I recently covered the New England Journal Of Medicine's damning article on public Mask wearing, where scientists state:
"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic"
"We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic"
They also conclude that masks
Serve a symbolic rather than protective purpose.
That masks make people feel more safe.
So after I started making multiple social media posts (and others did as well)
NEJM "clarified" their statements !!!
The only problem is their follow up article
Makes them look really bad.
Their follow up article sounds like
They were reprimanded or coerced into
Changing their statements. Were they?
They start by saying that they understand that many people are sharing their article to discredit
Mask wearing but their intent in writing their article was to encourage more mask wearing not less. 😏
They go on to say:
"We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments"
I believe that they were forced into making these statements.
"We did state in the article that “wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear, we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces, not sustained interactions within closed environments"
I believe that they were forced into making these statements.
After i shared multiple social media posts
Throughout the last couple of weeks. Tweeted it out to CDC, Governor Cuomo, and others
The NEJM Blocked my IP address !!!
It happened after this tweet
After about an hour of being blocked,
I was unblocked after posting about it
On instagram and stating that this is a violation of my first amendment right and it is a denial
Of access to public Science information.
Coincidence?
Did cuomo get upset and contact them?
Did the CDC tell NEJM to clarify their statements?
We can only wonder...
No comments:
Post a Comment