Ep 566 | The Data Is In: Mask & Vaccine Mandates Don't Work | Guest: Ian Miller
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
202.62514
Summary
In this episode, we talk to Ian Miller, a pediatric infectious disease epidemiologist and author of the new book, "Unmasked: The Global Failure of Mask Mandates: The Case-Based Approach to Protecting Kids from Flu and Dengue from Flu. Ian uses publicly available data from the CDC and other CDC-funded research to make his case for why masks are a terrible idea.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey guys, welcome to Relatable. Happy Thursday. This episode, as always, is brought to you by
00:00:05.760
our friends at Good Ranchers. American meat delivered right to your front door. Go to
00:00:10.460
goodranchers.com slash Allie. Okay guys, I am so excited about today's episode. We have Ian Miller.
00:00:28.560
If that name sounds familiar to you, it's because every time we have talked about masks,
00:00:33.580
we cite the graphs that he creates using publicly available and accessible data about masking and
00:00:42.340
vaccine passports and if they have actually had any effect whatsoever on case counts or even death
00:00:48.960
counts or anything, not just in America, American cities and American states, but also abroad.
00:00:54.620
He has been so useful to me in understanding the data and understanding how these policies have
00:01:03.580
affected COVID case counts. Spoiler alert, they really haven't. And so that's what we're going
00:01:11.560
to discuss today. We're going to talk about the data, how he compiles this, where he is getting
00:01:16.080
his information. He recently wrote a book, which is a bestseller on Amazon, which is awesome. And
00:01:23.880
it is called Unmasked, the Global Failure of COVID Mask Mandates. I'm also going to put some links
00:01:31.100
in the description of this episode because we've talked about this several times. I hate how mask
00:01:36.320
mandates have so disproportionately negatively affected children because children are necessarily
00:01:43.680
compliant. They have to listen to adults who have an authority over them and whom they're supposed
00:01:49.320
to trust. And that has really broken my heart, especially to see the hypocrisy of the politicians
00:01:56.020
that are putting these rules in place and have imposed them upon kids while they are not even,
00:02:04.180
these politicians are not even following the rules themselves. It just drives me mad. And I'm not
00:02:09.280
coming from an ideological position on this. I am coming from a data-driven perspective on this. There is
00:02:17.360
no data, there's no science that supports mask mandates or universal masking. There just isn't,
00:02:24.400
especially not for kids, especially not for kids. And so we're going to talk about that today with Ian.
00:02:30.500
This is going to be an awesome episode. And like I said, I'm going to include those links in the
00:02:35.880
description of this episode. The several studies that are, some of them are 20 years old that show
00:02:42.980
that masks don't mitigate the spread of this type of virus. I put a blog post together several months
00:02:49.460
ago that compiles links to all of these different kinds of studies. I'm going to include a couple
00:02:55.960
articles that dig into the CDC studies that purportedly show that masks work. These articles
00:03:03.300
reveal that the data doesn't actually prove that. And so we're going to get into all of that today
00:03:08.840
too. You guys, I know we're going to love this episode. Ian is super insightful on this subject.
00:03:14.460
So without further ado, here's our new friend, Ian Miller.
00:03:20.020
Ian, thank you so much for joining us. Can you first tell everyone who you are and what you do?
00:03:25.960
Yeah. So I have been on Twitter mostly and then started a sub stack last year writing about,
00:03:33.040
you know, the failure of mask mandates and a lot of other COVID policy in general. And
00:03:37.880
so that became kind of a thing for me starting in mid 2020, I would say just tracking the information,
00:03:44.580
tracking the data, putting in these annotations showing what we did and when and what were the
00:03:49.440
results afterwards. And how did this start for you? Are you a political person? Are you someone
00:03:56.420
who reads data for a living? Why did you decide to start charting this?
00:04:03.220
Yeah, I did some like data management analysis and stuff and for my day job. And so that was,
00:04:08.460
I had some background in it and I personally wanted to see it. I wanted to see the results.
00:04:13.200
You know, I live in California, so a few places on earth have been more dedicated to COVID
00:04:17.500
interventions in the state of California, especially Los Angeles. So, you know, I kind of
00:04:22.120
was seeing in 2020, you know, LA's in California, we're doing all these things. We're closing
00:04:25.880
everything. We have mask mandates everywhere. What's been the impact? Is it working? And so
00:04:30.960
it was, it's a lot of this, this information, it's very easy to find. It's all publicly available.
00:04:36.040
It's just, you can download it yourself from the CDC or the New York Times or Johns Hopkins. And
00:04:40.060
so I just went through and started downloading all of the data for a lot of different locations. And,
00:04:45.580
you know, people would reach out to me and say, could you put something together for Chicago or
00:04:49.540
for New York or for Philadelphia or anything like that? So I realized there's a lot of people looking
00:04:54.300
for this and it just kind of became something I would do consistently to try to just download the
00:04:57.940
data, put these annotations in, here's the policy and here's what happened afterwards. And
00:05:01.540
unfortunately, the results are pretty consistent, but it never really actually seems to work.
00:05:05.960
Yeah. So basically all you've done is you said, okay, this is the case rate or the death rate or
00:05:10.220
whatever metric you want to use. And this is when a mask mandate was put into place. This is when a
00:05:16.860
vaccine passport was put into place. And very often you compare that, you compare the case rate or
00:05:22.660
hospitalization rate against a state or an area that did not impose the same restrictions. And what we
00:05:30.040
often find is that the conclusion is basically the same. Really across states, countries, cities,
00:05:37.060
we have not seen a very significant difference either in cases or deaths, depending on the kind
00:05:44.980
of mask mandates and passports and restrictions that have been put into place. Is that correct?
00:05:51.100
Absolutely. That's 100% correct. And that's one of the best ways to kind of disprove these
00:05:55.960
arguments is to show, you know, you can't say that a policy mattered if a similar area that didn't
00:06:01.520
have the policy also had the same results. It's a very consistent pattern everywhere you look.
00:06:06.320
Recently, the governor of New York came out and said that, oh, because of our mask requirement,
00:06:10.820
we brought the, you know, the Omicron winter surge has ended because of our mask requirement,
00:06:15.640
except New Jersey had exactly the same results, in fact, slightly better results, but basically
00:06:20.280
identical numbers over the winter period without a statewide mask mandate. And so, you know, I realized
00:06:25.980
pretty early on, and it's been a consistent pattern, unfortunately, that a lot of, you know,
00:06:30.060
media outlets, CNNs and New York Times of the world, you know, they don't call them out for this.
00:06:34.440
They don't say, how could this be possible when New Jersey didn't have this policy? So that became
00:06:39.280
kind of my goal is to show you can't credit masks when these areas that didn't have it had the same
00:06:43.740
results or better results. Yeah. And I think, though, sometimes the pushback that you'll hear from
00:06:49.180
these Democratic political leaders is that they'll say, well, it's just because not enough people
00:06:54.880
complied. We put our mask mandate in place and it is really effective, but the people are just
00:07:01.160
disobedient and rebellious and they're just not compliant enough. And that's why, I mean,
00:07:06.020
that's what I get a lot when I say, when I share some of your charts and I get some detractor that
00:07:11.260
says, well, that's just because people aren't compliant enough. If we had a 100% masking and
00:07:16.000
compliance to the mask mandates, then, you know, those numbers would be going down. What do you think
00:07:21.260
about that? Well, there's a few things there. One of which is that if anything you're doing requires
00:07:27.760
100% of people to comply with it in order for it to work, it's never going to work because 100%
00:07:32.480
of people are never going to comply with anything anywhere. The other thing is that you can do some
00:07:37.620
measurements with compliance. Recently, Los Angeles County, the public health department went around
00:07:42.200
to businesses, did some surveys and observational data. I think they tracked something like 1200
00:07:46.040
businesses and said that over 90%, 95% of people were complying with the mask mandate. This is in mid
00:07:51.500
December 2021. And then just a couple of weeks later, LA broke every record that they had previously
00:07:56.580
had cases went up 20, 25 times higher than they'd ever been in LA. So, you know, when they even do
00:08:02.240
when they do measure the data on people asking actually complying, it doesn't help them. And
00:08:07.080
there's also some survey data that has been done throughout the pandemic, like YouGov did a track
00:08:11.320
to survey in the United States. And I show this in the book where the mask compliance from YouGov is
00:08:15.680
consistent pretty much the entire time, but the cases go up and down, regardless of the compliance.
00:08:21.100
So, and there's also been a lot of international survey data that I pulled and used in the book too.
00:08:26.020
So even when you do measure how many people are actually wearing it, it doesn't make a difference.
00:08:30.860
Yeah. And the mask thing is just, it's very confusing to me. And I talked to, I'm sure you
00:08:35.540
know who Dr. Scott Atlas is. He was a part of the COVID task force. And we had a conversation where
00:08:41.040
basically he said when he asked Deborah Birx and Anthony Fauci to present the scientific literature
00:08:45.800
that proves that universal masking is actually going to mitigate the spread of COVID, that they didn't
00:08:50.540
have anything, that Deborah Birx actually cited this one CDC study that proved that two, two
00:08:56.520
employees of a salon who tested positive for COVID, but wore masks, apparently did not spread it to
00:09:02.560
their clients. Like that was the extent, apparently, according to Scott Atlas, of the scientific
00:09:07.360
literature that supported it. Of course, it's come out now through the reporting of journalists like
00:09:12.300
David Zwing, that even the studies that the CDC says supports masking, especially masking in schools,
00:09:19.140
that actually the data doesn't prove that. I think the CDC just came out with another study that they
00:09:25.300
say shows the efficacy of masking. And yet when journalists have broken it down and looked at the
00:09:30.820
actual data, that's not actually what it proves because it fails to account for all of the other
00:09:35.300
measures that were taken in schools and different places like that. And I just, I have a really hard
00:09:40.140
time understanding the why. If there is so little evidence to prove that masks and especially mask
00:09:46.500
mandates work, either in the general public or in school, why? Why the about face from Dr. Fauci in
00:09:54.600
March of 2020 basically condescending the idea that, you know, masks could ever work for something like
00:10:01.080
this to, if you don't wear a mask, you're a grandma killer by the summer of 2020. I mean, were you
00:10:06.960
surprised by that change? And if you were to guess kind of why they keep on doubling down on this
00:10:11.760
ineffective policy, what would you say? There's a lot of great points in there. One of the first
00:10:18.600
things that just to go back to that hairdresser thing for a minute, one of the flaws with that was
00:10:21.880
that only half the people that went to see these hairdressers even got tested. So there's another
00:10:25.980
half of the people that were clients of theirs that never even got tested. The CDC completely ignored
00:10:29.760
that. As far as the research, and I go into this in the book as well, where early on in late March
00:10:36.020
of 2020, Fauci was sent an email from one of his employees at the National Institute of Health saying
00:10:41.020
that they reviewed all the high quality evidence on masking in the general public, and it all
00:10:45.600
suggested masks would not have a significant impact. Literally just a few days later, I think
00:10:49.600
it was April 4th, like three or four days later, CDC and Fauci come out and say everybody should wear
00:10:54.360
a cloth mask. So clearly there was no science that changed in order to support this. So the why is a
00:11:01.440
very difficult question to answer because it's clear that they weren't, they always say we're
00:11:05.480
following the science. It's clear they weren't following the science because the science, all
00:11:08.580
this evidence and trial data had showed it wouldn't work. I think that they were, initially they were
00:11:14.580
thinking that the kind of Asian countries had done well because of masking. That was their thought.
00:11:19.580
I think they also wanted to be seen as doing something, you know, saying, well, we're fighting COVID
00:11:24.020
by telling everybody to wear a mask. And then I think it's kind of become this doubling down
00:11:29.500
because as you say, they promote it, promote it, promote it, say it's the most important thing to
00:11:33.020
do. The results aren't working, but they can't go back and say, actually, we were wrong. It never
00:11:38.300
really worked. They have to just kind of keep doubling down on what they're selling and promoting.
00:11:43.100
Yeah, I think it's that piece. Like if we're, if we could guess in the most charitable way,
00:11:49.280
what is behind these mandates, it's the, at least I'm doing something, thing, line, defense,
00:11:58.180
that at least I'm not doing anything. And that is why, I mean, obviously it's because he's a
00:12:03.140
Republican, but that's why I think DeSantis is demonized because even if the case and
00:12:07.500
hospitalization and death rates are similar in Florida to somewhere like California, well,
00:12:12.060
the bad thing is, isn't actually the result of the policy. That's what I've realized when it comes to
00:12:16.460
these COVID fear mongers. It's not the result. It's the, um, the intention or what is actually
00:12:22.700
done. So if a governor puts all of these restrictions in place and say they have a
00:12:27.180
higher death count than a state that does it, they are still deemed virtuous. And I mean, of course,
00:12:33.200
we saw the same thing with Donald Trump, that every single COVID death when he was president was
00:12:37.980
attributed directly to him. But of course, now that more people have died while Joe Biden was
00:12:43.700
president, no deaths are attributed to Joe Biden because at least he's doing something that's very
00:12:49.520
confounding to me. It's a great point. Um, same thing with Cuomo in New York, where New York has
00:12:56.180
had some of the worst numbers of anywhere in the world. And he was, you know, the Cuomo sexuals and
00:13:00.100
all these people that were so devoted to him, it's just completely absurd. Um, but I, yeah, I agree.
00:13:05.580
I think a lot of politicians realized that they would be criticized by the media for not doing enough
00:13:10.520
and not doing too much. So it became kind of this political benefit, politically beneficial for them
00:13:16.260
to kind of overdo it with policy because the media, I think a lot of them were scared and were
00:13:21.120
concerned. And so they were kind of advocating for further restrictions and more mask mandates and
00:13:26.260
more vaccine passports and all this. Um, so I think politicians kind of realized that they could get
00:13:32.000
away with doing more, but they couldn't get away as much with doing less. Uh, obviously if you're,
00:13:36.940
you know, DeSantis, there's really nothing you can do that will make them happy. Anything he does
00:13:40.260
is kind of criticized and, and, uh, screamed about, but yeah, I think that's a large part
00:13:51.860
What's crazy to me, and I'm sure this is maddening to you as well, is how accessible the data is that
00:13:58.360
you use to make your charts and how available it is to anyone. Like you don't have to have a special
00:14:04.740
password. You don't have to have a special degree to understand it. I don't have a background.
00:14:10.260
In data analysis. And it's very easy for me to understand and access these things.
00:14:15.540
If you have a search engine, if you have a connection to the internet, you can find these
00:14:20.700
things. And still you will have people say that if you don't support universal masking and
00:14:25.480
mandatory vaccines and vaccine passports, which you found the same conclusion there,
00:14:29.940
that that really doesn't make a difference to case rate and things like that. Um, that you are not
00:14:34.940
following the science and you are hateful and cruel and whatever. What do you think is inhibiting
00:14:41.400
people from simply looking at the data that is publicly available that shows the conclusions that
00:14:51.020
Right. And I've repeated that a few times, essentially saying, you know, this is,
00:14:54.680
it's their own fault. They made it easy to kind of disprove their arguments because this data is so
00:14:58.520
easily accessible and anybody can do it. I'll tell people, I can walk you through how to recreate
00:15:02.380
the chart yourself. It's not hard, but I think there's been this kind of, uh, turn mentally for
00:15:08.880
people where they, they were told for so long, you're a good person, you're doing the right thing.
00:15:13.680
You still see that where, when the governor of New York mandated mass again, in December,
00:15:17.260
she said, you know, 80% of adults have done the right thing and been vaccinated. Well,
00:15:20.880
if you're told over and over and over again, by everybody that you trust that you're a good
00:15:24.420
person and you've done the right thing and you've worn a mask and you've helped and contributed in
00:15:28.400
some way, it's a very powerful instinct for people to kind of maintain that. And it's also, I think
00:15:33.120
some people have been frustrated, the people that have gotten, you know, gotten vaccinated or
00:15:37.340
worn a mask the whole time that have feel like they've done the right thing. Um, I think they're
00:15:41.440
frustrated because they're also told it's the other person's fault. Um, so when, when you're given
00:15:46.160
that license to kind of be the police in a way where you get to say, Oh, you're the, you're the problem
00:15:50.500
here. You're not wearing a mask. You're not complying with, with what they told you to do.
00:15:54.220
Uh, I think it gives them this kind of superiority complex where they, they feel like they have the
00:15:59.080
license to blame other people for COVID not being over yet, which is never going to happen because
00:16:03.820
it's never going away. But those same people, it seems don't call out the politicians that have
00:16:11.080
put these rules in place that aren't following them themselves. It's always like other people who
00:16:16.880
aren't wearing their masks. It's always like the conservatives, the evangelicals who aren't
00:16:20.320
wearing their masks. It's never Eric Garcetti not wearing his mask. That's the problem. You know,
00:16:25.320
it's never Gavin Newsom not wearing his mask. That's the problem. It's okay for those people
00:16:30.260
to break the rules. But if someone like me breaks the rules, well, I'm the reason why people are still
00:16:34.860
dying from COVID, which of course isn't true. So that's also a little bit confusing to me,
00:16:39.880
like why there isn't more anger, um, about the hypocrisy of people like, you know, Stacey Abrams
00:16:48.320
sitting in a classroom full of masked little kids, totally unmasked herself. Of course,
00:16:52.900
she said the criticism was about racism. Eric Garcetti saying that when he took a picture
00:16:57.480
maskless with Magic Johnson, that he was holding his breath. I guess he was also doing that at the
00:17:02.300
Superbowl. All of these celebrities without masks on smooshed together in LA, which is apparently in a
00:17:08.080
state of emergency. So that little two-year-old still have to wear a mask to daycare. I know
00:17:13.200
that a lot of people do wake up because of that hypocrisy, but there are still so many people that
00:17:18.220
see that and they have no problem with it. There are parents that still send their little kid to
00:17:22.740
kindergarten with their mask on after they went to the Superbowl without a mask on and they're fine
00:17:26.740
with it. Is that crazy to you? It's absolutely crazy. Uh, there's a lot of, you brought up a lot of
00:17:33.220
great examples of this kind of inconsistency. And one of my favorites is, you know, Nancy Pelosi had a
00:17:37.440
fundraiser where all of the wealthy people that were at the fundraiser. Yeah, exactly. You know,
00:17:42.060
they're not wearing a mask, but everybody that's serving them food, they're all masked. Um, I think
00:17:46.180
a big problem is that the kind of a lot of media sources that people trust, like the New York Times
00:17:50.820
and the Washington Post, uh, the Atlantic have done a really terrible job of kind of calling out this
00:17:55.860
hypocrisy and saying, you know, if all these people don't actually think the rules are that
00:17:59.220
important that don't apply to them, well, why should we follow them? Um, they, they really just kind
00:18:03.520
of serve to promote and, and, and help this. Like I bring up examples in the book and I bring it up
00:18:07.840
on Twitter all the time where you see, you know, there was a story published, I think it was the
00:18:11.140
Washington Post that said, Iowa, welcome to Iowa state that doesn't care if you live or die because
00:18:15.200
they lifted their mask mandates. And there's never any follow-up to that. So people that read that
00:18:19.820
just see the story, see the headline and go, Oh my God, Iowa lifted their mask mandate. The numbers are
00:18:24.300
going to be terrible now. And they don't see the results after afterwards, which is that Iowa's has done
00:18:28.540
just fine. And their numbers have been much lower than states with mask mandates. So I think it's, uh,
00:18:33.680
it's this consistent problem of the hypocrisy, not being called out by the sources that these people
00:18:38.300
go to for information. And so they don't really hear the truth. They don't really hear the data and they
00:18:42.640
don't really kind of hear about the hypocrisy and, and, uh, you know, understand it and say to
00:18:48.920
themselves, this isn't, it clearly isn't that important because they're not doing it.
00:18:52.320
Yeah. And you know, now studies have come out, which I, there have been studies that were already
00:18:57.460
out there even before COVID that showed that, Hey, cloth masks and surgical masks really aren't
00:19:03.660
that effective when it comes to this particle size of COVID. It's just not. I mean, I was looking at
00:19:09.880
some, uh, uh, medical journals and I put them in a blog post several months ago, and I was just
00:19:15.940
stunned to find that really as far back as like the first SARS epidemic, there were studies that were
00:19:21.960
published in medical journals saying, Hey, masks really don't do anything when it comes to
00:19:27.440
mitigating the spread of this. And so again, this is publicly available data. And yet you will get
00:19:34.020
people who get very, who take it very personally, who will get very angry. And I do wonder how much
00:19:40.520
the kind of public health bureaucracy has been a part of that, that people think that being educated
00:19:46.200
or trusting the science is really just listening to what Francis Collins has to say, or the summary of
00:19:53.540
a study by the CDC, which is actually misleading and who aren't actually looking at the data because
00:19:58.900
maybe they don't want to, or maybe they're intimidated or maybe they think it's political,
00:20:03.580
but you had Francis Collins, the head of the NIH. He did this interview. He was kind of the evangelist
00:20:09.660
to evangelicals about masks and vaccines. And, you know, he held up his cloth mask and he said,
00:20:14.700
this is a, this is a life-saving device. And basically you're not loving your neighbor and
00:20:20.520
you're not a good Christian if you don't wear it. And I think to your point, that's a very powerful
00:20:26.020
psychological and spiritual form of manipulation. Oh, wow. You're not a Christian. You know,
00:20:32.980
this is a Christian podcast. You're not a Christian. If you don't wear this mask, you're not a good
00:20:37.260
person. No one wants to be a bad person. No one wants to be seen as, as selfish. And I just think
00:20:43.320
that you make a really good point that that could be part of the reason why people feel so compelled
00:20:48.020
to stick to this narrative, despite the facts contradicting it. Absolutely. It's, it's a very
00:20:55.780
powerful instinct to try to help others. And especially for Christians and I completely,
00:20:59.520
you know, it's a good instinct to have. I mean, we should want to help everybody, help our neighbor
00:21:02.760
and, and be kind that way. But what wearing a mask isn't doing that. It's not accomplishing that.
00:21:08.840
And that's, that's the kind of, they've used these, these kind of tools to, to tell, get compliance,
00:21:14.180
to encourage compliance. And, you know, it's very funny. You mentioned how Collins holds up a cloth
00:21:18.840
mask and then CNN recently come to one of their, their top medical experts, quote unquote, comes on
00:21:23.040
and says the cloth master facial decorations. So I think that's one of the key things to, to bring up
00:21:28.140
to people is that, you know, it's a good thing to want to help others, but what you're doing isn't
00:21:32.320
really helping. And the CDC studies that when they've tried to justify their, their masking
00:21:37.140
recommendations have been so deeply flawed that it doesn't take somebody with a lot of credentials
00:21:41.580
to understand it. I wrote a whole chapter about this in the book where you show, you know, they
00:21:45.060
try to say, oh, masks dropped infections by 75%, but they don't show you that they, they also dropped
00:21:50.620
by 75% in counties that didn't have a mask mandate. It's things like that. And it's, it's very frustrating
00:21:56.620
that they've kind of used messaging this way. And, and I think that they've also done, they purposely
00:22:01.360
kind of came out and tried to discredit anybody that, that was telling the opposite story. You know,
00:22:06.240
the great Barrington declaration was kind of this famous article written to try to say, we need to
00:22:10.800
protect, focus on protecting the elderly and let the rest of us go back to normal. And Francis
00:22:15.960
Collins and Fauci were kind of colluding privately to try to discredit those people. And they called
00:22:20.380
them fringe epidemiologists and they were incredibly well-credentialed experts in their field. So it's,
00:22:26.580
yeah, it's very frustrating how they've used language to try to convince people to wear masks.
00:22:30.400
I posed a question on Twitter. I think it was on Sunday night because just you're looking at the
00:22:40.360
Superbowl and I don't care that everyone is maskless. I think it's great. I would love for
00:22:44.840
everyone to continue to be maskless. I don't care that people aren't following the so-called rules
00:22:50.060
of the Superbowl or LA County, which said that you had to wear masks in this place. That doesn't bother
00:22:55.400
me. Obviously what bothers me is we've kind of already talked about is the fact that the next
00:23:00.280
day, two-year-old kindergartners would go to their daycare, go to their school, being forced to wear
00:23:05.240
masks and that people don't have a problem with that. And so I asked on Twitter, like, how does
00:23:09.400
it make logical sense that my two-year-old, in order to get on the plane, she has to wear a mask.
00:23:13.980
She's never had to wear a mask before. And so there have been things that we've missed out on as a
00:23:17.940
family, or we had to drive 15 hours to go somewhere because I didn't want to put her in a mask
00:23:21.940
because am I going to get that flight attendant who gets angry that my toddler won't wear a mask
00:23:26.400
and it just seemed like too much. And so we have to go through all of that, but adults can be
00:23:32.480
smooshed together in a stadium without masks and not just there, but I mean, there have been plenty
00:23:36.920
of football games over the past several months where people have been, you know, smooshed together
00:23:41.260
without a mask, which again is great, but how does that make scientific sense? And the only real
00:23:46.300
response that I got from people trying to be like, oh, I'm so scientific, was, well, the Super Bowl
00:23:52.820
is outside. It's outside. And planes are really dangerous places for COVID to spread. And so that's
00:23:59.840
why, you know, two-year-olds have to wear masks. Do you think that argument holds water?
00:24:06.380
Definitely does not. Planes have these incredibly powerful air filters that filter the air
00:24:11.200
repeatedly. In fact, they're probably even, if not the same as outside, maybe better. Not that
00:24:16.780
masks have any impact anyway, but, you know, if theory, if you were trying to make that argument,
00:24:21.940
the planes have these air filters that filter air constantly. So it wouldn't be a significant risk
00:24:27.220
on a plane regardless. One of the things that, you know, we're kind of outliers on the United States
00:24:31.600
is that is the two-year-old masking two-year-olds. You know, hardly anybody does that. I don't think a lot
00:24:35.660
of parents know that. I think it's just kind of, you know, people are just told what they're told by
00:24:39.420
the media or from the scientists, and they don't know that a lot of other countries have never
00:24:43.420
masked kids in schools. Most other countries, because the WHO doesn't recommend it. The WHO,
00:24:47.920
even though I think the WHO is in itself very corrupt in a lot of ways, but they don't even
00:24:52.920
recommend. They actually recommend against masking kids under five years old. Exactly, exactly. And
00:25:00.100
especially one of the things that drives me crazy is in California, for example, Los Angeles and San
00:25:04.060
Diego, and I don't know if this is still the case, but for a long time they were masking kids
00:25:06.860
outside at recess. So if you're trying to say that the Super Bowl isn't a problem because it's
00:25:10.500
outdoors, you know, they're masking kids outside at recess, you know, three, four, five, six-year-olds.
00:25:15.960
It's completely unsupported by any kind of scientific data or evidence. There are real harms to it
00:25:20.200
and, you know, significant side effects from masking kids that young and from masking them at schools.
00:25:25.300
And so, and there's no benefit. So basically, you know, every policy has a trade-off. What's the
00:25:29.280
harms and what's the benefits? There's no benefit to mask wearing in schools. All we're getting are harms,
00:25:33.760
and a lot of people are still defending it and supporting it and promoting it. It's completely
00:25:37.540
ludicrous. And then another response, I forgot about this one, is, well, everyone at the Super
00:25:43.420
Bowl, they had to show a negative test or vaccine verification. And two-year-olds, they can't get a
00:25:51.380
vaccine yet. And so obviously, they still have to wear masks. What do you say to that?
00:25:56.640
Well, unfortunately, in a lot of countries that do a better job of tracking this data,
00:26:01.400
the rates of infection in people that are fully vaccinated is higher than those,
00:26:05.640
the rates among people that are unvaccinated. This is the case in Denmark. It was a case in
00:26:09.700
Scotland, UK, and Ontario, Canada. A lot of the places that, Iceland for another example.
00:26:15.600
So, you know, trying to say that vaccinations are going to prevent the transmission of COVID is just
00:26:20.920
not, it's not backed up by any kind of scientific data or evidence anymore. I think a lot of experts,
00:26:26.120
again, this is the same problem where these experts kind of go on TV and they say, oh,
00:26:29.180
you can't get COVID if you get vaccinated. Joe Biden said that. A lot of, you know,
00:26:32.580
vouchers out there, it's a dead end for the virus if you get vaccinated. That's just not the case.
00:26:37.640
It doesn't mean there might, you know, there might be benefits to it. But as far as children who we
00:26:42.060
know are at extremely low risk of severe cases or from death from COVID, there's really no benefit to
00:26:48.500
it because it's not going to prevent them from spreading it to other kids or from spreading it to
00:26:51.700
adults. It's not going to prevent adults from spreading it to them. So there's really no
00:26:55.800
justification for that line of thinking. And it's very frustrating that it's kind of continued on
00:27:01.580
into 2022. Yeah. And this illogic is continuing to affect policy. D.C., her mayor or its mayor
00:27:09.460
announced that they are lifting the mask mandate for bars and restaurants, but not for kids in
00:27:14.860
school. According to Fox News, California is leaving school mask mandate in place despite lifting
00:27:20.500
indoor mask mandates elsewhere. Now, I saw also Politico reporting. I'm guessing this is this
00:27:27.420
is true. This makes sense to me that Gavin Newsom actually wants to lift mask mandates for school.
00:27:33.520
Well, that part isn't necessarily what is what seems likely to me. The next part does. But that it is
00:27:40.420
the teachers unions who are pushing back against lifting mask mandates in schools. And we're actually
00:27:46.900
seeing that in a lot of places. We're seeing that in many states that it's actually not the it's not
00:27:51.960
the experts. It's not the scientists that are making these decisions. Even the CDC has said that they
00:27:56.660
want to defer to the governors in making these decisions. The governors are then saying that they're
00:28:01.500
deferring to the teachers unions. So is maybe that's what's behind it is really that the teachers
00:28:08.120
unions are kind of imposing this guidance of kids wearing masks, even though it's ineffective and
00:28:13.960
really has nothing to do with science at all. Absolutely. And I think that's been a consistent
00:28:20.380
problem where there were these emails that came out that teachers unions had influenced CDC guidance
00:28:24.820
on school reopenings and school masking. I mean, that's completely insane. And, you know, for the
00:28:29.720
people that claim that to be following the science so closely, the fact that they're being influenced by a
00:28:33.880
political organization, which is essentially what teachers unions have become in the last two years,
00:28:38.100
is is really depressing. And it's it's a very important point to bring up because these people
00:28:43.560
try to pretend for so long they've been pretending for so long that they are all their decisions are
00:28:47.900
being based off of recommendations from the experts. And that's just not true. It's clearly
00:28:52.200
that they're that they're being influenced by outside sources. And that can't be acceptable,
00:28:56.020
especially when this is part of the goal with the book was to try to destroy the arguments behind
00:29:00.260
masking entirely. Because if you believe that masks work, they're always going to be licensed for
00:29:05.640
organizations like the teachers unions to try to bring it back if cases go up again, which I'm sure they
00:29:10.980
will. And again, in 20 winter, 22, 23. So, you know, if you if you buy the premise that masks
00:29:16.560
work, there can they can never really permanently go away. But then that's that's the goal is to try
00:29:21.620
to present the data and show all the evidence that it hasn't worked and that we can't keep going back
00:29:25.620
to these things over and over again and listening to teachers unions that think these these measures
00:29:31.600
And the amazing thing is that the the very people who often say, oh, we have to listen to the science and
00:29:36.780
Republicans are the ones that are politicizing this. I'm not saying that there are no
00:29:40.280
Republicans who have wrongly politicized it, but they are, you know, they are the ones whether
00:29:48.500
they realize it or not, that are actually doing what they're doing for politics. I try to tell
00:29:53.260
parents is that your child is wearing a mask to school because of politics. I know that you love
00:29:58.600
your child and you think that you are doing what's best for them. Of course, I think all parents
00:30:03.480
believe that they are doing that. But the restriction, the rule that your child has to wear a mask to
00:30:10.020
school is not for their safety. It's not based on science. It actually is based on politics,
00:30:15.060
not the other way around. And I'm hoping that your book, I'm hoping that people who are not
00:30:21.400
conservative that have all different kinds of political backgrounds will read it and that it
00:30:26.100
will help them wake up to the logic that has diluted so many people over the past couple of years.
00:30:32.520
I think one thing that's really difficult is to admit that you've believed a lie,
00:30:36.700
admit that you've been lied to, admit that maybe you impose something on your child unnecessarily
00:30:42.400
that could end up harming them long term. That's going to be really hard for a lot of people
00:30:47.380
to admit, don't you think? It definitely is. I think one thing I would say to people that feel
00:30:53.720
like that is, you know, there's nothing, there's no reason to blame yourself for listening to people
00:30:58.100
that you trust. You know, you listen to scientific experts. That makes sense. In theory, they should be
00:31:02.960
telling you the truth. The problem is, is unfortunately, they haven't been telling the
00:31:06.160
truth. They've been kind of trying to promote a policy as opposed to maintaining this kind of
00:31:10.120
dispassionate, scientific, evidentiary based line of thinking. And one thing to bring up as well is
00:31:15.900
that, you know, one of the problems that I've tried to fight against and, you know, blaming
00:31:20.360
Republicans is something that we look like somebody like Ron DeSantis, who was one of the first people
00:31:24.420
in the country to push for opening schools. He got the schools open. He pushed for normal schooling
00:31:28.400
without masking. And he was fought every bit of the way. And now it's kind of universally accepted
00:31:33.460
that closing schools was a disaster. It was a terrible policy. Never should have happened.
00:31:37.720
That masking in schools has had very little impact, if at all. And nobody kind of goes back and gives
00:31:43.140
him credit for being the first person to point that out. It's like, oh, Ron DeSantis is trying to
00:31:46.940
kill your kids. And it turns out, no, actually, he was right the whole time. And that's, so when you see
00:31:52.200
that people have been right, that were demonized, and they're telling you, this is what we should be
00:31:56.320
doing. That's kind of somebody you should be listening to more so than somebody who,
00:31:59.160
you know, didn't give you any evidence for why these measures were so important and has been
00:32:03.120
proven wrong over time. And good for him for abiding his time, because it can be really easy
00:32:07.880
to kind of acquiesce when there's a cacophony of voices that are calling you a killer and everyone
00:32:13.740
who supports you a killer. It can be really easy to either back down or kind of caveat or apologize
00:32:19.000
for your position. And he just kind of, he just knew that he just waited, that the spike that was
00:32:24.240
happening in all southern states in really the heat of the summer when people were inside was
00:32:29.360
going to go away. And it was going to switch geographically. And of course, that's what
00:32:33.700
happened. Now, what's incredible is that after a year of vaccines, mask mandates, January, we saw our
00:32:42.420
highest case rate ever, ever higher than at the start of this thing, higher than in January of 2021.
00:32:50.740
Now, the death rate, this is just according to Google, which compiled this data for the New York
00:32:56.100
Times and Our World in data, the death rate wasn't as high as it was in January 2021. But it was a lot
00:33:02.020
higher than it was over the summer when we had fewer vaccines going out. And so I'm a little bit
00:33:09.380
confused on that. And I'm not asking you to speculate about the efficacy of the vaccine. But don't you think
00:33:14.420
it's just a little strange that when 70 percent of the country has been fully vaccinated, a large
00:33:20.940
percentage has gotten their booster shot, we're seeing vaccine mandates and passports that's still
00:33:25.500
happening. Big employers are still requiring their employees to get this vaccine, that we had the
00:33:31.260
highest case rate ever in January versus a time when we had hardly any vaccines a year ago. That's just a
00:33:37.900
little strange to me. Yeah. And again, it goes back to the problem that the vaccines just don't stop
00:33:44.800
infections or transmission hardly, if anything at all, really. You know, we saw this kind of early
00:33:49.960
on where Singapore last summer was a much higher vaccination rate. The U.S. had their biggest surge
00:33:54.760
of the pandemic. So we should have known going into winter that this wasn't going to really stop
00:33:59.400
cases from happening. And clearly that didn't happen. And we can see this with Vermont. Vermont's numbers
00:34:04.220
had gone up. Iceland saw the same thing. All these very highly vaccinated areas that saw their biggest
00:34:09.000
surges of the pandemic. So trying to say that that would prevent surges, which is what a lot of experts
00:34:13.980
went on TV and did. They said, oh, if everybody, we just got a higher vaccination rate. And they would
00:34:17.580
set out these numbers, 80, 85 percent. And then they would ignore that areas that had that percentage
00:34:22.320
saw their highest surges of the pandemic before this. So I think it's been a very, it's very confusing
00:34:28.680
because it's so easy to just show. And I do this all the time where I'll point out, you know,
00:34:31.640
Fauci said if we get 70 percent of people vaccinated, we won't see surges anymore. And then,
00:34:35.860
of course, that's disproven just a few months later. So it kind of goes back to what I was
00:34:39.900
saying a minute ago about how, you know, when these people are wrong so often and so consistently
00:34:44.020
and so easily disproven, you got to stop trusting them at some point because it's clear that they're
00:34:48.680
kind of winging it. They're not really basing their mandates and their guidance on evidence. It's
00:34:53.520
just kind of political posturing. Yeah. And one of these days, I hope we can really
00:34:58.320
get to what is behind the motivation for what made Fauci and the public health bureaucracy
00:35:05.400
switch on masks. Because, yes, maybe it was just let's just do something. Maybe it was just,
00:35:11.300
hey, this is a political wedge to make it seem like Donald Trump doesn't care because he's kind
00:35:15.720
of flouted the whole mask thing. And therefore, maybe he'll lose in November. Maybe they see it as
00:35:20.540
a right-left issue. Or maybe it's more nefarious than that. I don't know where the propaganda is
00:35:24.520
coming from. I don't know what the motivations are to mask two-year-olds when I don't know if
00:35:28.480
any other country in the world is doing it. But I really, maybe it'll be you. Maybe you will
00:35:32.940
uncover, excuse me, something for us that tells us where this propaganda and this craziness is
00:35:40.440
actually coming from. What do you think is behind these politicians that are now rolling back
00:35:46.740
restrictions, even though cases, at least in January and February, have been so high? Are
00:35:54.900
like, are you optimistic about that? Are you cynical about that? What do you think?
00:36:00.480
I think it's mostly political pressure. I think they've realized the polling numbers have showed
00:36:04.960
people are really fed up with it. They're tired of these measures. They're tired of their kids being
00:36:08.480
masked. And I think that they realized that they were going to get really hurt in midterm elections
00:36:14.020
coming up if they continue these policies for too long. And I also, I feel like there's,
00:36:19.420
my concern is that a lot of states, like you mentioned, California being a state of emergency,
00:36:23.540
they just extended that again. And Illinois, the governor, when he said, oh, we're going to enter
00:36:27.660
a mask mandate, said it doesn't mean that we won't bring it back again when the numbers go up.
00:36:31.340
So my concern is that they're going to kind of give this temporary respite for now. And then as soon
00:36:36.080
as there's another surge again, which inevitably will happen, they're going to go right back to the same
00:36:40.880
policies that we already know don't work. So I think it's, it's been mostly political. I'm
00:36:45.860
optimistic to an extent that a lot of states that had statewide mask mandates in 2020 didn't bring
00:36:51.580
them back in this winter with all the big numbers, one of the numbers went crazy in Ohio and West
00:36:55.360
Virginia and places like that, where the governors had praised masks and mask mandates didn't go back
00:36:59.680
to it. So I think they realized that, you know, people are tired of it and that, you know, they can't,
00:37:04.220
they don't have the political capital to keep mandating masks forever, at least in some of these
00:37:07.700
states. I'm concerned about New York and Illinois and California, but yeah, optimistic about most of
00:37:13.260
the rest of the country kind of committing to return to full normalcy. Yeah, it really is a battle
00:37:18.140
against misinformation, true misinformation, and propaganda and just this faulty mindset. I saw a
00:37:25.220
tweet by someone the other day that said, you know, why are we throwing up our hands and saying we're done
00:37:30.720
with mask mandates when cases are so high? I can't believe we're lifting indoor mask mandates. And this is
00:37:35.840
a point that you make a lot in your tweets. Oh, so cases are at an all time high, meaning the policy
00:37:41.600
that was put in place has been ineffective. Let's just double down on the policy that was completely
00:37:46.360
ineffective. That should probably work this time. I mean, a lot of people think that way, crazily
00:37:50.080
enough. Yeah, it's amazing how that logical consistency works there, where it's like, well,
00:37:55.900
this policy is so important to keep, even though we just had it and broke every record with COVID cases.
00:38:00.720
And another thing I try to point out as well is, it's not just that the masks don't stop the
00:38:03.980
surges is that when you remove mask mandates, there's no negative side effects at all. And
00:38:07.980
people forget, but back in March of 2021, when Texas lifted their mask mandate,
00:38:12.540
there was a huge outcry of criticism. I go, I devote a large section of the book to it as well,
00:38:18.120
where you point out all these people, these politicians saying that he was part of a death
00:38:22.000
cult and wanted to murder Texans. And then, of course, the numbers a couple of weeks later were
00:38:26.480
lower. They actually continued to drop after the mandate was lifted. So it's not just that they
00:38:31.460
don't stop infections and surges. It's that after you remove it, there's no difference. But they
00:38:36.520
never go back and update the story or update that, you know, the people on Twitter and never go back
00:38:40.840
and say, actually, we got this one wrong. Removing the mask mandate didn't have any negative side
00:38:44.660
effects. It's maddening, Ian. It's maddening. And I know it is to you, too, because you deal with this
00:38:49.640
data all day long. And you see just how honestly not to be rude, but just stupid people are about this.
00:38:56.980
People are very stupid about this. And it's kind of disheartening. But I think that you've probably
00:39:01.360
probably changed more mind than you realize just by doing a simple thing of compiling data. And I'm
00:39:06.800
thankful for that. Can you tell everyone a little bit more about your book? What can they expect in
00:39:11.400
reading it? Well, thank you. First of all, it's very kind. But the idea behind the book was to show
00:39:18.460
and I kind of mentioned this earlier, show what was the evidence before COVID on mask mandates and
00:39:23.300
or masking, I should say. And then what happened afterwards? Like what was the new once they
00:39:28.100
decided to say where everybody should wear a mask? What was the guidance on what we should expect to
00:39:32.280
happen from from wearing masks in the general population? And then present the data of what
00:39:36.700
were the results afterwards? And you can show that by looking countries like Sweden, where nobody wore
00:39:40.480
masks. So I highlight them significantly. I showed all of the U.S. states, a lot of international
00:39:46.500
locations as well, where, you know, it's one thing to say, oh, it hasn't worked in the U.S. because
00:39:50.340
like a lot of people will say, oh, people weren't wearing masks. That's the reason it didn't work.
00:39:53.600
But when you go back and look at all these different locations, United Kingdom and France
00:39:58.220
and Italy and Spain, et cetera, you know, it's impossible to say that no one was wearing masks
00:40:02.540
there either. So especially because the enforcement in some of these areas was incredibly strict and
00:40:07.640
fines were very severe and police enforcement. So that was the goal to try to show, you know,
00:40:12.740
tell the story of like, what was science pre-COVID? What were the expectations? And then did the
00:40:16.880
results match the expectations? And I don't want to give away too many spoilers, but the results don't
00:40:21.300
line up with the expectations. Yeah. Wow. Well, thanks for the work that you do. And thanks for
00:40:25.920
working on this book. It's a bestseller on Amazon, which is really exciting. I think it just shows.
00:40:33.200
And there have been a lot of books like this that have told the other side of COVID. People are really
00:40:37.100
hungry for what's true. They're tired of the propaganda and they want to see the true side of it,
00:40:43.480
the other side of it. And so congratulations on that. I hope you sell lots and lots of books and
00:40:49.820
thank you for taking the time to come on the show and talk to us. Well, thank you very much. Thanks
00:40:55.340
very much for having me. Thank you. All right, guys, hope that you enjoyed that episode. Remember
00:41:05.260
tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow is my birthday. Today is my last day of being 29. Let me tell you just
00:41:14.960
like a really quick story about 29. So when I, and this is just so like you, I know whenever I meet
00:41:22.000
you guys, one thing that you say is I feel like I know you, I feel like we're friends. So, and I feel
00:41:26.580
that way too. So this probably isn't going to surprise you. When I was in first grade, we had like a local
00:41:32.420
news organization, like a local news station that we were visiting as, um, at a field trip. And one
00:41:40.020
of the anchors, I don't know how old she was, maybe like 45. Um, but it was her birthday. And so our
00:41:45.820
first grade class, we were all supposed to like write her cards. And I guess I had heard this. This
00:41:51.600
is what happens when you have like older siblings and you watch the things that they watch you, you know
00:41:57.120
things and you like no phrases, or, you know, things that people say that probably other six
00:42:02.280
and seven year olds don't. So the card that I wrote this woman that I don't know that she actually read
00:42:08.160
on air, or maybe I can find the tape somewhere. I said, I said, dear so-and-so happy birthday,
00:42:14.980
you 29 year old again. Why did I say that as a six year old, as a first grader, for some reason,
00:42:21.200
I just knew that when people get old, that they always want to say that they're 29 for a really long
00:42:26.500
time. Maybe that's what I'll do. Maybe I'll just continue saying I'm 29 forever. Not really.
00:42:31.900
I'm excited about turning 30 kind of, but I'm definitely going to milk it for the rest of the
00:42:36.700
day that I'm just in my late twenties. So for my 30th birthday tomorrow, it's going to be a bonus
00:42:42.120
episode. Make sure that you tune into that. It'll be out at the regular times. It'll be really fun.
00:42:46.960
We're going to listen to some voicemails from people giving some advice for twenties and thirties,
00:42:51.700
and I'm going to be doing the same thing. It's just going to be a really fun and reflective
00:42:55.660
and hopefully practical and maybe funny episode. And I'm excited about it. So make sure that you
00:43:03.640
tune in for that tomorrow. And also be sure to donate an item in my honor for my birthday. If
00:43:11.160
you want to know what you can do for me for my birthday, you can donate an item to Prestonwood
00:43:16.840
Pregnancy Center. It's a pregnancy center. It's a pro-life pregnancy center serving women and families
00:43:21.660
in crisis in Texas and they need baby items. And we've got an Amazon registry for them
00:43:29.260
in the description of this episode. Just click on that, donate what you can. It would be super
00:43:34.240
helpful. It's a way for us pro-lifers to put our money where our mouth is. So make sure that you do
00:43:38.880
that. And I will see you back here tomorrow on my 30th birthday.