Back To Top
Image Alt

Flight Speed

Flight Speed

This morning a very popular and professional local radio host commented that there was an article, he was told, in the New England Journal of Medicine, pointing out that masks were not an effective preventive for the coronavirus.

Before posting this on any of my platforms, I thought I’d better check out the source.

The NEJM in fact said that masks were not needed for “casually passing by others” but that in crowds and contained environments masks were every efficacious in preventing disease transmission.

I’m glad I checked the original source. The radio host had been misinformed and I promptly dropped him a note, because he’ve very careful about factual reporting.

Never rely on a secondary source in your work. Find the original. In this age of technology, it’s not difficult.

The trouble is that rumors have more powerful engines than facts, and tend to fly faster.

Written by

Alan Weiss is a consultant, speaker, and author of over 60 books. His consulting firm, Summit Consulting Group, Inc., has attracted clients from over 500 leading organizations around the world.

Comments: 4

  • Tom Smith

    June 10, 2020

    I believe the radio host you refer to is closer to the truth than you Alan, but reasonable people are to be found on both sides of this issue.

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/06/jon-rappoport/to-citizens-wearing-medical-masks-youre-whacko-conspiracy-theorists/

    If you choose to wear a mask, then you’ll get no argument from me… as it should be your choice.

    It’s important to understand though, that the mask hysteria is just a tactic.

    The concept is that you should unquestionably obey government approved narratives disseminated via the dominant media.

    The ultimate objective is to eliminate liberty/choice and replace it with tyranny/obedience.

    It’s important to see the big picture when discussing concrete issues, it adds the necessary context.

  • Tom Smith

    June 10, 2020

    If you want to argue the facts and/or dispute the sources, then please do so Alan.

    If you want to make statements that are non-falsifiable in order to blank out the truth or stifle discussion, then that’s a problem.

    In fact, that’s a huge problem in this country right now.

    Maybe I’m wrong about what you really meant, so please explain what it would take to falsify your “conspiracy theory/paranoia” hypothesis?

    If you can’t do that, then you are not advancing a hypothesis; you are advancing an article of faith.

    As you well-know it’s difficult to convince anyone of anything if they are not open to reason.

    Especially so if it questions their long term beliefs or their long-held worldview.

    As Mark Twain might have said, ‘It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.’

    Don’t you agree?

Post a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.