Jacob Hale Russell & Dennis Patterson: "The Mask Debacle"

This:

   In what may be the longest-lasting ramification of our flawed national discussion about masks, the opportunity to do good science was lost. Indeed, Stanford scientist and Tablet contributor John Ioannidis’ much-misrepresented warning that our response to COVID might be a fiasco because of insufficient data may prove one of the few accurate predictions of the pandemic. There was no appetite to do randomized control trials of masking, the gold standard for evidence and which were badly needed to evaluate when and how masks should be used. Unfortunately, proponents of masking proclaimed almost immediately that masks were so obviously useful that it would be unethical to study masking. Even if it were ethical, there was no room in academia for discussions. Who, after all, would study something that was known to be a panacea—and who would want to come to a “pro-Trump” finding? As a consequence, we have learned very little about when, how, or which masking policies are beneficial to help us respond to a future respiratory disease outbreak.
   Some say it is unfair to criticize public health for messaging flip-flops—whether about cloth masks, herd immunity, natural immunity, or the vaccines’ effects on transmissibility—because they were just “following the science” as it changed. But in many cases, what evolved was politics, not science. The critics of public health messaging do not begrudge scientific progress—indeed, most of them want more research. Rather, people are upset by unjustified dogmatic certainty in one direction, followed by an immediate swoop to utter confidence in the opposite course of action. The pandemic produced a headfirst leap into a series of unprecedented interventions, from masks to lockdowns to school closures. In the first weeks of the pandemic, speed was necessary, and mistakes were inevitable. What was not necessary or inevitable was the suppression of healthy skepticism and discussion.

   This is one of the few things I predict our university administration will be more rational about than the faculty. I'll bet the administration feels at least some pressure to drop our mask mandate (which I flaunt at just about every opportunity)--whereas the faculty are religiously devoted to it, as they are to everything progressive. The administration wants the students to be happy--or so I'll bet. Unfortunately we've pegged our mandate to the politicized CDC recommendations...but at least it's going to be hard for them to keep it if the CDC relevantly changes its recommendation. So that's something anyway. I predict the faculty will shriek if/when we drop it--I predict there'll be hysterical demands that everyone keep "masking" (stupid f*cking word) anyway. Which means I'll relish not wearing one even more. I already wear a fake one--it's specifically made to not impede your breathing. That is: it's fake by design.