Deceit and Lies at Inland Empire Safe Schools
The Gaslighting Continues
As I reported yesterday, I attended an Inland Empire Safe Schools Webinar, during which I submitted two questions. I was surprised that they read my question, though they only answered one of mu questions. I was not surprised they lied. The common theme of elected and unelected policy makers in California continues to be gaslighting. The full video is here—my question is answered at 48:17.
My questions:
Note that while they posted both questions, they only read out and answered the first question. So take a look at that— did I not clearly state that the latest CDC study used to justify masks was rejected by peer review? Did I not clearly ask for what Peer Reviewed studies were being used to justify the government trying to give us all (especially our kids) Bacterial Pneumonia? As we discussed yesterday, and as can be seen in that RealClearPolitics link, there are NO peer reviewed studies. None. Zip. Nada. So how did Dr. Naomi Bardach, the head honcho from Safe Schools, choose to answer? She bullshitted us like she was a high school sophomore faking a book report. There is no excuse at being this ignorant, and I don’t believe Dr. Bardach is. The logical conclusion then, is that Dr. Bardach just assumed the community was dumbed down enough by propaganda to accept this utter nonsense.
Shall we parse this out? Silly Rabbit, of course we shall! What do we get for an answer? Surely the highly qualified Dr. Bardach will speak to the recent study that was mentioned? No. Well, then surely Dr. Bardach will give the newest and latest studies regarding masks? No, and don’t call her Shirley. So, what does she give us? Two non-peer reviewed studies from 2020! Are you kidding me? They are going to require our schools to mask up and this is the best that they can come up with?
The first study that Dr. Bardach cites is the “Hair Salon Study” from July 14, 2020. Don’t get excited, not the Nancy Pelosi study—same time period though.
Nancy Pelosi's Hair Salon Visit Draws Backlash | PEOPLE.com
Of course, you will notice that the “study” consisted of just two hairstylist and 139 clients. This is what the CDC refers to as anecdotal, or observational evidence, and should not be relied upon to make policy. Don’t make me show you how many times these same people criticize and mock anything they don’t like for not being able to exceed these same standards, because everyone knows I can.
Next, were there any limitations to this “study”? I am so glad you asked! Yes, there were actually four limitations—take a look.
I see they relied on the 97% false positive PCR tests but look at the all of the limitations. The best this study can conclude is that face mask policy was “Likely a contributing factor”. Likely? Seriously Dr. Bardach? In addition, if you keep reading, one of the authors actually gets paid by big Pharma company Merck.
So how about the second study that the good doctor cited? Surely, that one will be more current? They had 18 months to perform a large, peer-reviewed study—and 103 years since the last time they tried to get the USA to mask up during the Spanish Flu—there should be a slew of them by this time. Alas, there is none, so we get this “Air Drop Masks to a Ship” study from June of 2020! The “observational only” caveat still applies.
This second study also has troubling limitations and was based on just 382 sailors on one ship. Keep in mind, that “peer reviewed” means that a study can be replicated and the data verified, no peer review means the opposite. I am wondering if I just buried the lede there?
So once again, Dr. Bardach proves there is no scientific evidence to mask up our schools. All she has is sloppy, conflict of interest, observational data.
sorry if repeat post, I'm a retard.
https://kennys.substack.com/p/deceit-and-lies-at-inland-empire