Those damned face diapers are meant to deliberately make one sick and weak and stupid from lack of oxygen and psy-op conditions the wearer to be a frightened hypochondriacal faceless robotized SLAVE OBEDIENT TO THEIR TECHNOCRATIC PREDATOR GLOBALIST ELITE OVERLORDS!
Abaluck sabotaged himself making it very hard to determine anything. He focused too much on the minutaie of technical issues and less on where it matters most: Masks and its impact on public health. We're humans. Not machines. He then picked up his ball and went home because he didn't like curve balls and wanted straight low velocity fastballs with no movement. Or slow pitch. Whatever.
And I'm not a fan of mechanical engineering lab controlled environments to study masks. I want real world stuff.
Were you having a debate with Jason? It felt more to me like you were interviewing him about the study. He wouldn't let you talk or finish your thoughts.
The idea that a debate like this has a real "winner" seems very odd to me. One or the other participants might be declared to have scored more points, or to have spoken with more knowledge or panache. A few listeners might even change their minds. But in broader society, the debate rages on.
Since Steve Kirsch is constantly making offers of massive rewards for participating in such "debates" (A hundred thousand dollars! A Million Dollars! Name Your Price!!) I am curious whether any honorarium was paid for Dr. Abaluck? If Kirsch really wants to encourage more of these debates, he needs to make those payments -- even if (in his perception) his opponent is a "loser", incompetent, or worse.
James, my dear man, you truly have the patience of a saint.
Two hours with that guy, was beyond my limit. I got through the first 30 minutes, trying to follow his fast-talking while saying nothing, then gave up.
I've bookmarked Steve Kirsch's page, so I'll try again when I can gather my own patience.
It almost doesn't matter whether or not they work; the most important thing to TPTB about the masks is that they are still being worn, even by those who know or believe they don't work. If by "work" we mean "as a symbol of conformity" or as "following orders," it seems they are doing a bang up job, and that's what really matters to them.
You know which side your readers are on. I’d rather do a poll of the other side. But unfortunately you can easily find their mask comments on YourLocalEpidemiologist substack. Her site is Revealing of the mentality of supposedly intelligent people.
And yes, if any of you (those that believe masks work) are here on Dr Lyons Weiler Substack trolling, feel free to comment and try to counter my assertion that you’ve left all intelligence behind, especially if you wear a cloth mask.
I thought that Mike made a ton of excellent points which I'd love to hear a response to from the study authors. Dr. Abaluck had a tendency to latch onto pedantic, easily provable points and waste a lot of time on them, such as the argument about perfect correlation showing up in a random set of 300/600 clusters. Abaluck is correct that perfect correlation is statistically impossible. But the question is not whether the correlation is perfect, it only needs to be significant! JLW could have backed up and said, "well, I didn't mean perfect", maybe that would have saved me pulling out a few hairs.
The salient points Mike brought up were:
* the "N" value should have been 600 not 300000 because of a lack of independence within each cluster
* only testing 10K for seropositivity further reduces the power (although this only applies to incorrectly using 300K as N)
* I don't understand what the symptomatic seropositive metric even means, did they also test these people prior to symptoms so they know they hadn't already had it? Did they wait the 30 days or so required to establish post-infection seropositivity?
* the differences in the control subgroups were as large or larger than the claimed effect size.
* the claimed effect size was very small, and on the same order as the false positivity rate for the tests
Those damned face diapers are meant to deliberately make one sick and weak and stupid from lack of oxygen and psy-op conditions the wearer to be a frightened hypochondriacal faceless robotized SLAVE OBEDIENT TO THEIR TECHNOCRATIC PREDATOR GLOBALIST ELITE OVERLORDS!
Abaluck sabotaged himself making it very hard to determine anything. He focused too much on the minutaie of technical issues and less on where it matters most: Masks and its impact on public health. We're humans. Not machines. He then picked up his ball and went home because he didn't like curve balls and wanted straight low velocity fastballs with no movement. Or slow pitch. Whatever.
And I'm not a fan of mechanical engineering lab controlled environments to study masks. I want real world stuff.
“The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.”
― Tacitus, The Annals of Imperial Rome
Were you having a debate with Jason? It felt more to me like you were interviewing him about the study. He wouldn't let you talk or finish your thoughts.
The idea that a debate like this has a real "winner" seems very odd to me. One or the other participants might be declared to have scored more points, or to have spoken with more knowledge or panache. A few listeners might even change their minds. But in broader society, the debate rages on.
Since Steve Kirsch is constantly making offers of massive rewards for participating in such "debates" (A hundred thousand dollars! A Million Dollars! Name Your Price!!) I am curious whether any honorarium was paid for Dr. Abaluck? If Kirsch really wants to encourage more of these debates, he needs to make those payments -- even if (in his perception) his opponent is a "loser", incompetent, or worse.
James, my dear man, you truly have the patience of a saint.
Two hours with that guy, was beyond my limit. I got through the first 30 minutes, trying to follow his fast-talking while saying nothing, then gave up.
I've bookmarked Steve Kirsch's page, so I'll try again when I can gather my own patience.
Thank you, so much for this!
It almost doesn't matter whether or not they work; the most important thing to TPTB about the masks is that they are still being worn, even by those who know or believe they don't work. If by "work" we mean "as a symbol of conformity" or as "following orders," it seems they are doing a bang up job, and that's what really matters to them.
You know which side your readers are on. I’d rather do a poll of the other side. But unfortunately you can easily find their mask comments on YourLocalEpidemiologist substack. Her site is Revealing of the mentality of supposedly intelligent people.
And yes, if any of you (those that believe masks work) are here on Dr Lyons Weiler Substack trolling, feel free to comment and try to counter my assertion that you’ve left all intelligence behind, especially if you wear a cloth mask.
I thought that Mike made a ton of excellent points which I'd love to hear a response to from the study authors. Dr. Abaluck had a tendency to latch onto pedantic, easily provable points and waste a lot of time on them, such as the argument about perfect correlation showing up in a random set of 300/600 clusters. Abaluck is correct that perfect correlation is statistically impossible. But the question is not whether the correlation is perfect, it only needs to be significant! JLW could have backed up and said, "well, I didn't mean perfect", maybe that would have saved me pulling out a few hairs.
The salient points Mike brought up were:
* the "N" value should have been 600 not 300000 because of a lack of independence within each cluster
* only testing 10K for seropositivity further reduces the power (although this only applies to incorrectly using 300K as N)
* I don't understand what the symptomatic seropositive metric even means, did they also test these people prior to symptoms so they know they hadn't already had it? Did they wait the 30 days or so required to establish post-infection seropositivity?
* the differences in the control subgroups were as large or larger than the claimed effect size.
* the claimed effect size was very small, and on the same order as the false positivity rate for the tests
I certainly believe that a picture tells a thousand words. And simple graphs simply tell the story.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKMrLxdWRgU
James I'm biased. And I'm not Steve's biggest fan either.
No way in hell do masks work. I'm with Steve on this one.
Never mind the mask studies where are the studies showing that the new virus actually exists?
Turns out there are no studies showing that a new virus exists, turns out all of the methods used in virology to identify any virus are complete guff.