SARS-CoV-2 aka COVID-19: a Note to Experts: this Video Shows Why Facial Coverings are Useless (not)
Related: editorial, health, particulate respirators and masks, SARS-CoV-2 aka COVID-19 aka Coronavirus
See also:
- SARS-CoV-2 is the virus; COVID-19 is the disease.
- COVID-19: Public Policy MUST be Changed: Facial Coverings should ALWAYS be Worn To Protect Others
- COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2): the Tide is Turning for Facial Covering / Mask Official Recommendations
- SARS-CoV-2 aka COVID-19: Studies of Transmission via Coughing and Sneezing offer Compelling Evidence to Require Facial Coverings.
- WIRED: The Face Mask Debate Reveals a Scientific Double Standard
- All about SARS-CoV-2
Why the fuck are facial coverings not MANDATORY in all public places?
Maybe this video will help the WHO and CDC and Surgeon General understand something that any idiot can figure out. I myself am such an idiot—I know so because a few readers told me so! :) I was that dumb even back on January 29.
Why have experts been so wrong about just about everything with SARS-CoV2?
Because our experts have more of a hyper needing to be right than to discern reality? Because those experts think assumptions are science and do not understand even the most basic science: you make a hypothesis and try repeatedly to disprove it. Or because showing the 'wrong' results can ruin your career or deprive you of funding or block advancement or get you demoted, or at least result in ridicule*?
And when a scientist lacks imagination (because of assumptions and incestuous amplification within intellectually-inbred communities of researchers), you need to see half a dozen other studies by non intellectually-incestuous researchers with no vested status or financial interests to replicate the results. Which said-replication cannot be done about half the time even for studies in peer-reviewed journals. The combination of rejecting assumptions, creative thinking, freedom from financial or status incentives are rare in science today. Witness the clusterfuck that is the poisoning of the world for net-zero benefit (at best) of statins.
* If experts cannot predict a few weeks ahead, what that says for climate science, which is heavily dependent on models and predicts for decades? Offensive? Then you don’t believe in real science.
