They've always admitted that cloth masks barely do anything. The studies that get linked in all the news stories pushing masks always have a couple percent difference between masked and unmasked and always within the margin or error. The Danish study that came out early that showed masks don't protect the wearer by those standards would be counted as a win for masks; it's just the mask skeptics got to it first and managed to establish a narrative. That can't happen anymore as any mask study is immediately heralded as a victory for masks no matter how small the effect.
If you go back to pre-coof mask studies that show masks don't work they generally show the same thing, a couple percent difference (of whatever, cases, particles, it doesn't really matter) and within the margin of error. It's just back then because the science was unimportant to those in power the results weren't considered sufficient to overturn the null hypothesis.
Early on I noticed I could temporarily shift a pro-masker from "masks are the key to stop the pandemic" to "yes, masks barely work but WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ITS A PANDEMIC" but as soon as pressure was released they would go back to "masks are the key to stop the pandemic." It's a motte and bailey but I think it was subconscious. The NPC meme is real, folks.
I wrote a meta-analysis in April that showed masks are basically useless, with a negligible benefit at best (the right type of masks worn properly, etc.). Practically speaking, almost nobody is wearing them this way anyways, so they're basically useless. This has been known for a long time. Still people are so easy to manipulate. Nobody seems to be willing to do their own research anymore.
They outsourced their thinking to "the experts." There was an article in late 2020 that I got linked to often when I said masks only worked at best a couple of percent saying if there was a national mask mandate it would prevent 200,000 cases. I would then point out that number was calculated from the 2% reduction figure that they were arguing against and point to the link to the study in the article and where in the study the 2% was mentioned and they would immediately flip to "we have to do something." It was both funny and depressing because despite them getting okie dokied super hard it didn't change a single mind.
It’s the same with “social distancing”, which was never advocated for during past, arguably worse, “pandemics”…
Also lockdowns and curfews.
They can ONLY get away with those things now because of the internet, and the fake “service economy” where most jobs don’t really physically produce or DO anything…
These measures would never have worked back when people had real “work” (ergo any time in the last several centuries prior to the last couple of decades), or still interacted largely in person. They could never have worked back when SOME, at least, of the media, still held “truth to power”…
Oddly, I don’t think the circumstances that have led us to where we are now, in this “pandemic”, have existed since at least the 1930s, which suggests that… Something very fucking fishy is going on.
War is coming. It’s just a question of who will be fighting who, and who wins…
They've always admitted that cloth masks barely do anything. The studies that get linked in all the news stories pushing masks always have a couple percent difference between masked and unmasked and always within the margin or error. The Danish study that came out early that showed masks don't protect the wearer by those standards would be counted as a win for masks; it's just the mask skeptics got to it first and managed to establish a narrative. That can't happen anymore as any mask study is immediately heralded as a victory for masks no matter how small the effect.
If you go back to pre-coof mask studies that show masks don't work they generally show the same thing, a couple percent difference (of whatever, cases, particles, it doesn't really matter) and within the margin of error. It's just back then because the science was unimportant to those in power the results weren't considered sufficient to overturn the null hypothesis.
Early on I noticed I could temporarily shift a pro-masker from "masks are the key to stop the pandemic" to "yes, masks barely work but WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING ITS A PANDEMIC" but as soon as pressure was released they would go back to "masks are the key to stop the pandemic." It's a motte and bailey but I think it was subconscious. The NPC meme is real, folks.
I wrote a meta-analysis in April that showed masks are basically useless, with a negligible benefit at best (the right type of masks worn properly, etc.). Practically speaking, almost nobody is wearing them this way anyways, so they're basically useless. This has been known for a long time. Still people are so easy to manipulate. Nobody seems to be willing to do their own research anymore.
They outsourced their thinking to "the experts." There was an article in late 2020 that I got linked to often when I said masks only worked at best a couple of percent saying if there was a national mask mandate it would prevent 200,000 cases. I would then point out that number was calculated from the 2% reduction figure that they were arguing against and point to the link to the study in the article and where in the study the 2% was mentioned and they would immediately flip to "we have to do something." It was both funny and depressing because despite them getting okie dokied super hard it didn't change a single mind.
It’s the same with “social distancing”, which was never advocated for during past, arguably worse, “pandemics”… Also lockdowns and curfews.
They can ONLY get away with those things now because of the internet, and the fake “service economy” where most jobs don’t really physically produce or DO anything…
These measures would never have worked back when people had real “work” (ergo any time in the last several centuries prior to the last couple of decades), or still interacted largely in person. They could never have worked back when SOME, at least, of the media, still held “truth to power”…
Oddly, I don’t think the circumstances that have led us to where we are now, in this “pandemic”, have existed since at least the 1930s, which suggests that… Something very fucking fishy is going on.
War is coming. It’s just a question of who will be fighting who, and who wins…