Table of Contents
Introduction
“You should be wearing a mask”, the New York Times has now boldly proclaimed. “The debate over whether Americans should wear face masks to control coronavirus transmission has been settled.”[1]
Implicitly, in the context of the public debate about mask use, the Times means that the science has been settled and shows that widespread mask use by the general population in community settings is an effective means of preventing transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which further implies that executive orders requiring mask use are evidence-based.
The New York Times is lying. The debate is far from “settled” in favor of universal mask use, and just how ludicrous a claim that is can be illustrated simply by examining its own cited sources.
It’s not surprising, of course, that the statist Times has taken the position that we should obey executive orders to wear a face mask whenever we leave our homes and enter public places—which, in some states or municipalities, means even when outdoors.
The whole nature of the debate is utterly ridiculous. The question being asked is, “Should you wear a mask?” And there’s a tendency for people on either side of this debate to answer the question either “Yes” or “No”.
But both of those positions are extreme, irrational, and unscientific. The truthful, evidence-based answer to the question is “It depends.”
The idea that a blanket recommendation can be made one way or the other to the entire population is ludicrous and ignores the fact that there are many variables to take into consideration. No bureaucrat can possibly issue reasonable orders to others because no bureaucrat has the unique knowledge of the individual situation that is required to be able to make that assessment.
My purpose here is not to extensively review the existing literature on masks or to detail all the variables that must be taken into consideration, but to simply illustrate how utterly absurd it is for the Times to authoritatively declare that the science has been settled in support of universal mask wearing.
🔓Continue reading with a FREE or premium membership.
Log in below or choose your membership.
The one thing that is most often overlooked in this mask debate is how harmful masks can be, especially when people are forced to wear them all day. They constrict the supply of oxygen, drive up blood pressure and force the user to re-inhale the bacteria, fungus, mold and viruses that their lungs are trying to expel. And, the masks themselves quickly become spreaders of disease when they become caked with dried spit. One study in China found that the rooms in hospitals with the most contaminated air were the poorly-ventilated rooms in which workers had been changing their protective gear, including masks.
excellent once again Jeremy, thank you for this fantastic resource.
Hi Sara. I’m glad you found the article useful.
While some interesting points were certainly made about the reliability of the New York Times, I have to wonder if much of the mask-favored commentary is not just for the sake of others. An abundance of caution certainly wouldn’t hurt in the case of those who are not taking care of someone with COVID-19 but are still out and about. This is, after all, a novel disease. The information coming out has been changing day-in and day-out. Personally, I think I’ll be safer wearing it rather than not.
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2020/07/10/study-fraudulently-claims-sars-cov-2-is-mainly-airborne/
Masks are mainly intended as “source control”, meaning to prevent the wearer from spreading viral-containing droplets to others, not to protect the wearer. A mask might offer some protection to the wearer, but as ECDC, WHO et al point out, they could potentially also increase the risk of self-infection (from touching your face more frequently with infected fingers to adjust the mask or otherwise improperly using it) and create a false sense of security. High quality studies are required to determine this. Existing state mandates are not evidence-based both for this reason and because they fail to recognize variability in individual circumstances that must factor in to whether wearing a mask would be appropriate.
Re: study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, just thought I should let you know that the study has been retracted. It seems the reasons are genuine but knowing that truth is often changed or covered up you can never be sure!
Thank you. I was aware of that and had updated this article of mine where I cited it to make note of it:
https://www.jeremyrhammond.com/2020/07/10/study-fraudulently-claims-sars-cov-2-is-mainly-airborne/
However, I neglected to recall at the time that I’d cited it in this article, too. I’ll update accordingly as soon as possible.