#638 Musings Beyond the Bunker (Wednesday April 19)
Good morning,
And welcome to the ongoing debate of any subject, reduced to a debate not on the merits, but on the political positions of the antagonists. Here are two examples…
JANUARY 6 DENIAL
Of course the “big debate” on how the January 6th insurrectionist riot at the Capitol would be subject to debate. The revisionist history maintains that (a) there was no organized effort (disproved by the testimony of Proud Boys and Oath Takers were were doing precisely that), (b) nobody really was harmed, other than an “unarmed” protester (of course, disproven by videotape, the January 6th Committee’s exhaustive recreation of events, interviews, and hospital records), (c) Trump did not instigate the events (contrary to news reports of him riling up his troops), (d) people weren’t in danger (despite the calls of “Hang Pence,” the presence of zip ties used to restrain people, and the fear expressed by many of those in the Capitol that day), and (e) Trump was innocent of wrongdoing (despite propounding false narratives of the election, which his advisors confirmed were false, and the repeated unanswered attempts to get Trump to ask his supporters to stand down).
It is extraordinary that good people continue to defend Trump and refuse to acknowledge not only the physical threat to our Capitol and our elected representatives, but how close we came to the failure of our democracy.
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MASKS
There is a narrative out there that seeks to deride the medical professionals and those who supported masking in public places. This drumbeat blames the nanny-state, deep-state liberals (with some nefarious motives yet to be satisfactorily articulated), despite the Trump administration’s support of masking once COVID became a public health crisis. In support of this narrative, the anti-maskers seized upon a study published by Cochrane, a respected scientific nonprofit from the U.K.
This single report has become the darling of those who seek to make the illogical claim that a high-quality mask designed to reduce aerosols from entering the body do absolutely no good.
The findings of Cochrane was that, based upon a review of specific studies, it was as “uncertain whether wearing masks or N95/P2 respirators helps to slow the spread of respiratory viruses.” Since then, the Cochrane folks have back-peddled in the face of misinterpretation of their conclusion.
From an article in The New York Times:
“Many commentators have claimed that a recently updated Cochrane review shows that ‘masks don’t work,’ which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation,” Karla Soares-Weiser, the editor in chief of the Cochrane Library, said in a statement.
“The review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses,” Soares-Weiser said, adding, “Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask wearing itself reduces people’s risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses.” [emphasis added]
She said that “this wording was open to misinterpretation, for which we apologize,” and that Cochrane would revise the summary.
Soares-Weiser also said, though, that one of the lead authors of the review even more seriously misinterpreted its finding on masks by saying in an interview that it proved “there is just no evidence that they make any difference.” In fact, Soares-Weiser said, “that statement is not an accurate representation of what the review found.”
The article goes on to point out the insufficiency of the studies—in number, in statistical sample, in implementation, and in reporting.
What’s the result? Masks are but a tool. Perhaps their mandates went on for too long and in too many circumstances. But they are real and they work. And if you don’t think they do, try to convince your surgeon when you are on the operating table that you’d rather the surgical team go maskless, just to prove your hypothesis.
The politicization of masks continues, when what we should be doing is preparing for the next pandemic or other public health emergency.
THE VALUE OF COLLEGE
The value of college is in dispute these days. Some see college as a trade school. Others see it as a place to make connections. Some think college teaches kids to write or deal with numbers. As to this last claim, I think one either learns to write or work with math from high school—college is simply about stretching those muscles and applying these skills. Many think it isn’t “worth it.” But to understand the worth, one must agree on its primary purpose. I’m not sure it’s the best job in venture capital. It is to make the best of life that lies ahead.
The reason for college is to appreciate new ideas, learn critical thinking and be exposed to the culture and beauty of the world. College, in its most noble sense, is about expanding as a human being and standing witness to history and thought and things one never otherwise would have contemplated. In the words of a friend:
“I don’t know where you stand about this new college/no college discussion, but I do enjoy my mind, in my old age here, full of the bells and whistles and trills of higher education in the humanities/liberal arts, circa 1961-65 — with all its lingering, living bits of poetry and foreign languages and names of places…”
And this is the fraternity to which college graduates should belong—not one of a rigid orthodoxy that does not give quarter to debate, which denies the right to speak—but one of appreciating better the wonders of the world (both natural and manmade) and sharing that wonder with those around us.
Have a great day,
Glenn
From the archives: