The path to hell is paved with something, something.
Canada is paving one helluva path.
They (he, all of us) need to take a step back, take a deep breath and revisit our assumptions lest they become orthodoxy driven by junk science and superstition. For example, this mask thing is way out of control and needs to be put to rest and bed. Fast.
Clinging on to false notions (and hopes) and pretending it's 'science driven' will indeed lead to medical tyranny of good intentions.
Feb 28, 2023·edited Mar 1, 2023Liked by Dr Philip McMillan
Dr. McMillan, it always helps me to ask multiple people the same question to gain the greatest understanding and broadest perspective. Regarding masks, I listened carefully to your Canadian guest Mark Keeley's position on the effectiveness of masks. It is my understanding he believe masks are to protect others, not the person wearing the mask. What is the evidence supporting Mark Keeley statement that masks protect those not wearing masks? I believe it was Dr. Banerjee that referred to the latest Cochrane study, this study is the highest quality evidence available on the effectiveness of masks. The study is a database systematic review, published January 30, 2023, which included data from 78 randomized clinical trials, and concluded that masks do not work for flu or SARS-CoV-2 and there is no strong rationale for mask mandates. The paper states “wearing masks (medical/surgical) in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks" and “there were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.” Of course, there is the possibility that masks do reduce the transmission of the virus, but there is apparently no evidence to support this possibility. Is the study not clear, there is no evidence that masks reduce transmission, not even N95 or P2 respirators? I am genuinely confused by Mark Keeley's statement that masks protect others. Is Mark following the science or ignoring the science? Below is a link to the transcript of the interview with the lead author, Tom Jefferson, of the study in which he is even more clear on the effectiveness of masks. I would very much appreciate your honest and direct perspective.
Mar 1, 2023·edited Mar 1, 2023Liked by Dr Philip McMillan
I appreciate your reply. I think your saying that it is "common sense" that masks work but other steps must also be taken along with masks to be effective. This still leaves me uncertain why the Cochrane study would show no benefit of masks. Did the studies included in the Cochrane meta analysis not include any of the "other" steps required for masks to be effective? The study is specific to effectiveness in the "community" and "health care" environments. For these environments, no benefit was found. In what environment and/or other additional steps/actions will result in masks being effective? You also think a study of washing your hands will not show a reduction of transmission. Why do think that? There does not seem to be any controversy that washing your hands does reduce transmission. It would be great if you could interview the lead author of the Cochrane study and discuss how masks can be effective for flu and SarsCoV-2?
Are doctors facing losing their licenses in places like South Africa, Australia, India and the UK like they are here in Canada and the United States? I know there was censorship but have doctors had to face stiff threats from their respective colleges and boards in those places?
marc kealy makes me ashamed to be canadian. @48:46 he say we should accept efficacy over safety in drug development. what happened to the hypocritic oath "do no wrong". this guy contradicted himself over and over, and the constant promotion of political lies.
At least he agreed to be on the panel. He is discussing his views. I do not at all agree with much of anything he said, but at least he appeared. Most of the doctor clowns who support the corrupted narrative will not have a discussion with anyone opposing their view. So I do give Mark credit for being there. He’s a true believer, but he was brave to open himself up to some humiliation from the audience. Maybe a little light will get in through the cracks in the narrative occurring with more and more frequency.
there in lies the problem. in the pre-internet world, this kind of nonsense would be dismissed by those around him, and an inane viewpoint would have died on the vine. But in this world of anyone with an opinion and a device connected to the 7 billion people of our planet can say anything, regardless of its validity, is only confusing those with limited capacity to understand the concepts being shared. We have not yet reached the ability as a global nation to discern what merits attention, and what should be dismissed. for example, we tend to accept number of "posts" compared to accepting number of "posters" (the old squeaky wheel get the grease).
@Dr Philip McMillan: your statement "His views reflect a significant part of leadership across the world." only supports my assertions of my previous comment. i would also put to you, the views of the leadership across the world is a very low standard to set anyone's bar. Please, if you can, point to ANY world leader that got there without winning a popularity contest (read: elected), or through military force. the term world leader is very offensive. At best we have world REPRESENTATIVES, not leaders.
The experts got it all wrong on vaccines and vaccination in this pandemic …….on the product, on the virus, on the timing,….just about everything. In the process, they have damaged the process of mass vaccination as a legitimate and effective public health intervention in the minds of the people. Vaccinations began to be pushed by end 2020 by health authorities around the world, even though their experts had full knowledge that the virus was shape and feature shifting constantly, that it meant that none of the vaccine components had an exact match to the virus at that time, that it meant that the vaccine were ineffective and their effects short lived, that the vaccine would not stop someone getting infected originally etc. Since about 2021, they also ignored the possibility that the long covid effects in the vaccinated could actually be organ injuries from the spike protein segments from the vaccines. It was left to the people in 2022 to start ignoring vaccinations once they realised that the vaccines were neither prophylactic nor therapeutic and they had damage potential too even if it was limited to a small percentage of the population. The virus may be new, but the symptoms were all too familiar as were the established treatment protocols from other respiratory infections - early use of anti histamines and URT medicines. Many countries began to realise the value of this simple medicinal/clinical intervention by mid 2021. In time they completely subdued delta and later Omicron also. This did not happen by more and repeat vaccinations. The West, which was totally hitch riding on vaccines and repeat vaccinations, has now gotten into a frustrating tussle with Omicron, which, with simple medicinal interventions, could have been consigned to the ranks of common cold. The experts there are clearly avoiding looking into the mirror.
That Canadian had my blood boiling. So many points to counter I lost count. Talk about losing the plot.
Sadly, he's par for the course here.
I wish he had a less arrogant, and more thoughtful tone and demeanour like yourself and the other two gentlemen.
Canada is offering little to the conversation. I felt like taking him by the ear and apologizing to the world.
He means well.
That is his style and unlikely to change.
Allows for further exploration of views in a coherent fashion.
The path to hell is paved with something, something.
Canada is paving one helluva path.
They (he, all of us) need to take a step back, take a deep breath and revisit our assumptions lest they become orthodoxy driven by junk science and superstition. For example, this mask thing is way out of control and needs to be put to rest and bed. Fast.
Clinging on to false notions (and hopes) and pretending it's 'science driven' will indeed lead to medical tyranny of good intentions.
Dr. McMillan, it always helps me to ask multiple people the same question to gain the greatest understanding and broadest perspective. Regarding masks, I listened carefully to your Canadian guest Mark Keeley's position on the effectiveness of masks. It is my understanding he believe masks are to protect others, not the person wearing the mask. What is the evidence supporting Mark Keeley statement that masks protect those not wearing masks? I believe it was Dr. Banerjee that referred to the latest Cochrane study, this study is the highest quality evidence available on the effectiveness of masks. The study is a database systematic review, published January 30, 2023, which included data from 78 randomized clinical trials, and concluded that masks do not work for flu or SARS-CoV-2 and there is no strong rationale for mask mandates. The paper states “wearing masks (medical/surgical) in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks" and “there were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection.” Of course, there is the possibility that masks do reduce the transmission of the virus, but there is apparently no evidence to support this possibility. Is the study not clear, there is no evidence that masks reduce transmission, not even N95 or P2 respirators? I am genuinely confused by Mark Keeley's statement that masks protect others. Is Mark following the science or ignoring the science? Below is a link to the transcript of the interview with the lead author, Tom Jefferson, of the study in which he is even more clear on the effectiveness of masks. I would very much appreciate your honest and direct perspective.
https://maryannedemasi.substack.com/p/exclusive-lead-author-of-new-cochrane?publication_id=1044435&post_id=100756872&isFreemail=false
On masks my thoughts are simple.
If you did a study on the effectiveness of washing hands, it would not show any benefit.
This is because it is part of a series of steps towards reducing risks.
Masks must help by reducing aerosol spread.
It cannot work on its own.
Omicron is however so transmissible that nothing will stop it.
I am more concerned about the other infections being spread.
I appreciate your reply. I think your saying that it is "common sense" that masks work but other steps must also be taken along with masks to be effective. This still leaves me uncertain why the Cochrane study would show no benefit of masks. Did the studies included in the Cochrane meta analysis not include any of the "other" steps required for masks to be effective? The study is specific to effectiveness in the "community" and "health care" environments. For these environments, no benefit was found. In what environment and/or other additional steps/actions will result in masks being effective? You also think a study of washing your hands will not show a reduction of transmission. Why do think that? There does not seem to be any controversy that washing your hands does reduce transmission. It would be great if you could interview the lead author of the Cochrane study and discuss how masks can be effective for flu and SarsCoV-2?
Are doctors facing losing their licenses in places like South Africa, Australia, India and the UK like they are here in Canada and the United States? I know there was censorship but have doctors had to face stiff threats from their respective colleges and boards in those places?
Occurring in different parts of the world now.
Even Dr Chetty (South Africa) is being targeted.
marc kealy makes me ashamed to be canadian. @48:46 he say we should accept efficacy over safety in drug development. what happened to the hypocritic oath "do no wrong". this guy contradicted himself over and over, and the constant promotion of political lies.
Marc is a very important part of the future healing.
His views reflect a significant part of leadership across the world.
Only through engagement and understanding can progress occur.
At least he agreed to be on the panel. He is discussing his views. I do not at all agree with much of anything he said, but at least he appeared. Most of the doctor clowns who support the corrupted narrative will not have a discussion with anyone opposing their view. So I do give Mark credit for being there. He’s a true believer, but he was brave to open himself up to some humiliation from the audience. Maybe a little light will get in through the cracks in the narrative occurring with more and more frequency.
there in lies the problem. in the pre-internet world, this kind of nonsense would be dismissed by those around him, and an inane viewpoint would have died on the vine. But in this world of anyone with an opinion and a device connected to the 7 billion people of our planet can say anything, regardless of its validity, is only confusing those with limited capacity to understand the concepts being shared. We have not yet reached the ability as a global nation to discern what merits attention, and what should be dismissed. for example, we tend to accept number of "posts" compared to accepting number of "posters" (the old squeaky wheel get the grease).
@Dr Philip McMillan: your statement "His views reflect a significant part of leadership across the world." only supports my assertions of my previous comment. i would also put to you, the views of the leadership across the world is a very low standard to set anyone's bar. Please, if you can, point to ANY world leader that got there without winning a popularity contest (read: elected), or through military force. the term world leader is very offensive. At best we have world REPRESENTATIVES, not leaders.
Wrong on masks , straight away wont watch any more rubbish
Duh!
The experts got it all wrong on vaccines and vaccination in this pandemic …….on the product, on the virus, on the timing,….just about everything. In the process, they have damaged the process of mass vaccination as a legitimate and effective public health intervention in the minds of the people. Vaccinations began to be pushed by end 2020 by health authorities around the world, even though their experts had full knowledge that the virus was shape and feature shifting constantly, that it meant that none of the vaccine components had an exact match to the virus at that time, that it meant that the vaccine were ineffective and their effects short lived, that the vaccine would not stop someone getting infected originally etc. Since about 2021, they also ignored the possibility that the long covid effects in the vaccinated could actually be organ injuries from the spike protein segments from the vaccines. It was left to the people in 2022 to start ignoring vaccinations once they realised that the vaccines were neither prophylactic nor therapeutic and they had damage potential too even if it was limited to a small percentage of the population. The virus may be new, but the symptoms were all too familiar as were the established treatment protocols from other respiratory infections - early use of anti histamines and URT medicines. Many countries began to realise the value of this simple medicinal/clinical intervention by mid 2021. In time they completely subdued delta and later Omicron also. This did not happen by more and repeat vaccinations. The West, which was totally hitch riding on vaccines and repeat vaccinations, has now gotten into a frustrating tussle with Omicron, which, with simple medicinal interventions, could have been consigned to the ranks of common cold. The experts there are clearly avoiding looking into the mirror.
Although it is not clear why f it was wrong or wilful.