(LifeSiteNews) –– An opinion piece was published in The New York Times on Tuesday called The Mask Mandates Did Nothing. Will Any Lessons Be Learned?” giving yet another example of how even the Left is waking up to the nonsense of the COVID restrictions.
The piece, written by Bret Stephens, quoted Oxford epidemiologist Tom Jefferson, who said, “There is just no evidence that they [masks] make any difference. Full stop.”
For almost three years New York Times pushed mask mandates, promoted masking and double-masking, and viciously attacked any scientist who expressed skepticism about these policies.
Now they admit they were wrong…
_ pic.twitter.com/P4oRf5ch5b— Dr. Eli David (@DrEliDavid) February 22, 2023
Amazing, isn’t it? It only took three years for the mainstream media to admit what was known by “conspiracy theorists” in March 2020. This sort of statement would have gotten you banned from YouTube until about 15 minutes ago, but apparently, it is now permitted at the Times.
Now, the critic might retort that it is only non-medical masks or simply cloth masks that do nothing. However, Jefferson said that even if one were to don an N-95 mask that it “makes no difference – none of it.”
Asked about why mask mandates were enforced despite the now obvious evidence showing they do absolutely nothing for the general population, he said that the policies were based on “non-randomized … flawed observational studies.”
Again, those of us who are not predisposed to trusting everything the powers that be declare knew this a long time ago.
No protection at all
It did not take a genius to look up the size of a virus particle and compare that to the size of the pores in even a medical mask to realize that using a mask to stop a respiratory virus was like holding up a chain-link fence as a shield to stop yourself from getting wet.
Masks have long been used in medical settings when properly fitted in order to stop the transmission of bacterial debris, which makes perfect sense when you consider how risky it could be for spittle and other fluids to make their way into an open wound. But the fact has always been that if you can breathe through something then you can pass along what you breathe.
Add to that the fact that people used all sorts of materials for their masks – I remember a woman in a drive-through using the top of a winter toque – and what we had was billions of people walking around with loose handkerchiefs over their mouths as if they were COVID-bullet proof vests.
Unsettling science
I can’t be certain if any of the experts ever said things like “the science is settled” about the efficacy of masks, but they definitely acted as if it was. The fact that people were dragged off trains, planes, and out of supermarkets for not donning the muzzle definitely made it seem like the “science was settled.” It was so settled that you had a hard time participating in society if you didn’t act like it was settled.
The New York Times published an interactive piece in October 2020 called “Masks Work. Really. We’ll Show You How.”
The piece stated that “the public health debate on masks is settled,” and “wearing a mask is more important than ever.”
Right …
I wonder if the Times will retract their “misinformation?”
The piece even went on to show interactive images of how the fibers of a cotton mask could protect you! Excuse me while I LOL.
The only science that was settled was the pro-mask political science that the Times mistook for real medical science.
However, as part of the Times about-face, Stephens wrote, “No study — or study of studies — is ever perfect. Science is never absolutely settled.”
He continued by saying that even though there was no evidence that any effect was noticeable on a societal scale, it may be that for various individuals wearing a mask helped them.
“People may have good personal reasons to wear masks, and they may have the discipline to wear them consistently. Their choices are their own,” he said.
I couldn’t agree more. People have reasons why they choose to do things and those reasons are their own.
It would have been nice if this sort of tolerant mentality existed in the mainstream media while they were throwing pastors in jail for not enforcing COVID restrictions.
No justice in this world
I must, however, give a hat tip to Mr. Stephens as he wrote: “Those skeptics who were furiously mocked as cranks and occasionally censored as ‘misinformers’ for opposing mandates were right. The mainstream experts and pundits who supported mandates were wrong.”
If I had a loonie for every time I was mocked as a “crank” or a “conspiracy theorist … ”
I would disagree with Stephens on one point, however, as it was not that us cranky misinformers were “occasionally censored.” No, we were censored always.
He continued, “The mainstream experts and pundits who supported mandates were wrong.”
Stephens noted that in a “better world” those who implemented all the needless and damaging mandates would be humble enough to acknowledge their errors. But, as he said, “don’t count on it.”
He ended by stating: “[T]he people who had the courage to [speak up about masks] deserved to be listened to, not treated with contempt. They may not ever get the apology they deserve, but vindication ought to be enough.”
I think I can agree with Stephens on that last point. I don’t expect vindication in a public sense, but there is satisfaction in knowing that you didn’t follow the crowd or give into pressure.
