One of many studies finding the same result pre-2020. First ones I remember coming across when researching then were in the 1960's. And earlier, Kellogg's Spanish Flu masking studies, too. No difference. Just theater. Nevertheless they were donned by hospital staff as "placebo masks" for frightened patients and accompanying families scared of catching something in a facility full of sick people. Placebo. As in to trick the mind into thinking they're protective. Never deemed suitable for community practice before 2020. But the same justification was behind the mandates. Public told they were backed by "science." Just not what *type* of science they meant. Not natural, medical science. But social, behavioral science. BF Skinner science.
Masks and distancing mandates all were behavioral science (BS) based. In community settings rather than hospitals they were no longer placebo to calm, rather they were prescribed as fear-amplifying NPI devices to "cure" people of their "optimism bias" beliefs they'd be fine. Complete BS. Hiding in the ambiguity of the word, "science." The pushback against unscientific masking mandates failed to challenge the "type" of science. Allowing authorities to use the linguistic deception conflating pseudoscience, Skinner science for actual science.
And for purposes of historical context, while studies going back to the 1960's show that masking even in hospital operating theaters is ineffective the public mind was primed to believe they were effective using media and entertainment programming. Like M.A.S.H. The Korean War medical sitcom where much emphasis was placed on masking as protective. Psychological priming a false belief into an adopted truth. Add in shows like E.R. Quincy Adams, Doogie Howard, General Hospital, all of the dramatic presentations of masking in hospitals as necessary for health safety. Propaganda in service to a promoted lie intended to become adopted as truth. The masks of obedience and "fear amplification" have been planned for a long, long time.
I'd be more concerned about someone in the viewing area of the operating theater dropping a piece of candy in my flayed open body (like Kramer did in a Seinfeld episode) than of a surgeon not wearing a big face diaper. With the powerful antibiotics available (and that are used for any surgery) and other things like clean water, soap, and showers, the chances of someone getting an infection of any kind from a surgeon not wearing a mask is almost non-existent.
Excuse Bilbo. Bilbo is having a meltdown.
There is little evidence that suck ZOG cock in NZ will improve your life, but Smeagle keeps saying it wlll
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/adl-grades-us-campuses-efforts-to-combat-antisemitism-says-many-schools-failing/
One of many studies finding the same result pre-2020. First ones I remember coming across when researching then were in the 1960's. And earlier, Kellogg's Spanish Flu masking studies, too. No difference. Just theater. Nevertheless they were donned by hospital staff as "placebo masks" for frightened patients and accompanying families scared of catching something in a facility full of sick people. Placebo. As in to trick the mind into thinking they're protective. Never deemed suitable for community practice before 2020. But the same justification was behind the mandates. Public told they were backed by "science." Just not what *type* of science they meant. Not natural, medical science. But social, behavioral science. BF Skinner science.
Masks and distancing mandates all were behavioral science (BS) based. In community settings rather than hospitals they were no longer placebo to calm, rather they were prescribed as fear-amplifying NPI devices to "cure" people of their "optimism bias" beliefs they'd be fine. Complete BS. Hiding in the ambiguity of the word, "science." The pushback against unscientific masking mandates failed to challenge the "type" of science. Allowing authorities to use the linguistic deception conflating pseudoscience, Skinner science for actual science.
And for purposes of historical context, while studies going back to the 1960's show that masking even in hospital operating theaters is ineffective the public mind was primed to believe they were effective using media and entertainment programming. Like M.A.S.H. The Korean War medical sitcom where much emphasis was placed on masking as protective. Psychological priming a false belief into an adopted truth. Add in shows like E.R. Quincy Adams, Doogie Howard, General Hospital, all of the dramatic presentations of masking in hospitals as necessary for health safety. Propaganda in service to a promoted lie intended to become adopted as truth. The masks of obedience and "fear amplification" have been planned for a long, long time.
I'm shocked.
Bretty is a hypocrite!
I am almost beyond words
I'd be more concerned about someone in the viewing area of the operating theater dropping a piece of candy in my flayed open body (like Kramer did in a Seinfeld episode) than of a surgeon not wearing a big face diaper. With the powerful antibiotics available (and that are used for any surgery) and other things like clean water, soap, and showers, the chances of someone getting an infection of any kind from a surgeon not wearing a mask is almost non-existent.
Glad that he has "evidence", to show that operated ons do better for being breathed on.
Might be the breath of life.
Edit: He's probably right as wearing a mask will fog their spectacles and they might operate on the wrong body part because no clarity of vision.