Trusted Sources - Why You Shouldn't Believe Everything You Read in the COVID Era

OK, Sada Nam Khalsa, you claim that you have "important medical information" for the local community.  About masks.  Honestly, I've come to the point where I'd sooner block people who promote false or misleading information, but this is one article that is simply dangerous to the health of too many people and to our society in general.  

This was the article you wanted to promote.

Unfortunately, I realize, based on previous conversations with you, that your mind is pretty much made up, coming at things from an anti-science, pro-woo worldview, so I don't really know why I'm bothering.  In any case, I won't be debating this with you.  I just want you to know that this kind of "information" is unhelpful, not to mention dangerous, and flies in the face of almost everything we have learned about biology, medicine, epidemiology, vaccinations, viruses, bacteria, to name just a few scientific disciplines, over the past several hundred years.  If you want to pretend you can live your life the way we did 200 years ago, that's your choice, but suggesting it as an aspiration for everyone else is simply dangerous.  Here is why.

First, let's look at the publication the article appeared in, The Post Millennial.  This is how that publication is described in Wikipedia:

The Post Millennial is a conservative Canadian online news magazine started in 2017. It publishes national and local news and has a large amount of opinion content. It grew rapidly since 2018, and has been criticized for releasing misinformation and articles written by fake personas, for employing an editor with ties to white supremacist-platforming and pro-Kremlin media outlets, and for opaque funding and political connections.

 I don't see any of that as positive or describing the kind of publication I should trust in any way at all.  The fact that you seem to is disturbing, to say the least.  The Wikipedia entry goes on to expand on those basic points.  Are you comfortable associating yourself with a publication like that?

Second, let's consider the article in general, and its author.  It's an opinion piece, written by lawyer John Carpay.  He's a lawyer, not someone trained in any aspect of medicine or science so far as I am aware.  He is, therefore, not qualified to offer any valuable opinion on these topics.  He certainly may have an opinion, but it's not worth much because it's on a topic for which he has no qualifications.

Mr Carpay himself is one of the prime movers behind the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms.  That organization claims to be non-partisan but has had dealings with right-wing organizations in the USA.  While his association with the Reform Party, the Alberta Wildrose Party and the United Conservative Party doesn't automatically disqualify him from anything, it does indicate quite clearly where his political sentiments lie.  I wouldn't trust someone with those credentials any further than I could spit, but that's a topic for another time.

As to his opinion piece....  

• He takes a swipe at governments who instituted "those harm-causing lockdowns", ignoring the success that such lockdowns (and other measures) had in bringing the spread of the virus under some control.  Places that didn't are paying the human (and economic) price now.  I will go further and suggest that people protesting simple measures like wearing masks are actually doing more damage to the economy by making things worse and making sure the damage lasts longer.  The list is long, but just witness what's happening right now, as of July 2020, in Florida, Texas, Brazil, the Major League Baseball "startup", and so on.  You want to prolong the problems we're in, just keep this kind of anti-science nonsense going and you will get your wish.

• He refers to a study about masks but seems to completely misinterpret what the study is saying.  The study was looking at heathcare workers, where masks can be worn for hours at a time and the study certainly did indicate that cloth masks were less effective than surgical masks.  But the use of masks currently being debated is not that at all.  Nobody is saying that masks need to be worn 24/7, just when you can't keep distance from others.  As for improper use, yes, that is a concern.  Possibly people are smart enough to learn how to use a mask properly with some simple instruction?  The recommendation was that cloth masks should not be used by healthcare workers.

• Decreased oxygen levels in those wearing masks?  This has been successfully refuted in many, many tests in recent weeks.  Frankly, it's not even worth talking about.  Your blood oxygen level will not be affected by wearing a mask, see here and here.  Nonsense about the "dangers" of wearing masks is simply just malarkey.

• The author keeps repeating the same incorrect line about how masks (especially cloth masks) do little to prevent infection.  The problem is this: that is not what the masks are intended to do.  The clear intention is to prevent all those water droplets that you exhale from escaping and getting into the face of someone else.  Those water droplets are what carry the virus.  Mask wearing helps protect others, not you.

• As for mask wearing by healthy people?  We have known for quite awhile that people can spread the virus before they have symptoms - ie: when they may seem perfectly healthy.  Since there is no way to determine instantly whether you are actually infected and if you are contagious, this argument has a severe problem.

• He include more twaddle about needing to see someone's face, that it's part of our identity, and so on.  Sure, but these are exceptional circumstances.  I've also been to a number of Asian countries where mask-wearing is quite common.  Somehow all those millions manage their lives and personal interactions even while wearing masks.  And, just in case you want to argue that masks haven't protected people in those countries, I would mention just one (of many), Taiwan.  They locked down, mask-wearing was already very common, there was much testing and contact tracing, and they brought the infection rate under control, avoiding the shit-storm that we see hitting a number of American states right now.

• For the author to use Quebec's ban on face coverings as justification for protesting mandatory face masks for public health reason is just nonsense.  Everyone with any sense knows that Quebec's ban on face coverings a few years ago was racially motivated.  I don't think we really want to open that can of worms during a public health emergency.  I also note that parts of Quebec are bringing in mandatory face masks in some places.  This further shows that their earlier ban was just targeting religious and ethnic minorities.  The government's hypocrisy in this is stunning but not surprising.

• The author also subscribes to the faulty notion of "natural herd immunity".  This notion has been discredited clearly over the past few weeks.  It's hard to believe that anyone would suggest this as a strategy, especially as more and more evidence becomes available.  Naturally acquired immunity may be short-lived, long-term health consequences may be very serious, at current rates of infection, it may take years before a critical proportion of the population is infected and (possibly) become immune (although that immunity might not really be helpful or possible).  It's not only faulty as a strategy, it's dangerous and, frankly, callous in its disregard for people's lives and health.  Another article can be found here, discussing the notion of herd immunity in the UK.

In short, the author's various contentions just don't hold much water.  He might not like wearing a mask, personally, but there is no medical reason not to wear a mask, masks do help contain a person's exhaled water droplets, and this notion that somehow our personal freedoms are at risk if we wear a mask....  Basically, it's all just twaddle.  

More on mask wearing and oxygen levels can be found in this article but it is similar to many, many others.  Mask wearing just does not affect blood oxygen levels.

So my question is why would you insist on spreading this kind of nonsense?  Do you want to potentially cause harm to other people?  Do you want your community to be the site of a virus outbreak?  Do you want more people to be hospitalized, be placed on ventilators, or die?  Do you want even more damage to be done to our economy and people's jobs?