But it does.
Fission and Fusion are special cases.
No they're not.
The only thing different between the two is that the vast amounts of energy involved in fission/fusion result in a net change of mass that's large enough to be "noticeable", whereas the amount of energy involved in chemical reactions (or kinetic energy, etc.) are small enough that the net change of mass is so tiny that it can be disregarded for most practical purposes (and indeed, next to impossible to actually measure much less notice).
But in all cases, the "books must balance" relative to E=mc2.
As with most things, the default position is that longstanding science is right and Einstein is right.
If that leads to the unexpected (to a layman) result that chemical reactions convert mass to energy, then it's time to hit the books to find out how and why.
It's interesting how many people will try to stick with common sense when it conflicts with reality.
placemark