(Video Credit: Fox News)
Fox News contributor Dr. Marty Makary criticized school districts for reinstating mask mandates in classrooms as COVID cases rise, openly defying numerous studies that show there is no benefit to universal masking.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and Providence, Rhode Island are two of the cities that are reinstating mask mandates at school for children as young as five-years-old.
“Does wearing a mask in class protect five-year-olds?” the Johns Hopkins University professor was bluntly asked on “Fox News Live.”
“I’m really concerned that these school districts going back to universal masking are defiant of a lot of the new research that has come out. Now, last year, we had two randomized control trials that basically suggested there was no benefit to universal masking. But in the last few months, we’ve got the Spanish study, the Finnish study that very elegantly compared school districts, and in the United States on Thursday we got a big study from the University of California Davis that looked at so many counties, it was very obvious from the sample size and the power that there was clearly no benefit,” Makary noted.
“Now, what’s important is that they reexamined the data from a CDC study that was used to recommend masks in schools. They looked at more counties, a longer follow-up period, and found that the CDC study that concluded schools should mask was flawed and that is important because masks do have some harm. And let’s be honest, 75 percent of kids have had COVID as of February, since Omicron has been circulating, it’s likely 80 to 90 percent,” he added.
WH Covid Czar now tweeting misinformation & distorted statistics that exaggerate the risk to kids
Truth is 👇
Lying about COVID severity in kids is the reason school was closed for 18+ months in many places, & intermittently closed to this day, ruining the lives of children
Sad! https://t.co/BkpD8K51Br pic.twitter.com/P9dCPHLp90— Vinay Prasad, MD MPH 🎙️📷 (@VPrasadMDMPH) May 31, 2022
He continued as he addressed the CDC’s guidelines and handling of mandates, “There’s been several areas of dogma in science where public health officials should have simply told the public, ‘We don’t know.’ When people were asking us questions, public health officials should have said, ‘We don’t know if it’s a surface-transmitted virus when they told people to wash their hands like crazy or stay at home with universality.”
“And perhaps the biggest catastrophic mistake was calling for the closure of schools and telling people to mask universally at that young age. The data is now pretty clear and the CDC puts out their own dogma in their medical journal that they control called MMWR and many people have been critical because it uses science as political propaganda,” he asserted.
New research from @KevinBardosh, @sdbaral & colleagues. It's important to study interventions, not just rely on intuition about what we think works. https://t.co/uZOxbyOpy2
— Liz Highleyman (@LizHighleyman) May 28, 2022
When asked if we should be forgiving because the CDC guidance changed so often and so much, Makary stated, “No, and here’s why… if they don’t know if it’s airborne or surface transmission, do the study. The NIH has 45 billion dollars. In 24 hours, that could have been answered. Instead, they let that open question linger with no clinical date from the government for months and people were given the wrong message and the false assurance that if they washed their hands like crazy, they would not transmit the virus to their vulnerable, older companions.”
He wrapped up by commenting on the CDC reportedly saying that 1 in 5 Americans could develop long-haul, long-COVID.
“The incidence has been described under five percent in many studies, but they make such a narrow definition and the study was flawed because they looked at any other reason you came to the hospital and they only looked at people who got tested in a hospital setting. Those are high-risk people,” he asserted.
Explanation by Dr. Gellad of the methodological flaws of CDC's long-Covid study. 1/5 people getting long-Covid is also inconsistent with clinical observations.
Another study last week in the Ann Int Med suggested the exact opposite of what CDC put out, but did not make headlines. https://t.co/wjobSUJwvA— Marty Makary MD, MPH (@MartyMakary) May 31, 2022
“Many scientists now are highly critical and have told people to disregard this study. There’s another study that came out last week that got almost no attention on most of the networks and it showed that there were no biochemical indicators of long-COVID. It’s a small subgroup of people and the only predictor was pre-COVID anxiety as to who developed long-COVID,” Makary concluded.
Get the latest BPR news delivered free to your inbox daily. SIGN UP HERE
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
- Adam Schiff should’ve never picked a fight with Elon Musk over ‘election misinformation’ - September 29, 2023
- Insane footage of dangerous flooding reveals concerning infrastructure issues in NYC: ‘Be prepared’ - September 29, 2023
- San Francisco mayor ripped for ‘trying to sound like a conservative’ with new drug testing proposal - September 29, 2023
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
