Why I Won't Talk to 'Fact Checkers' About Our Mask Study – The Daily Sceptic
The fact-checker of a powerful press syndicate asked Dr. Tom Jefferson to assist it in "debunking misrepresentations" of his recent Cochrane review finding no clear evidence masks work. Take a hike, he said.
For those not familiar, Cochrane studies are considered the best in the world and can't be dismissed by Regime cultists like they do with every other thing that refutes their brainwashing. This will force the MSM to attack Cochrane, which means either they demolish what credibility science has left, or lose and and destroy their own credibility among Regime cultists. This is gonna be more enlightening to the normies than the Rittenhouse verdict!
Normies worthy of the title will just go right along and fall for the next obvious bullshit. Because they're stupid.
It really is that way unfortunately. Even when they get fooled and they know they get fooled it doesn't make them more suspicious of the narrative next time. It's large scale Gell-Mann amnesia.
For God's sakes people still eat margarine and that's been a known scam for forty years. The average person is dumber than hell and unfit to make decisions past their own nose.
This is actually a huge pain point for me. People know they are super unhealthy and that everyone is basically super unhealthy but if you tell someone to cut out vegetable oil (or something similar) you'll get a "well, achtually, the experts say that vegetable oils are more healthy than animal based fats- I read that on huffpost or something."
The average pleb doesn't matter, their opinions are just whatever they're told to think. What matters is that the pleb-wranglers in the media, academia, etc, are gonna have short-circuiting brains because of this.
What, did you really think that media and academia care about whether masks actually work?
Their brains won't short-circuit. The regime says masks good. So they say masks good. Any research showing otherwise is a far-right conspiracy theory, until such time that the regime tells them that masks are bad. At which point Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
And don't forget evil!
I doubted so hard my [X] button broke.
Well obviously they can, but my point is that if they do there will be many people - the kinds of people whose opinions matter to the Regime - waking up to the fact that the media, fact checkers, etc, are lying scum.
Fingers crossed!
Alternative option 3: The media lies about it, and all the NPCs clap like the trained seals they are. The few people who are aware don't speak up because they're afraid of getting crushed.
Cochrane really are among the top dogs of the medical world I will confirm. They're the folks that publish what is known as 'meta-analysis' and systematic reviews. They're respected more than anyone else really. You don't attack them (or BMJ, or the lancet) without cause and have medical professionals on your side.
And they (and the bmj!) have already been into a slapfight with facebook/instagram/meta and old twitter over being 'factchecked' and shadowbanned
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95
https://www.cochrane.org/news/trusted-information-needs-be-protected-social-media-much-misinformation-needs-be-challenged
So they've been chaffing at this nonsense for a few years now.
AFAIK, Cochrane doesn't actually do any primary medical research (ie. Actually conduct any physical solitary medical trials).
They instead are a clearinghouse of sorts where they used to do secondary meta-analysis reviews trying to collect all the best studies floating out in the ether for a clinical question. They use evidence-based medicine appraisal techniques to boil it all down in good faith to make a single recommendation on whether there's enough evidence to support a medical intervention and the strength of the evidence.
You are correct that before COVIDians the medical industry went completely mad re: ethics, Cochrane review recommendations were considered the gold standard to answer complex clinical questions.
You are right, they (cochrane) conduct and publish systematic reviews and meta analyses, not the primary studies themselves. And this is regarded as higher-order evidence than RCTs or any other method. The are regarded as best in the world.
(not all of their research is a meta analysis, the systematic review part essentially has to find enough studies that fit the criterea before that can be done)
They'll change the subject and not cover this information while blaming Donald Trump for recommending it.
He uses the term 'stringer' for journalist. I wondered what it meant.
According to Urban Dictionary:
And:
And:
All of these seem strangely applicable to the Journalist.
Wikipedia says: "In journalism, a stringer is a freelance journalist, photographer, or videographer who contributes reports, photos, or videos to a news organization on an ongoing basis but is paid individually for each piece of published or broadcast work"
I have to wonder if this influenced Peter Parker's job.