{"id":271653,"date":"2023-07-30T07:02:44","date_gmt":"2023-07-30T07:02:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=271653"},"modified":"2023-07-31T07:33:35","modified_gmt":"2023-07-31T07:33:35","slug":"this-pro-mask-study-is-why-you-should-never-trust-the-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=271653","title":{"rendered":"This pro-mask \u201cstudy\u201d is why you should NEVER \u201cTrust the Science\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

Kit Knightly \u2013 Off-Guardian July 27, 2023<\/strong><\/h1>\n

Last week it was reported<\/a> that the Australian state of Victoria may be considering \u201cpermanent\u201d facemask mandates to achieve \u201czero-Covid\u201d.<\/p>\n

Now, we don\u2019t need to get into the personal liberty implications of such a law, or \u00a0the near-infinite supply of evidence<\/a> that masks don\u2019t work to prevent the transmission of respiratory disease.<\/p>\n

They don\u2019t work, they never worked. Mandating them was a political move designed to make the fake Covid \u201cpandemic\u201d appear real, and their continued use is a symptom of brainwashing or a by-product of chronic virtue signaling.<\/p>\n

The mask debate, such as it was, is over<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n

No, the only aspect of this development worth talking about is the \u201cevidence\u201d used to support the position \u2013 and trust me, the quotes are entirely justified.<\/p>\n

The \u201cstudy\u201d which claims to demonstrate the benefits of permanent masking was published in the Medical Journal of Australia<\/em> last week and titled \u201cConsistent mask use and SARS\u2010CoV\u20102 epidemiology: a simulation modelling study\u201d<\/a><\/em>.<\/p>\n

\u201cSimulation modelling study\u201d is very much the key phrase there. For those who don\u2019t know, \u00a0\u201csimulation modelling studies\u201d involve feeding data into a computer programme, then asking it to form conclusions.<\/p>\n

Clearly, they are only as reliable and useful as the data you use. In fact, you can very easily make them produce any result you want by feeding in \u00a0the \u201cright\u201d (bad) data.<\/p>\n

In this particular modelling study they started out by telling the computer that cloth masks reduce transmission by 53% and respirators reduced it by 80%:<\/p>\n

Odds ratios for the relative risk of infection for people exposed to an infected person (wearing a mask v not wearing a mask) were set at 0.47 for cloth and surgical masks and 0.20 for respirators<\/p>\n

Essentially, they told their computer that masks prevent disease<\/em>\u2026and then said \u201cok, computer, since you now know masks prevent disease \u00a0\u2013 what would happen if everybody wore them all the time?\u201d<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

The computer then told them \u2013 obviously \u00a0\u2013 that nobody would get sick.<\/p>\n

Because they made it logically impossible for it to say anything else.<\/p>\n

But there\u2019s a bit more to it.<\/p>\n

The next layer of interest is where they got their input data from.<\/p>\n

After all there have been dozens of studies done on masks over the years, 98% of which say masks don\u2019t work.<\/p>\n

So, did our guys they choose a peer-reviewed real-time control trial relying on lab-tested double-blind results?<\/p>\n

Perhaps one of the dozen or so such trials listed in our 40 facts<\/em> article<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Did they maybe average the results of multiple studies?<\/p>\n

No, they used a phone survey.<\/p>\n

One<\/em> phone survey.<\/p>\n

This phone survey<\/a>, published last year and conducted in late 2021.<\/em><\/p>\n

In this *ahem* \u201cscientific study\u201d, they had people randomly call up those who had recently been tested for \u201cCovid\u201d, ask them \u201cdid you wear a mask?\u201d<\/em> and then published the conclusion \u2013 \u201cmasks reduce transmission by 53%\u201d<\/em> \u2013 as if they meant something.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, if you scroll down to the \u201caffiliations\u201d section you can see that one of the authors is a Pfizer grant recipient.<\/p>\n

Rather more troublingly \u2013 and for some reason not mentioned as a conflict of interest \u2013 is that the whole study was produced by the California Board of Public Health<\/a>.<\/p>\n

California had already had a mask mandate in place<\/a> for almost a year before this \u201cstudy\u201d was even started.<\/p>\n

What we have here is not \u201cscience\u201d it\u2019s a computer model based on the results of a subjective phone survey conducted by a government agency with a vested interest. It is entirely meaningless<\/em>, and yet is published in journals and cited by \u201cexperts\u201d, perhaps even used as the basis of introducing new laws.<\/p>\n

This is how \u201cThe ScienceTM<\/sup>\u201d works. And, although Covid has maybe opened many people\u2019s eyes to this issue, it is far from unique to \u201cCovid\u201d. You are just as likely to find this kind of \u201cresearch\u201d published on any topic \u2013 especially those that serve a political purpose \u2013 and have been for years if not decades.<\/p>\n

Stanford Professor of evidence-based medicine, \u00a0John Ioannidis wrote a paper called \u201cWhy Most Published Research Findings Are False\u201d<\/a>, and that was back in 2005.<\/p>\n

This has nothing to do with the \u201cpandemic\u201d, and everything to do with the difference between science and \u201cThe Science\u201d. So let\u2019s examine that distinction.<\/p>\n

\u201cScience\u201d<\/a> is an approach to the world. A rational method for gathering information, testing new ideas and forming evidence-based conclusions.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe Science\u201d is a self-sustaining industry of academics who need jobs and owe favours.<\/p>\n

An ongoing quid pro quo<\/em> relationship between the researchers<\/strong> \u2013 who want honors and knighthoods and tenure and book deals and research grants and to be the popular talking head explaining complex ideas to the multitudes on television \u2013 and the corporations<\/strong>, governments<\/strong> and \u201ccharitable foundations\u201d<\/strong> who have all of those things in their gift.<\/p>\n

This system doesn\u2019t produce research intended to be read, it creates headlines for celebrities to tweet, links for \u201cjournalists\u201d to embed, sources for other researchers to cite.<\/p>\n

An illusion of solid substantiation that comes apart the moment you actually read the words, examine the methodology or analyse the data.<\/p>\n

Self-reporting surveys, manipulated data, \u201cmodelling studies\u201d that spit-out pre-ordained results. Affiliated-authors paid by the state or corporate interests to provide \u201cevidence\u201d that supports highly profitable or politically convenient assumptions.<\/p>\n

This mask study is the perfect example of that.<\/p>\n

Interlacing layers of nothing designed to create the impression of something.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why they want you to trust it<\/em>, rather than read it<\/em>.<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

Support Off-Guardian<\/p>\n

Ko-fi<\/a><\/p>\n

Subscribestar<\/a><\/p>\n

Liberapay<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We now know that facemasks did absolutely nothing to slow the spread of Covid-19. So why is the Australian state of Victoria reportedly considering a \u201cpermanent\u201d facemask mandate?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39262,"featured_media":237372,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[105,71],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-271653","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-coronavirus","category-Health_and_the_New_World_Order"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271653","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/39262"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=271653"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271653\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":271656,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/271653\/revisions\/271656"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/237372"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=271653"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=271653"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=271653"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}