You can hunt anything you want, animals, insects and, latterly, human beings, especially scientists. This happened to us and to Tom in the august columns of the New York Times (NYT), as we reported here, here and here.
The main problem appears to have been that the columnist took exception to the idea that the Cochrane Review A122 failed to find any better quality evidence of mask effectiveness, and of course, she proceeded to try to shoot the messenger.
Ever since her article, however, some of the background to her intervention has come to light, and Tom has written back to the NYT pointing out some of the consequences of its irresponsible behaviour:
Opinion Editor
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018212-556-1922
kathleen.kingsbury@nytimes.com
Dear Ms. Kingsbury,
Thank you for your reply dated March 18th to my complaint dated March 15th 2023.
Matters are not what you reported, although I understand your willingness to defend your columnist.
Dr. Tufekci seems to have forgotten to make clear that she has been lobbying CDC and maybe other organisations for over three years to impose mask mandates, although she has no scientific expertise in this matter. This happened after a somersault from her initial position against use of masks (she is in very good company in such a change of course in March 2020). Elsewhere she described creating a new symbolism around the use of masks, a clearly ideological standpoint which has naught to do with science.
Dr. Tufekci now publicly claims that she has corrected Cochrane (although it was hard work it took her almost a month). She has done no such thing, as no edits have been made to the review text.
You and Dr. Tufekci state that the Plain Language Summary of the review may have helped people misinterpret the review.
Possible corrections, addenda and edits in science (and in the Cochrane Library) are handled through the editorial peer review mechanism, not through the columns of a daily. It seems to me that by insisting on corrections and claiming “victory” the New York Times through its columnist is trying to subvert not just Cochrane but the whole scientific process, while launching a personal attack on me, one of the twelve authors. Her attack on our review and on me can perhaps be explained in her own words: “The most effective forms of censorship today involve meddling with trust and attention, not muzzling speech itself. As a result, they don’t look much like the old forms of censorship at all. They look like viral or coordinated harassment campaigns, which harness the dynamics of viral outrage to impose an unbearable and disproportionate cost on the act of speaking out.”
I ask you to look again in detail at the personal agenda of your columnist and ask yourself if subversion of the scientific process through unqualified comments is the aim of the New York Times. Finally I note that your mission is to “seek the truth and help people understand the world“.
I do not think this is possible if you hold an ideological view.
I believe that given the facts you owe me at least a right of reply.
I look forward to hearing from you,
Yours,
Professor Tom Jefferson
Senior Associate Tutor
University of Oxford
Oxford
OX2 6GG
It remains to be seen whether the complaint will be taken seriously.
Our dissection of the UKHSA mask review that we had scheduled for today has been postponed to Friday at the request of GB News which will be interviewing one of us on Friday just after the 10am news to present our findings. In making this decision, we were aware that we had promised publication today, but the opportunity of communicating on TV is too great to let go.
We hope that our readers will forgive us and tune in on Friday morning.
Last but not least, Carl is busy drafting his response to a Request for Evidence under Rule 9 of the Inquiry Rules 2006 Module 2 of the U.K. COVID-19 Public Inquiry..
We plan to serialise the response once it is ready and, of course, any reply the NYT might send us.
But please do not hold your breath, and as we have said many times before, keep away from mainstream media headlines. They are one of the main causes of the mess we are in.
Dr. Carl Heneghan is the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine and Dr. Tom Jefferson is an epidemiologist based in Rome who works with Professor Heneghan on the Cochrane Collaboration. This article was first published on their Substack blog, Trust The Evidence, which you can subscribe to here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Very well said indeed. I, for one, am very, very grateful that you have supplied the detailed information to pretty much confirm much of what Professor Nicholls told us from China, 06 Feb 20: SARS-CoV-2 is another endemic common cold coronavirus.
So true. Even back in 2020, the virus was for the vast majority of people, just a little pest.
No doubt your invitations to appear on the BBC are in the post.
Thank you for all your courage and hard work over the last three years, It’s been bad enough for the likes of me but it must be utterly frustrating if not soul destroying for you to see your hard work and expertise being traduced by a whinging old harpy.
Keep going, there are far more of us than they would have you believe – and never forget that we have right on our side.
No doubt we have right on our side.
Unfortunately the bogus “science” and enthusiastic tyranny team have both power and apparently unlimited wealth on theirs.
And the mass in the middle are more interested in watching the Footie and Bellenders.
Heartily seconded
I wish you the greatest of luck in receiving a coherent, rational reply from this bunch of rock chucking knuckle draggers!
Bullies always punch the ones who don’t punch back! But if they do, the bullies just turn away shocked and completely ignore them from then on, then to the next passive target!
Those knuckle-dragging troglodytes are indeed an irrational bunch of cowards.
Excellent rebuttal, but I just don’t understand why you are not taking any medical advice from a Professor in Sociology :-).
The legacy media are thrashing around in their death throes, cruelly being kept alive because of their usefulness to the establishment. Staffed by low-grade, lazy presstitutes, copying and pasting the latest news agency propaganda, and delusional, knowledge-lite hacktivists, angrily screaming about the current thing. It’s only their own sense of self-importance that keeps them going.
Ridiculous and pathetic in equal measure. Real journalism has moved on, along with most people’s attention.
The good journalists make more money on Substack anyway.
If proof were ever needed of how utterly biased and bent Wikipedia is, take a browse through the brief notes on the inestimable Professor Carl Heneghan, who along with Mike Yeadon is responsible for this 74 year old and his family refusing the mRNA stabs.
Half the write up on CH is given over to criticism by Sonia Sodah, a PPE graduate and part-time scribbler for the Grauniad and her opinion of where the supremely well qualified Prof Heneghan got it wrong on the Danmask study.
The word ‘chutzpah’ was clearly invented for this woman.
@ Dr Carl Heneghan
I don’t know if you are aware of Stephen Petty as he that could be a useful ally. He gave evidence at a Senate hearing on the effectiveness of masks. He speaks from experience as his he is a certified industrial hygienist. As he pointed out that the knowledge around hygiene controls, which includes masks, has been around for 80 years.
Here is the Senate hearing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3dnkbKoj4A&t=35s
There’s not science, just indoctrination
The Indoctrinators, Part 2: Klaus Schwab
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/the-indoctrinators-part-2-klaus-schwab/
Karen Harradine
*******************************************************
Stand in the Park Make friends & keep sane
Sundays 10.30am to 11.30am
Elms Field
near play area
Wokingham RG40 2FE
thank you for doing this i despise the masks more than anything. ny times bought and paid for gates etc , for years
Strangely enough, this is the latest email information I’ve received today from govuk re effectiveness of n95 masks in community settings.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-effectiveness-of-n95-masks-in-community-settings
‘The purpose of this rapid review was to identify and assess the available evidence for the effectiveness of N95 and equivalent face masks as wearer protection against coronavirus (COVID-19) when used in the community by people at higher risk of becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 (search date: up to 26 September 2022).’
The conclusion?
No studies matching the inclusion criteria were found, so no evidence could be presented.
Published 12 April 2023
Many congratulations once again gentlemen for your excellent work. The fact that the NYT are using a totally unqualified and hypocritical contributor to try and rubbish your excellent work proves that you are winning. All cults only have one response to attacks on their beliefs, to dig their holes deeper and deeper by making ever more hysterical ad hominem attacks. The sides of their holes will eventually collapse. Remember “If all else fails, try honesty”.
Zeynep can go Tufecki herself. The Cochrane review remains the gold standard and stands up to scrutiny, and thus remains the final word on the matter.