president, and countless people would die without a sound. How’d that conspiracy turn out?
Here’s an example of that ignorant fear-mongering by Hillary Clinton (who was shot at by snipers in Bosnia):
The crowd fled at the sound of gunshots.
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 2, 2017
Imagine the deaths if the shooter had a silencer, which the NRA wants to make easier to get.
That tweet was fact-checked into oblivion but anti-gun activists are a cult. They are never embarrassed when their dogma is debunked. Nor do they stop repeating said debunked dogma, leading to more ignorant people falling for the lie.
That’s why this video is so good.
It takes a scene from John Wick where a gun battle happens in a crowded train station without anyone noticing. Again, people actually believe this is possible.
The video replaces the fake and unrealistic shooting sounds with sounds more accurately representing what it would really sound like as these two shot at each other with suppressors.
Like nearly everything you hear or see from Hollywood, movie suppressor sounds are far from reality.
Casey and Mayor Roberson have a contentious interview about masks and mask fines in Elkhart, IN.
Fact-dump below.
Remember this?
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.
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.
Please listen to a previous podcast I did: Why Can’t We Listen To The Experts Who Disagree With Politicians?
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.
Authors Retract Study Showing Efficacy of Mask Mandates After Surge In New Cases
“The authors have withdrawn this manuscript because there are increased rates of SARS-CoV-2 cases in the areas that we originally analyzed…”
Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data
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.
Masking lack of evidence with politics
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.
Even a Military-Enforced Quarantine Can’t Stop the Virus, Study Reveals
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.
Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China
A total of 1174 close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases were traced, and they all tested negative for the COVID-19.
EPIDEMIOLOGIST: IS THERE HARD EVIDENCE THAT MASKS ARE EFFECTIVE IN STOPPING COVID? – July 2020
“At the moment, there is no hard evidence to back this up.”
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.
Dr. Matteo Bassetti, director of Infectious Diseases at the San Martino Hospital in Genoa
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.
A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers
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.
Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/face-masks-to-prevent-transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic- review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05
None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H).
bin-Reza et al. (2012) “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x
“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.
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 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: