Posted on 12/02/2020 3:21:32 AM PST by Kaslin
While we should certainly give the doctors and nurses on the front lines heroically treating COVID patients their just due, there’s another, albeit unsung, brand of COVID-hero. They are the reporters, the data hounds, the fact-checkers, the politicians, and especially the medical professionals who all put their reputations on the line to tell the truth about COVID-19 and the destructive, irrational response to it from governments around the world. While nobody’s perfect and this virus has at times made fools of us all, there’s no doubt that ‘Team Reality’ has been correct far more than the powers-that-be, and ongoing trends continue to prove that out. (To help amplify their great work, I feature 165 (and counting) of them on my ‘Team Reality’ Twitter list!) While many (certainly not all) lean to the right, political ideology doesn’t define them so much as a dedication to telling the truth against a seemingly endless tide of lies, of proclaiming that the emperor indeed is stark-naked regardless of everyone in the crowd exclaiming otherwise.
Arguably chief among these, at least on the reporter front, is former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, who has been a prominent lockdown skeptic since the early days of the pandemic in March. Over the ensuing months, his massive Twitter account and frequent Fox News appearances have been a refreshing beacon of light against the overwhelming insanity of lockdowns, restrictions, and mask-mandates as governments twist themselves and their societies into pretzels inexplicably trying to “crush” a highly contagious respiratory virus.
Thankfully, Berenson had enough supporters in enough prominent places to somehow convince Amazon to reverse their initial decision last month to censor his latest edition of “Unreported Truths about COVID-19 and Lockdowns” that dares call into question our new State Religion, the Almighty Face Mask. Otherwise, not nearly as many people would lay eyes on it. And believe me, as many people as possible need to lay their eyes on this.
Like a hand-written letter in the mail, there’s something quaint yet quietly powerful about using print media to distribute something the powers-that-be clearly do not want the public to read. There are, to be sure, plenty of anti-mask articles available on the internet (I’ve written at least ten here at Townhall with the word ‘mask’ in the title), but good luck sharing them on social media (at least with any ‘reach’ and without a “fact-check”) or finding them on Google. Yes, there’s a Kindle version, but holding this 39-page pamphlet in my hands and personally handing it to friends and family to read feels like a throwback to another era, something dissidents from ‘establishment’ thought on any topic have done since the invention of the printing press. Try ‘deleting’ this now, Big Tech!
Fox News legend Brit Hume said the book is “worth reading, unless you’re allergic to views and evidence that are at odds with the current conventional wisdom.” I strongly concur. It begins with an overview of the pre-COVID science behind mask-wearing and a description of the “sudden 180-degree turn” that occurred in the spring with seeming every media outlet, ‘health official,’ and politician now in lockstep in the insistence that mask-wearing is now a virtue akin to not shooting someone on the street with a pistol.
“The relentless pressure has caused a sharp rise in mask-wearing,” Berenson writes. “In blue states like California, masks are essentially standard, even outside. People who wear masks are increasingly willing to challenge people who don’t.”
Yet, as Berenson documents, the virus is now “spreading faster” than ever before. Noting the difference between various kinds of masks, the author goes on to detail the science behind why most masks used by the public aren’t doing anything at all to curb the spread of COVID-19, and may even in fact be making things worse. All this talk of droplets, aerosols, microns, and nanometers can be complicated, but Berenson breaks things down in a way that’s easy to understand yet not over-simplified. He also offers several examples of post-COVID research that points to masks being generally useless without directly saying so because it’s become taboo.
After proving unequivocally and devastatingly that most masks offer little to no protection to the wearer, Berenson goes on to poke a few Titanic-sized holes in the contention that masks protect others as a form of source control, which serves as the basis for mask-mandates around the world. Not only does Berenson use existing research to prove that face masks “have almost no chance of catching most of the particles we exhale,” he also destroys the premise that “larger droplets [which masks would conceivably curb] are responsible for most viral transmission.”
But the carnage doesn’t stop there. Berenson then moves to the Sacred Cow of COVID-Dogma, asymptomatic transmission. From both Dr. Anthony Fauci and the WHO reversing course on the issue to a study in Wuhan, China that found asymptomatic transmission to be virtually nonexistent, Beresnon efficiently drops this sacred cow too, Leviticus-style. The author then goes on to disprove both the (in)famous hairdresser “study” as well as the CDC report from Kansas supposedly showing mask-mandated states to be doing better than their unmasked counterparts.
“In the case of the source control theory for masks, the real-world evidence is somewhere between weak and nonexistent,” he writes. “Yet instead of decades, public health authorities changed their collective mind on masks nearly overnight.”
It’s a quick read, but the former New York Times reporter includes plenty of data and research throughout this booklet to more than prove the general useless of face masks to anyone open-minded enough to consider the evidence. At a reasonable $5.99 per copy, this is one of those purchases you should duplicate by at least ten. Keep one, then place the others into the stockings of everyone you know.
Indeed, this is one of those rare polemics that has the power to change minds - and ultimately, changing minds is the only thing many of us can do, at least right now. Change enough of them, and pretty soon the world will change too.
Worked for Tom Paine.
Alex Berenson spent most of his first appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show ranting about how politicians should stop wasting their time trying to overturn an election and instead start working on a Covid plan with the incoming Biden administration. The worst thing about it was that Tucker never once interrupted him or asked him if he thought the results were fair.
Kindle $2.99
Somehow I missed that.
Opinions are like a certain orifice. Everybody has one.
Destructive, yes, irrational no. Once one embraces the fact that government responses are about power and control and not public health, there is nothing irrational about it. In fact, when viewed in that light, it makes complete sense.
Does Alex really think things would be better with Biden? Expect stricter control measures. I am sure the Progressives are surprised small business are still hanging on.
We will have Big Business and Big Givernment. What could go wrong. /s
>> “...he [Berenson] also destroys the premise that “larger droplets [which masks would conceivably curb] are responsible for most viral transmission.” <<
I doubt very much that he proves that quantity of the virus doesn’t matter, and that larger droplets don’t contain a larger quantity.
My own homemade test of coughing with my mouth uncovered, and feeling whiff of air on my hand held a couple of feet in front of my mouth, and then coughing with my mouth covered and feeling none convinces me that masks help prevent the virus from being propelled as far. That’s a common-sense test that anyone can do. No need to depend on experts who are telling us a hundred different things.
1- As few people who slap on a mask to contain a cough or a sneeze rather than carrying a handkerchief have no training on how to properly select a mask (e.g., type of material; custom sized and shaped), on how to apply the mask to the face and fit-test the seal (e.g., the mask cannot be applied over facial hair as a mask-to-skin seal must be established completely around the mask perimeter), on how to wear a mask without disturbing the seal that has been so carefully established and its integrity tested (i.e., if the mask is adjusted or lifted away from the face to scratch your nose the seal must be re-established and re-tested), and on how to maintain the mask (i.e., the mask must be sanitized or replaced following each time it is worn), a mask is at best marginally effective in containing a cough or a sneeze (or spittle for that matter) as a significant portion of any discharge simply exits through the mask perimeter;
2- Like any non-HEPA dry filter, liquid droplets coughed, sneezed or spit into a mask will, within 30 minutes or so, dry out and the residual particles, including virus "particles" are unloaded either deep into the mask-wearer's lungs as they inhale, or released through the mask into the surrounding area with each exhale.
This is why despite widwspread use of masks the virus continues to spread. It's not just that masks cannot contain something as infinitessimally small as a virus, it's that the way masks are improperly selected, incorrectly applied/fit-tested, improperly worn and incorrectly maintained by the vast majority of mask-wearers that renders their use as personal protective equipment (PPE) completely ineffective ... this from a guy with going on 54 years of hands-on experience with PPE (including masks) as an environmental health and safety professional in heavy industry and big agriculture.
Politicians, unelected bureaucrats and "experts" (who should really know better about the significant limitations of wearing face masks by the general population to control the spread of a respiratory virus) are simply lying to you ... not just exaggerating the effectiveness of masks ... but outright lying because they know -- or, being "experts" they should know -- better.
Don't believe me? Very well. Then believe reality as the virus continues to "run its course" as respiratory viruses do despite 85-90 percent of the population following the politicians' mask mandates because they're scared and because ... jeez ... it seems to "make sense". Cheers!
Does common sense come into play when you put your mask on with contaminated hands?
Does common sense say anything about touching the outside of the mask as you are wearing it to remove fog from glasses or adjust it on your face with contaminated hands.
Do you wash your hands, put on gloves then remove your mask, placing it in a sterile container or paper single use bag.
Does common sense have you sterilize the mask with UV, Virex or Ozone after each use?
Does common sense make you destroy a mask after the inside (side facing you) is touched in any manner or deformed?
Masks do NOTHING to prevent the spread of culture confirmed viral (Influenza) spread and in fact the improper use (touching a mask with viral particles on the outside with ungloved hands then touching your face, eyes, nose) will increase the rate of infectivity.
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article?fbclid=IwAR3o4xyKoXICVDwXOWxJ7oOeX8WqXczTz2O_ElartL0SWwQ2x9YXczohqbI
>> “Does common sense come into play when you put your mask on with contaminated hands?” <<
Yes, I wash my hands before using it, and I’m careful about the way I touch the outside of the mask then and later — and don’t touch the inside. After using it, I place it in a plastic bag (not sterile or airtight, with the outside touching the bag), and place the bag in a part of the house I don’t usually frequent. (All I expect is to reduce the amount of the virus to which I’m exposed, not perfectly prevent it.)
I’m retired (as many persons are in the high risk group), and schedule everything I need to do around other people on one day. By the time I need to do other things, I expect the virus on the mask to no longer be infectious.
Sorry, I somehow overlooked your post when responding to the other one.
>> “...a mask is at best marginally effective in containing a cough or a sneeze (or spittle for that matter) as a significant portion of any discharge simply exits through the mask perimeter” <<
I’ve confirmed that the whiffs of air from a cough don’t go as far, not only forward but sideways too. You can confirm that as well. Apparently what happens is that when the air is deflected, it doesn’t go as far.
>> “...liquid droplets coughed, sneezed or spit into a mask will, within 30 minutes or so, dry out and the residual particles, including virus “particles” are unloaded either deep into the mask-wearer’s lungs as they inhale, or released through the mask into the surrounding area with each exhale.” <<
That’s something that my test doesn’t cover. I’m assuming the virus needs to be propelled a good distance, and that most of the dangerous quantities will quickly fall to the ground if they don’t reach someone within a relatively small perimeter (assuming there’s no strong wind blowing or a fan right behind the person).
If protection from significant quantities of the virus being propelled long distances isn’t helpful, and merely breathing dried particles into the air later is enough to pose the same risk to others — and those dried particles won’t fall to the ground but stay in the air infecting people for a long time — then I’d expect nearly all of us except persons in complete isolation would have gotten infected by now. That hasn’t happened, so I doubt that those breathed-out dry particles are that dangerous.
it was November 4th or 5th, definitely in the same week as the election. He has been on again since then and hasn’t mentioned Trump. OTOH, Tucker also hasn’t asked him if he would like to walk back his rant considering all of the controversy over the fairness of the election.
” I’ve confirmed that the whiffs of air from a cough don’t go as far, not only forward but sideways too.”
Face Mask Comparison Using Vaping
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=almtH9kipl0
One notable thing at work is masks with valves are banned. The valves catch the droplets and turn them into aerosols upon exhaling. So those do the very opposite of source control. We have employees who use those in their jobs and they have to take them off outside of their labs and put on cheaper masks.
That depends on dose. Large quantities (thousands) are usually required to become infected.
If physicians are honest they will tell you we learned in mec school the limited utility of masks - at least I did. Among the learnings - after 20 minutes masks are saturated by exhaled moisture and lose whatever effectiveness rhey had. They serve mostly as a physical barrier to keep coughs/sneezes and large objects out of the surgical field. They also keep the wearers face from getting large objects ( sprays of blood/pus etc ). ack at them. that’s it.
Thanks for a well reasoned response to the fear science. If GJones2 chooses to wear a mask, that’s up to him/her but the reality is as you describes. A piece of cloth that spends much if its time in the wearers pocket does not suffice for real PPE.
Most of the people I know who have caught the virus are maskers. A doctor in a press conference yesterday noted 96% mask compliance in Maryland. Yet in literally the next sentence he said that cases are drastically increasing. If masks work and virtually everyone complies how does that make sense?
I’m starting to notice skin issues on faces of people who wear masks constantly
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.