Distortions based on firmly held beliefs: the future obituary of science?
The Cochrane review Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses continues to attract media attention. We have listed our reasons for not wanting to have anything to do with vast swathes of the media.
We know our long-time readers do not need any further evidence, but for those hundreds who have just joined us, here is some more evidence, fresh off the press, well, the email feed.
One of the co-authors of the Cochrane review received the following request from a very senior person in a big news corporation in a very rich country (the XXX stands for our redactions):
“I’m emailing to you today, because I read your excellent paper “Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses” on Cochrane Library Systematic Review.
You have analyzed the effectiveness of masks in preventing infection in this paper, and there is a social debate in XXXX about the wearing of masks. The paper also draws skeptical conclusions about the effectiveness of masks in preventing infection.
There is an ongoing debate about the wearing of masks in XXXX.
I fear that such a paper in the Cochrane review, a highly prestigious library,
would send the wrong message to the public. Because, I believe that wearing a
mask has some effect in preventing respiratory infections.
So I have a few questions for you, which I hope you will answer.
Why is it so difficult to scientifically evaluate the effectiveness of masks in preventing infection?
This review analyzes before COVID-19 pandemic papers on the effectiveness of wearing masks in preventing infection, but is wearing masks equally effective in preventing the spread of COVID-19 infection now?
In fact, are masks effective in preventing infection or not?”
Like the other media requests, this person is asking for information that can be readily accessed in the 300-odd page review. The important bit is the statement: “Because, I believe that wearing a mask has some effect in preventing respiratory infections”.
So this senior person is a true believer.
But if they believe, why are they asking for information and trying to make contact with one of the authors? Our experience so far tells us it’s so they can cite and probably misquote responses or, at the very least, gain credibility for subsequent distortions.
We are touched by the desire not to send the “wrong message” to humanity. However, a belief is an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially without proof; it also relates to one’s trust or confidence in some person or thing. Believers, therefore, don’t need evidence. So, what are we supposed to believe?
Meanwhile, the conclusion is unchanged: stay away from mainstream media.
Source – https://trusttheevidence.substack.com/p/still-escaping-the-main-stream-media