I dunno, I think it's pretty obvious why the NIH didn't design a years-long study to determine the efficacy of masks in March of 2020.
www.compactmag.com/article/rest...This book is *psychotic*. Revisionist, fact-free propaganda from the very first page. I know I shouldn’t be at this point, but it’s shocking that the authors were featured on The Daily
Look, their conclusion was correct. It was merely the factual basis for that conclusion that was laughably wrong.
May 11, 2025 12:42"Let's risk a a few million deaths on the small chance that this actually doesn't cause a few million deaths."
Fucking sociopaths.
I must have missed when we had “universal quarantine”.
Call me a nitpicker, but I’d like to see them use the word quarantine correctly.
Also, the reason we stopped doing lockdowns was that we were all vaccinated! So hospital systems didn’t crash when we returned to society! Seems like CRAZY detail to leave out when that’s why policy shifted!
*whispering* freakonomics...
I notice something about reactionary reasoning, it's immediate actuarial tables and train schedules when contemplating mass death (always of others) in the abstract, but no expense is ever too much to address some acute incident of moral panic.
I too always write op-eds in national publications speculating (wrongly) that an emerging pandemic is no big deal in order to marshal support for serious study rather than rank speculation.
I too always write op-eds in national publications speculating (wrongly) that an emerging pandemic is no big deal in order to marshal support for serious study rather than rank speculation.
