[untenured]

I’m guessing Mr, Rucker, like the people he quotes, didn’t actually read the article. It reported no data or original analysis, and merely reported the work of others, almost none of which involved the effect of widespread mask-wearing on COVID infection and death rates,

I read it, and noticed the complete lack of originality in it. Here is the first two paragraph of the publisher’s description of the guide for authors written by the journal itself:

“The purpose of Medical Hypotheses is to publish interesting theoretical papers. The journal will consider radical, speculative and non-mainstream scientific ideas provided they are coherently expressed.”

A lot of people are already certain of everything, are simply looking for support for their point of view, and stop once they’ve found some.

[untenured]

Couldn’t get the link to work. Here it is:

https://www.elsevier.com/journals/medical-hypotheses/0306-9877/guide-for-authors