Andy Paquette, Mask Science, Big Lie? |523|

I'm not following the fuss here either. Again, if this was supposed to be a systemic test of a societal control program; it failed miserably.

If you are conspiratorially inclined, I'd suggest this whole thing is a head fake for the potential tool of REAL control which is the evolving capabilities of digital technology. If I were an evil overlord I sure as hell wouldn't be messing around with mask-mandate tests of control systems (and vaccines for that matter). I'd be employing the best data scientists to continue the already impressive manipulation capabilities of digital technologies. Better yet, I'd already have control of the Directors of companies like Alphabet and Facebook.

The control and spread of misinformation has been the most wildly successful outcome in all this. We're supposed to buy that this was all an inadvertent consequence of ordinary profit-seeking and incompetence. Maybe it was. But now it's clearly a juicy plum, ripe for the picking. I doubt somebody hasn't grabbed it already.
 
sounds like statistical sophistry

"Sophistry, like poison, is at once detected, and nauseated, when presented to us in a concentrated form; but a fallacy which, when stated barely in a few sentences, would not deceive a child, may deceive half the world if diluted in a quarto volume."
(Richard Whately, Elements of Logic, 7th ed. 1831)

When buried in an 80 page study (quarto volume), the 'Relative Risk Deception' is obscured, and when simply stated, as Andy has done here, a child can easily see the lie.

Moderna used the same relative risk deception in touting its injection as being 95% effective.
Vaccine Makers Claim COVID Shots Are ‘95% Effective’ — But What Does That Mean? • Children's Health Defense (childrenshealthdefense.org)
Big Pharma have used this trick for years. For example after realising that my muscle cramps were caused by my statin prescription, I went on to read some of Dr Malcolm Kendrick's books. There I learned that a statin can reduce your risk of having a heart attack by something like 35%, and yet have an NNT > 100.

The NNT (Number Needed to Treat) is the number of people a doctor would have to treat with a statin in order to help one of them. The other 99% get no gain but a fair percentage get side effects.

Without Dr Kendrick's efforts (and a few other medical 'mavericks') I might have worried whether it was safe to give up the statin even with the horrible side effects.

Part of the mess we are in now, is because Big Pharma was allowed to get away with so much over the years. Even when caught they were only fined - whereas if those responsible had done jail time you can guarantee those companies would have changed their ways.

https://projects.propublica.org/graphics/bigpharma

I would also argue that to some extent the problem goes way back to the decision to allow drug companies to research a drug, organise the drug trials, and then make and sell the product. This model is hopelessly unstable - I mean a perfectly honest and diligent company could be wiped out by a few drugs that progressed most of the way through the system and failed late on n the process. They learned to cheat to stay afloat.

David
 
IMO this particular episode is just perpetuating the war. The Bangladesh study does seem like bad science. But masking as a precaution against infection seems solid. Anecdotally, my kid who's required to wear a mask at school and has been distancing and such has resulted in far fewer colds and flu like symptoms compared to years past.
I wonder if your family took the advice of some medics to take a vitamin D supplement and ideally also a vitamin C supplement while COVID was around. We have taken that precaution and have had no infections whatsoever.

David
 
I'm not following the fuss here either. Again, if this was supposed to be a systemic test of a societal control program; it failed miserably.

If you are conspiratorially inclined, I'd suggest this whole thing is a head fake for the potential tool of REAL control which is the evolving capabilities of digital technology. If I were an evil overlord I sure as hell wouldn't be messing around with mask-mandate tests of control systems (and vaccines for that matter). I'd be employing the best data scientists to continue the already impressive manipulation capabilities of digital technologies. Better yet, I'd already have control of the Directors of companies like Alphabet and Facebook.
Even in England, large numbers of people voluntarily wear masks in shops and a few even wear them outside. The point is, it creates the impression that the situation is far worse than it really is. If everyone forgot about COVID, they would have lost. After all, does any non-medic know about the range of illnesses that people are likely to get?

David
 
I'm not following the fuss here either. Again, if this was supposed to be a systemic test of a societal control program; it failed miserably.

If you are conspiratorially inclined, I'd suggest this whole thing is a head fake for the potential tool of REAL control which is the evolving capabilities of digital technology. If I were an evil overlord I sure as hell wouldn't be messing around with mask-mandate tests of control systems (and vaccines for that matter). I'd be employing the best data scientists to continue the already impressive manipulation capabilities of digital technologies. Better yet, I'd already have control of the Directors of companies like Alphabet and Facebook.

Silence,
I don't follow your logic. Just because an attempt fails doesn't mean that it wasn't intended to succeed.

And I question your assertion that the study failed to achieve a misinformation objective. I think you don't understand how an information op works. This study was promoted as far as CNN and other corporate media outlets (not that too many people still watch CNN or take it seriously) and touted as definitive ultimate proof that masks work. The fools that digest the drivel from those "news" outlets are not here realizing that the study is debunked. They just heard that "science" says masks work. Furthermore, the countless people engaging in online debates/discussions will google this study and positive reviews of it and not only be convinced that masks work, but use that to convince others. It's a matter of putting the misinformation out there into the collective conscious. Also, no info op relies on a single piece of misinformation. This study is meant to be just one shot in an endless barrage. Finally, you have people like Ellis who's job it is to come to sites like this and sow doubt just in case a fence sitter finds this site and the salient discussion.

If I were an evil overlord looking to re-set the economies of the world and further a one world/one government neo-feudal/neo-socialist plot, I would have a diverse multi-pronged strategy for gaining the compliance of the many and diverse societies on the planet. Again, there is no single magic bullet. The war is fought on a large number of fronts. They are employing data scientists and digital tech. They do have control of key companies, like FB and Twitter and much more. That is a matter of fact. Zuckerberg of FB spent $400 million on operations involving bolstering the the polling and voting in heavy democrat districts in swing states in the 2020 election. That is a fact. You don't think he's using FB to further the cause as well?

Do you not understand how personal mask wearing is. It literally removes the human face from social interactions. It's like how Mao made everyone wear the same stupid grey outfits. It's why the military shaves everyone's head and makes them all do everything the same upon entering basic training. You know this. The vaccines? Getting people to stick experimental drugs into their bodies isn't testing and gaining compliance at a very personal and human level? I think you're being deliberately obtuse. I thought you better than the likes of Ellis and Malf.
 
Last edited:
Big Pharma have used this trick for years. For example after realising that my muscle cramps were caused by my statin prescription, I went on to read some of Dr Malcolm Kendrick's books. There I learned that a statin can reduce your risk of having a heart attack by something like 35%, and yet have an NNT > 100.

You agree that that is the information you need to make an informed decision - what is my absolute risk without the drug? And what effect will the drug have on that absolute risk? And that's the information that the researchers gave us in the study. First they told us what the baseline/absolute risk was for the people in the study. Then they told us what effect the masking had on that risk.
 
Last edited:
Finally, you have people like Ellis who's job it is to come to sites like this and sow doubt just in case a fence sitter finds this site and the salient discussion.

You know, I said back at the beginning of all this that I didn't personally find the study persuasive. All I've done is try to discuss the valid criticisms and correct the errors you and others have made. Correcting errors is not a disinformation campaign. Surely, if we are truly interested in engaging with the study, it should be on the basis of what the study actually found, not on false information about the study.

Do you not understand how personal mask wearing is. It literally removes the human face from social interactions.

Is that it? You think it depersonalizes people if you don't see their mouth? I don't buy that. Billions of social interactions take place every day without even seeing someone's face, let alone their mouth. And there are all sorts of circumstances there people interact with someone whose face is partially obscured for a variety of reasons without thinking anything about it - health care settings, religious garb, Fargo in winter time, long hair, etc. Why is this different?
 
Is that it? You think it depersonalizes people if you don't see their mouth? I don't buy that. Billions of social interactions take place every day without even seeing someone's face, let alone their mouth. And there are all sorts of circumstances there people interact with someone whose face is partially obscured for a variety of reasons without thinking anything about it - health care settings, religious garb, Fargo in winter time, long hair, etc. Why is this different?
I hope you’re trolling here.

I would feel bad about masking a dog in public. But I would do it if it was an absolute necessity.

THE ONLY reason the majority of Americans didn’t respond to mask mandates with guns is because they were tricked into accepting it as a temporary measure of necessity (of which both have been proven lies).

if you don’t see clear danger in masking children without regard fo psychological effect (let alone any desire to compare said danger with benefit of wearing the mask), maybe you need to take a step back and try to imagine viewing things from outside of your bubble.

again. I would feel bad for having to put a mask on a dog
 
Covid Deaths?

How do you know they were Covid Deaths?

Were they reported as Covid because they took the PCR test?

The PCR test is fraudulent use of the the PCR method developed by Kary Mullis.

Were they reported as Covid because they had Covid symptoms, which could be from anything?

They could have had respiratory illness from breathing jet fuel on the airplane from Mexico.

As Biden would say, "C'mon, man!".

We have to think critically when considering cause of illness, and instead of assuming contagion, consider toxemia first.

my bad.

I should have said “deaths related to symptoms commonly associated with Covid, but generally accepted/understood as distinctly different than anything like common Flu.”
 
my bad.

I should have said “deaths related to symptoms commonly associated with Covid, but generally accepted/understood as distinctly different than anything like common Flu.”
Speaking of which, the near total disappearance of the flu in the wake of covid is interesting. It is almost as if someone has redefined "flu" as "covid", kind of like we now have "boy" redefined as "girl" and vice-versa. I do appreciate that there are differences between covid and flu but it also looks like the covid entrepreneurs grabbed a lot of flu cases and claimed them as covid to get their numbers up and increase the fear factor.
 
I hope you’re trolling here.

I'm not. I truly don't get this rhetoric. Face masking has been around for decades/centuries, and it's a trivial activity. Or it certainly feels that way to me. I don't get why you're behaving as though it's some kind of onerous undertaking. My underwear is more restrictive and causes more problems than any mask I've worn.

THE ONLY reason the majority of Americans didn’t respond to mask mandates with guns is because they were tricked into accepting it as a temporary measure of necessity (of which both have been proven lies).

Why on earth would you expect anyone to respond with guns to a trivial public health measure in the middle of a pandemic? Who exactly are you planning on murdering?
 
If I had a dog I might consider the following for a public sentiment experiment:

I go to a grocery store parking lot with my dog and a clipboard to record people’s responses. My dog would be wearing a Cloth Mask. I would be holding a sign which reads “Does my dog’s mask bother you? Why? Or Why Not?”
 
I'm not. I truly don't get this rhetoric. Face masking has been around for decades/centuries, and it's a trivial activity. Or it certainly feels that way to me. I don't get why you're behaving as though it's some kind of onerous undertaking. My underwear is more restrictive and causes more problems than any mask I've worn.



Why on earth would you expect anyone to respond with guns to a trivial public health measure in the middle of a pandemic? Who exactly are you planning on murdering?
Fuck you.
Guns are for defense against tyrants. You’re heroes are probably responsible for the pandemic..
 
I don't get why you are acting like wearing a mask is some kind of onerous task. You're not being asked to cut off part of your penis. You're not being asked to carry a tracking device around with you. You're not being asked to drink water that's contaminated with lead. There are way better things for you to complain about.
 
If I had a dog I might consider the following for a public sentiment experiment:

I go to a grocery store parking lot with my dog and a clipboard to record people’s responses. My dog would be wearing a Cloth Mask. I would be holding a sign which reads “Does my dog’s mask bother you? Why? Or Why Not?”

You'd probably find that people would assume you were one of those incomprehensible anti-maskers, and avoid you. I have no idea what your dog example is supposed to be about.
 
Speaking of which, the near total disappearance of the flu in the wake of covid is interesting. It is almost as if someone has redefined "flu" as "covid", kind of like we now have "boy" redefined as "girl" and vice-versa. I do appreciate that there are differences between covid and flu but it also looks like the covid entrepreneurs grabbed a lot of flu cases and claimed them as covid to get their numbers up and increase the fear factor.
Or measures simply work.
 
Back
Top