Stanford Faculty Smear Professor Who Accurately Summarized Data On Masks [Follow the Science! Who Needs Academic Freedom?]

The Federalist ^ | 15 September 2021 | Carl Heneghan and Martin Kulldorff

[Fractal Trader]

Open scientific discourse is especially critical during a public health crisis such as a pandemic. Academics should be free to pursue knowledge wherever it may lead, without undue or unreasonable interference. It is deeply troubling when scientists try to limit rather than engage in scientific debate.

Last week, anonymous posters with the portrait of Stanford University Professor of Medicine Dr. Jay Bhattacharya were plastered on kiosks around the Stanford campus, linking him to COVID deaths in Florida. Even though cumulative age-adjusted COVID mortality is lower in Florida than in most other large states, these smears appeared.

Taking it one step further, the chair of Stanford’s epidemiology department, Professor Melissa Bondy, circulated a petition among faculty members demanding that the university president exercise his obligation “to clarify for the faculty the limits of public pronouncements when proclaiming on public health policy.”

The petitioners are upset that “several Stanford faculty members have publicly advocated for policies for others that are contrary to those the university has adopted” and that “these recommendations are disturbing and contrary to public health standards; they foster uncertainty and anxiety and put lives at risk.”

While insidiously not naming anyone, the petition explicitly targets Bhattacharya by quoting his answer to a question from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis about masks on children. He responded that “there is no high-quality evidence to support the assertion that masks stop the disease from spreading.” To deserve trust, scientists must be honest about what is and what is not known, and we agree with Bhattacharya.

Randomized trials provide the best available research evidence to inform health-care decisions and are considered the gold standard for determining intervention effects. But no randomized studies have shown that masks in children are effective. Instead, there are observational studies of uneven quality that reach conflicting conclusions.

For example, a widely publicized observational study from Duke University showed very little COVID in North Carolina schools with mask mandates. Shockingly, the study did not have a control group to compare schools with and without masks. By comparison, Sweden also had little COVID in children and teachers without using masks in their schools.

While adults differ from children, there have been two randomized COVID studies evaluating masks on adults. Based on the 95 percent confidence intervals, surgical mask wearers in Denmark were between 23 percent more likely and 46 percent less likely to be infected by COVID.

[SNIP]

Hence, based on these randomized studies, adult masks appear to have either no or limited efficacy.

[Fractal Trader]

A faculty of "Karens": several Stanford faculty members have publicly advocated for policies for others that are contrary to those the university has adopted” and that “these recommendations are disturbing and contrary to public health standards; they foster uncertainty and anxiety and put lives at risk.”

[Fractal Trader]

Follow the science! Stanford has all their students wearing face diapers despite there being no science to support this policy

[Robert DeLong]

Some adults still have the need for a blanky to make them feel secure. Some even are regulars at this board who refuse to believe that masks are useless, no matter what evidence you provide to them..

[consult]

The liberals is this country are truly showing their fascist tendencies. They only use science when it supports their position. Perhaps they are driven to fear by the leftist media they watch?

[Sergio]

bkmk

[sauropod]

bkmk