If @realdonaldtrump suppressed a clinical trial showing masks were effective, every news outlet and scientist would be screaming over interference in science.

So why the silence on the Danish mask study? Where is the outrage that the scientists can’t find a journal to run it?
The presumption at this point must be that the paper shows either no or a NEGATIVE effect from mask use. Top journals have eagerly published much weaker papers showing that masks work; they would be desperate to run this one if it agreed.
And we already know that journals are suppressing other papers - on herd immunity, for example - that deviate from the preferred narrative. BUT THIS IS WORSE. This is not a model. It is a real-world trial with results that are crucially and immediately important.
Suppressing it is the strongest proof yet that the mainstream scientific community is leaving facts behind for politics. Which is almost unspeakably dangerous.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alex Berenson

Alex Berenson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexBerenson

19 Oct
Waaaaait six to 12 weeks! This is terrifying. It would be if @mtosterholm hadn’t been saying it since May, anyway... Image
Here’s @mtosterholm on August 3, warning that the then-daily US average of 1,200 deaths was about to get much, much worse. Conveniently enough, August 3/4 marked the summer peak - deaths have fallen 40% since then. ImageImageImage
And here’s @mtosterholm in May, warning that “the darkest days are still ahead.” But of course they are! How far ahead, Dr. O?

“In late summer or early fall, we could have a very significant wave of activity that would OVERWHELM SOCIETY AS WE KNOW IT [emphasis added].” ImageImageImage
Read 4 tweets
19 Oct
1/ Last week @mlipsitch - a Harvard epidemiologist - wrote a blistering @washingtonpost piece attacking any plan for herd immunity. Letting people at low risk for #Covid become infected “could kill millions,” he and other authors argued, because older people will also get sick... ImageImageImage
2/ Now Lipsitch is smart, well-respected - a top public health expert. We should take what he says seriously.

But we all know #Covid has been deeply politicized. Which is why this piece from him in 2008 - before #sarscov2 was a gleam in a Chinese bat’s eye - is so fascinating...
3/ It’s called “Too Little Of A Good Thing: A Paradox Of Moderate Infection Control.” In it, @mlipsitch makes a persuasive case that for illnesses that are likely to spread widely, efforts to protect people at low risk will be COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. Why? Image
Read 5 tweets
19 Oct
1/ Are you a scientist or a sciencyist?

Here's how to tell!

If you insist studies without control arms are proof of anything, you may be a sciencyist.

If you ignore decades of data from randomized trials because they don't fit your thesis, you may be a sciencyist...
2/ If you refer to predictions that are generated exclusively from computer simulations as proof of anything, you are DEFINITELY a sciencyist.

If you regularly call people who disagree with you "conspiracy theorists" or "deniers," congratulations, you may be a sciencyist...
3/ If you make heavy use of your credentials to intimidate people, you are probably a sciencyist (though you may just be an arrogant scientist)...

If you block - in life or Twitter - people who disagree with you in good faith, you are a sciencyist for sure...
Read 4 tweets
16 Oct
1/ Time to talk about the #Covid spike in Europe, which has been coming for a while (see below).

Yesterday France reported 30,600 positive tests - a huge number, equal to 160,000 in the US. That’s double the number (per-capita) the US reported at the peak of the summer spike... Image
2/ What does this tell us? First and foremost, LOCKDOWNS DO NOT WORK. France had one of the world's harshest lockdowns during the spring. All it did was delay this second wave. And the death toll in France in the spring surpassed the US (at the time)...
3/ The virus can spread VERY FAST under the right conditions - basically that seems to be when people are spending more time indoors.

These numbers look comparable with an R (person-to-person transmission rate) over 3.
Read 9 tweets
14 Oct
Very interesting. Despite a massive publicity campaign, @NYGovCuomo's book (out yesterday) ranks 777 on Kindle, meaning it has sold maybe 100 ebooks in the last 24 hours. It's 64 on the physical list, so maybe 500 hardcovers.

This is not a good number...

amazon.com/American-Crisi…
Meanwhile, the more the Governor-Emperor-Viceroy talks about the good old days when he was Albany's Churchill , the deeper the hole he digs. Now he's saying hospitals in New York "were never overwhelmed" in March and April.

Oh. Then why did we all panic?

nypost.com/2020/10/14/cuo…
All of which is to say maybe puking out a book to cash in (an undisclosed amount) on "leadership" that led to more deaths than anywhere in the world wasn't the best idea...

Maybe the Gov should just have stayed quiet and hoped no one would look too hard. Oh well. Too late now.
Read 4 tweets
6 Oct
These figures are... how do I put this politely? Wrong. @AaronBlake seems to be comparing IFR for the flu to CFR for the ro, or something.

The fact is that more people under 18 have died of the flu than #Sarscov2 this year, despite our hyper-aggressive count of #COVID deaths.
Here's the actual estimates of #sarscov2 IFR (infection fatality rate, the death rate for all infections) from @CDCgov. I know, it's hard to find, it's on the CDC Website.

0-19 years: 0.00003 (0.003%)
20-49 years: 0.0002 (0.02%)
50-69 years: 0.005 (0.5%)
70+ years: 0.054 (5.4%).
As you can see, the under 50 estimates are almost exactly the same for the flu and the ro (again, we know this includes many WITH rather than FROM ro deaths because of our counting rules). Thus the flu is likely less dangerous.

The reverse is true over 50, and certainly over 60.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!