The study showed nothing. If there was any protection at all, it was too small to measure in the study that was done. The authors need to do the right thing and correct or retract the study ASAP.
The Bangladesh study abstract did indeed claim some benefit, but the 95% CI of .82-1.00 admits that there is no evidence that the actual effect of masks is not zero. When the CI includes 1.0, that is the definition of "statistically insignificant". The CDC report of the Bangladesh study similarly brags up the claimed benefit up high in the CDC article, but way down at the bottom admits the CI. You don't need any other authority than the Bangladesh study itself to refute its glowing report. See my analysis at http://savetheworld.saltshaker.us/wiki/Application_for_Secular/Religious_Exemption_from_Mask/Vaccine_Mandate_-_Section_Two,_The_Evidence
This is my take on the results of the Bangladesh study - their claim that it proves masks prevent 9-11% of Covid infections is suspect - Correlation is not Causation.
Hmmm. I'm not a medical person but while wearing a mask in a department store early on in 2021, I found out they do not work. I was turned around and a bit lost in this store, but I found my way to the door I came in by smelling the perfume counter. Masks do not work I determined for myself that day. We wear them to comply with the others, period.
I will let you know if he responds. That would be the ethical thing to do.
Steve these people are not ethical, these people are bought. They are paid well, to follow an agenda and it matters little to them what suffering they cause.
I'm going to promote this idea in your comments section, again. Hoping you see it.
(And it isn't just Steve, anyone could do this. I am not going to spearhead this because I am self employed and my business relies on Google search. They could crush me.) VSRF is a perfect candidate to do this because you've already got the entirety of the system coming down on you already.
I assume VSRF is a non-profit 501C3. This would give you the discount rate for a non-profit mailing with USPS. I use bulk mail in my business and it is VERY effective. We hit every post box on the driver's route (excluding business and apartment boxes.)
I just ordered some post cards and paper has gone up. My cost to print the full color post cards on pretty heavy card stock is 14 cents per page. These are full color on both sides, 6" tall and 11" wide. I run the cards through my own software and print the addresses and bar codes myself on a laser printer. Then I drive my postcards over to the Business Mail Entry Unit and drop them off, which is about an hour for me. My postage cost to mail ~5,000 post cards, depending on saturation of the routes contained, averages about $850 per 5,000, which works out to ~17 cents per post card. I pay a higher rate because I am not hitting every box on a route... I exclude certain addresses. When you hit 100% of the boxes, the rates are a little lower.
My software allows me to check a box that indicates this is a non-profit mailing. This would bring my postage down by about 45%.
Ultimately, you'd need to buy a mailing list, order the post cards, get them addressed and then get them dropped off at one of the USPS Business Mail Entry Units. There are tons of firms that do this turnkey. I would imagine outsourcing the entirety of the job would run about 30 to 35 cents per post card all in.
There are a little over 17k boxes in zip code 02139. This is the home zip for MIT. A guy with a non-profit could absolutely destroy the Dean of Science just by exposing her refusal to hear scientific evidence. Givesendgo, just from this substack, could easily fund the entire mailing, in fact, I bet you could raise enough to blast several other zip codes in the surrounding MIT area.
These little bureaucrats feel all smug and comfy because they know the censorship of the Corporate MSM has their back. They would quickly start changing their stance with an example like this. I am guessing the Dean of Science would be fired within a month of the mailing but at a minimum, she would certainly be embarrassed AF if only the people around the MIT campus fully understood her refusal to see scientific evidence that opposes her position.
There were a bunch of leftists who did an Ivomectin study and came to the conclusion that it didnt work.When it was put under detailed scrutiny it was found to be flawed and they had to retract it with egg all over their faces,what measures these leftist will go down to to support a false narrative is quite amazing,must have no common sense coupled with a low IQ.Wonder if this mask test was intentional like the Ivomectin test or was it just a flawed methodology.
we need to have an awards show , a cross between the academy awards and a WEF meeting called the Crimes Against Humanity Awards.. where there are short videos detailing the crimes and then in each category choosing a winner... bet the live stream would do pretty well.. These jackoffs at Yale have been at their intellectual dishonesty for a good while. While I worked with some good people there I was pretty shocked at the low quality of intellect and the rank racism against white folks that worked for the university and williness to sell out what was right in order to toe the line to get the next grant.
You are completely in the right, Steve. You've clearly and convincingly pointed out the flaws in the paper to the main author and asked for appropriate action. Nothing will happen, of course, but hopefully the embarrassment will make these people a little hesitant to publish next time. Maybe it would be worth asking Science to either pull it or publish a peer reviewed rebuttal by you and your team.
The Bangladesh study abstract did indeed claim some benefit, but the 95% CI of .82-1.00 admits that there is no evidence that the actual effect of masks is not zero. When the CI includes 1.0, that is the definition of "statistically insignificant". The CDC report of the Bangladesh study similarly brags up the claimed benefit up high in the CDC article, but way down at the bottom admits the CI. You don't need any other authority than the Bangladesh study itself to refute its glowing report. See my analysis at http://savetheworld.saltshaker.us/wiki/Application_for_Secular/Religious_Exemption_from_Mask/Vaccine_Mandate_-_Section_Two,_The_Evidence
This is my take on the results of the Bangladesh study - their claim that it proves masks prevent 9-11% of Covid infections is suspect - Correlation is not Causation.
https://firstfactcheck.substack.com/p/claim-masks-work-to-prevent-spread
Thank-you! Now, please, do the dumb Canadian one blaming vaxxed getting sick on the purebloods.
Amazing that we have to fight so hard for something so obvious.
This is exactly what we need, accountability and if something is wrong, they should correct it or retract it. Great work, keep going!
follow up and solutions!!!
Hmmm. I'm not a medical person but while wearing a mask in a department store early on in 2021, I found out they do not work. I was turned around and a bit lost in this store, but I found my way to the door I came in by smelling the perfume counter. Masks do not work I determined for myself that day. We wear them to comply with the others, period.
I will let you know if he responds. That would be the ethical thing to do.
Steve these people are not ethical, these people are bought. They are paid well, to follow an agenda and it matters little to them what suffering they cause.
Steve
I'm going to promote this idea in your comments section, again. Hoping you see it.
(And it isn't just Steve, anyone could do this. I am not going to spearhead this because I am self employed and my business relies on Google search. They could crush me.) VSRF is a perfect candidate to do this because you've already got the entirety of the system coming down on you already.
I assume VSRF is a non-profit 501C3. This would give you the discount rate for a non-profit mailing with USPS. I use bulk mail in my business and it is VERY effective. We hit every post box on the driver's route (excluding business and apartment boxes.)
I just ordered some post cards and paper has gone up. My cost to print the full color post cards on pretty heavy card stock is 14 cents per page. These are full color on both sides, 6" tall and 11" wide. I run the cards through my own software and print the addresses and bar codes myself on a laser printer. Then I drive my postcards over to the Business Mail Entry Unit and drop them off, which is about an hour for me. My postage cost to mail ~5,000 post cards, depending on saturation of the routes contained, averages about $850 per 5,000, which works out to ~17 cents per post card. I pay a higher rate because I am not hitting every box on a route... I exclude certain addresses. When you hit 100% of the boxes, the rates are a little lower.
My software allows me to check a box that indicates this is a non-profit mailing. This would bring my postage down by about 45%.
Ultimately, you'd need to buy a mailing list, order the post cards, get them addressed and then get them dropped off at one of the USPS Business Mail Entry Units. There are tons of firms that do this turnkey. I would imagine outsourcing the entirety of the job would run about 30 to 35 cents per post card all in.
There are a little over 17k boxes in zip code 02139. This is the home zip for MIT. A guy with a non-profit could absolutely destroy the Dean of Science just by exposing her refusal to hear scientific evidence. Givesendgo, just from this substack, could easily fund the entire mailing, in fact, I bet you could raise enough to blast several other zip codes in the surrounding MIT area.
These little bureaucrats feel all smug and comfy because they know the censorship of the Corporate MSM has their back. They would quickly start changing their stance with an example like this. I am guessing the Dean of Science would be fired within a month of the mailing but at a minimum, she would certainly be embarrassed AF if only the people around the MIT campus fully understood her refusal to see scientific evidence that opposes her position.
It would be great if you would publish a laymen’s analysis in The Epoch Times…
There were a bunch of leftists who did an Ivomectin study and came to the conclusion that it didnt work.When it was put under detailed scrutiny it was found to be flawed and they had to retract it with egg all over their faces,what measures these leftist will go down to to support a false narrative is quite amazing,must have no common sense coupled with a low IQ.Wonder if this mask test was intentional like the Ivomectin test or was it just a flawed methodology.
Masks DO NOT stop:
- Cigarette smoke
- Perfume
- Car exhaust
- Food smells
- Body odor
...but yet people believe that they stop a virus. That's what you call a special kind of STUPID
I guarantee you will see IDIOTS wearing face diapers the rest of your life no matter how long you live...........BANK ON IT!!!
Bravo Steve and THANKS!!!!
we need to have an awards show , a cross between the academy awards and a WEF meeting called the Crimes Against Humanity Awards.. where there are short videos detailing the crimes and then in each category choosing a winner... bet the live stream would do pretty well.. These jackoffs at Yale have been at their intellectual dishonesty for a good while. While I worked with some good people there I was pretty shocked at the low quality of intellect and the rank racism against white folks that worked for the university and williness to sell out what was right in order to toe the line to get the next grant.
You are completely in the right, Steve. You've clearly and convincingly pointed out the flaws in the paper to the main author and asked for appropriate action. Nothing will happen, of course, but hopefully the embarrassment will make these people a little hesitant to publish next time. Maybe it would be worth asking Science to either pull it or publish a peer reviewed rebuttal by you and your team.
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/04/27/mask-mandates-eliminated.aspx?cid_medium=sms&cid=share