Newly acquired National Institutes of Health (NIH) documents indicate officials skewed data and misrepresented research to promote mask effectiveness against severe COVID-19 and transmission, despite conflicting expert input.
The letter, sent in November 2021 to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reveals Michael Osterholm, top epidemiologist and director for the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, and seven colleagues informed the agency it was promoting flawed data and excluding data that did not reinforce their narrative.
Learn the benefits of becoming a Valuetainment Member and subscribe today!
“We believe the information and recommendations as provided may actually put an individual at increased risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2 and for them to experience a serious or even life-threatening infection,” Osterholm wrote.
Secret Letter To CDC: Top Epidemiologist Suggests Agency Misrepresented Scientific Data To Support Mask Narrative https://t.co/dUWXTtWiPE
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) August 23, 2023
The letter shared warnings that misinterpreting this data on trusted websites like the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would result in Americans losing trust in the organization, ultimately damaging “credibility of science.”
The COVID-19 Real-Time Learning Network was created in 2020 to share “accurate, timely information about COVID-19.” According to its website, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) editorial team of infectious disease and public health experts synthesize clinical guidance, identify emerging scientific consensus and areas of ongoing uncertainty, and tackle “misconceptions and disinformation.”
The IDSA’s “Masks and Face Coverings for the Public” webpage appears to “focus on the strengths of studies that support its conclusions while ignoring their shortcomings of study design,” Osterholm wrote. “Studies that do not support its perspective are similarly downplayed.”
“We do not agree that the evidence for their efficacy has strengthened throughout the pandemic, as the website suggests,” Osterholm said. “In fact, contrary to the conclusion on this website, the November 2020 Cochrane Review cited states: ‘Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness (9 studies; 3,507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 3,005 people).’”
Did you comply with mask mandates? I did initially. Regret that and won’t happen again. Masks are filthy, harmful to the environment, and do not stop transmission of viruses. @CDCgov caught ignoring the science. ⬇️ https://t.co/RmdU1IvxZ9
— Mary Talley Bowden MD (@MdBreathe) August 22, 2023
Osterholm assured he and his colleagues are not “anti-mask” but wanted to see a more careful scientific review of the data showing the role masks may play in preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission.
“The story of official masking guidance should trouble the American public. Recall that Dr. Anthony Fauci first said there was no need for masks. The cloth masks were all that stood between you and COVID. But as evidence against cloth masks appeared, the premiere scientific health organizations dug in their heels and refused to follow the science or listen to their trusted outside advisors,” The Functional Government Initiative (FGI) said in a statement.
Add comment