A new study from MIT researchers has confirmed that coronavirus skeptics and anti-maskers understand science and data better than their political opponents.
The study, entitled “Viral Visualizations: How Coronavirus Skeptics Use Orthodox Data Practices to Promote Unorthodox Science Online,” was published this month, and analysed the reaction from skeptics and anti-maskers towards the pandemic from March to September 2020, during much of the initial phases of the breakout and then its expansion. The study focused on Facebook groups and Twitter posts, and the interaction between anti-maskers and visualisations of the coronavirus data that was being published by mainstream science outlets and governments.
In the study, the researchers revealed that despite current narratives that anti-maskers are simply scientifically illiterate, they actually have a very good grasp of science and data analysis. In the Facebook groups they studied, the researchers saw a serious emphasis on originally produced content, with people wanting to make sure that they were “guided solely by the data.” Many participants made their own graphs, and instructed others on how to access raw data. “In other words, anti-maskers value unmediated access to information and privilege personal research and direct reading over “expert” interpretations,” they noted:
Its members value individual initiative and ingenuity, trusting scientific analysis only insofar as they can replicate it themselves by accessing and manipulating the data firsthand. They are highly reflexive about the inherently biased nature of any analysis, and resent what they view as the arrogant self-righteousness of scientific elites.
Anti-maskers found themselves not on the side of ignoring science and data, but striving to push for “more scientific rigour” in their approach to the pandemic. The researchers argued that “users in these communities are deeply invested in forms of critique and knowledge production that they recognise as markers of scientific expertise,” and added that “if anything, anti-mask science has extended the traditional tools of data analysis by taking up the theoretical mantle of recent critical studies of visualisation.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lifted face mask recommendations for vaccinated people Thursday.
“Fully vaccinated people,” the CDC wrote, may “resume activities without wearing masks or physically distancing, except where required by federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial laws, rules and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance.”
Lockdown advocates and leftists who adopted the face mask as a political marker, however, despite full vaccination, pledged to maintain their obedience to strict pandemic mask protocols for fear of even the slightest appearance of association with conservatives they hold in contempt.
This idea to engage in such self-restriction was first mocked online after the CDC relaxed recommendations for vaccinated people outdoors. The DCist published an anonymous “Overheard in D.C.” post which featured an individual conceding the face mask is unnecessary but added, “I really don’t want people to think I’m a Republican.”
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow reacted to the CDC’s announcement on face coverings by saying she would have to “rewire” her brain in order to not perceive those who don’t wear masks as a “threat.”
The CDC said yesterday that those who had been vaccinated could remove their masks in indoor settings (aside from a bunch of exemptions, including airports, public transport, hospitals and care homes).
This prompted Maddow’s brain to short circuit as she expressed the difficulty she would have in dispensing with the idea of treating those who don’t wear masks as dangerous lepers.
“I’m going to have to rewire my self so that when I see somebody out in the world who’s not wearing a mask, I don’t instantly think ‘you are a threat’ or you are selfish or you are a COVID denier and you definitely haven’t been vaccinated,” said Maddow.
American COVID-19 concerns have led to recommendations and mandates that many believe have been and continue to be unsafe, invasive, extreme, ineffective, and unnecessary. This includes “contract tracing” for school children and adults (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
Since COVID vaccines became readily available, the focus has shifted to pressuring Americans to “get the shot” despite increasing reports, testimonies, and warnings about side effects and deaths after receiving it. Children’s Health Defense has been tirelessly updating their newsletter with incidents that are often being glazed over or sparsely reported at all. Recent media coverage by Bill Maher and Tucker Carlson have also provided viewers with reasons to be hesitant about “rolling up their sleeves”. Of course, American vaccine side effects, injuries and deaths have been happening for decades (see 1, 2, 3,). That’s also why many remain hesitant.
But none of this has stopped the push to “take the shot” by businesses and elected officials. Last month, Kentucky governor, Andy Beshear offered to lift additional mandates after 2.5 million residents were vaccinated. Last night Ohio governor Mike DeWine announced that he is cancelling COVID mandates and using federal funds to set up a lottery for vax recipients.
Anthony Fauci told NBC’s Chuck Todd that it’s “possible” mask mandates could continue indefinitely in order to reduce seasonal flu infections.
During his appearance on Meet The Press, Fauci was asked when Americans could take the masks off given that the CDC is now advising vaccinated Americans that they can remove the face coverings when outside.
“At what point, if vaccinated people get together, do you take the mask off? Are masks going to be something we have with us in a seasonal aspect?” Todd asked Fauci.
“You know, that’s quite possible, I think people have gotten used to the fact that wearing masks, clearly if you look at the data, diminished respiratory diseases. We’ve had practically a nonexistent flu season this year, merely because people were doing the kinds of public health things that were directed predominantly against COVID-19,” responded Fauci.
Dr. Shanna Swan, a professor of Environmental Medicine & Public Health at Mount Sinai Health System, has warned in a new book that phthalates, a chemical commonly used in the manufacturing of plastics, can shrink penises and decrease male fertility.
A study listed in the National Center for Biotechnology Information, which operates under the National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health, found that the microplastics used in the manufacturing of Covid face masks contain a number of toxic chemicals, including the penis-shrinking phthalates.
Dr. Swans’s book “Count Down: How Our Modern World Is Threatening Sperm Counts, Altering Male and Female Reproductive Development, and Imperiling the Future of the Human Race” warns that humanity is facing an “existential crisis” in fertility rates as a direct result of the chemical phthalates, and most men may be infertile by 2045.
As Sky News reported, Dr. Swan found that “male human babies who had been exposed to the phthalates in the womb had a shorter anogenital distance – something that correlated with penile volume.” Dr. Swan’s research also discovered that rats exposed to phthalates were born with shrunken genitals.
Other sources have also documented the link between phthalates and decreased male fertility. WebMD reported in 2009 on a study by Swan that found young boys whose mothers were exposed to high levels of phthalates were more likely to exhibit non-masculine behavior and less likely to “play with trucks and other male-typical toys or to play fight.”
A doctor who reviewed Swan’s study for WebMD found “exposure to the chemicals can cause a wide range of male reproductive harm, including undescended testicles, birth defects of the genitals, and infertility later in life.”
Even the CDC, which claims the effects of phthalates on human health are “unknown,” admits “Some types of phthalates have affected the reproductive system of laboratory animals.”