There’s a new paper out analyzing how antimask activists weaponize the tools of data visualization and scientific argumentation to produce convincing antimask propaganda. Antimaskers are claiming that it shows that they are more “scientific” than those supporting the consensus viewpoint with respect to COVID-19 and masks. What it really shows is that they are good at weaponizing the tools of data visualization and scientific arguments to come to the conclusions that they want to come to.
Medical Hypotheses is a fringe journal published by Elsevier that’s long been known for publishing pseudoscience, such as antivax and HIV/AIDS denial. In the age of the COVID-19 pandemic, it’s now back with antimask nonsense.
RFK Jr. is angry—so very, very angry—because Terry Gross had pro-science guests on her NPR show “Fresh Air” who called him antivaccine and antimask.
Why have antivaxxers allied themselves with COVID-19 deniers? Simple. Both share an unrelenting hostility to public health interventions.
Danish researchers published a negative randomized controlled study of masks to prevent COVID-19. Is this slam dunk evidence that masks don’t work? Not so fast, there pardner…
