Regarding Wayne Medley’s letter in The News-Review on April 20, Mr. Medley used scientism to describe Dr Fauci’s medical education, knowledge of science, and experience in the field to belittle the Dr. Scientism has come to mean an exaggerated belief or trust in the efficacy of the method of natural science. It originally defined the best or only way to objectively define normal and epistemological values.

The operative word here is epistemology. It is one of four tenants of philosophy. Epistemology tries to differentiate areas of justified knowledge vs fictional knowledge. The inability to verify existence by science is the divisional line between fact and opinion. The observation of faith and the existence of god is a fictional knowledge based on opinion. Science is the ability to prove theory by replication of the methods citied to achieve the same result is justifiable knowledge.

That Wayne Medley belittled Dr. Fauci and science based on opinion with fictional knowledge lends credence to said argument. The misleading use of scientism and epistemology distracts from proven knowledge of COVID-19. The conservative opinion of gods existence is used to rationalization disregard of medical science, ignore requests to wear masks, avoid large gatherings, and social distance to decrease infection rates is an exaggerated belief of religious opinion. COVID-19 has the highest fatality rate in a century. My epistemological opinion is that ignorance towards science and religious opposition to COVID-19 precautions exacerbated the pandemic. This is to be proven until then it is my fictional opinion.

Robert Wayne Cooper

Roseburg

React to this story:

12
1
0
0
0

Recommended for you

(15) comments

mworden

I consulted Professor Google and asked, "Who's spreading the rumor that masks don't work"

Main culprit: Tucker Carlson, on and off over the months

He has taken data that he misrepresented and/or misinterpreted and come to the conclusion that science says no masks. He's wrong.

There have been several studies that can be misconstrued. One showed that just giving people masks is not enough. Another showed that going to a restaurant or bar wearing a mask is not very protective because people take the masks off to eat and drink.

So, friends, if you're getting your info from Tucker Carlson and believing it -- you poor things -- I will weep for you. You do know the court ruled that no reasonable person would believe Tucker; therefore, he could not be sued for defamation. Tucker is a parody of journalism, like Jost and Che on SNL. According to the court, you're not supposed to take what he says seriously. (personal opinion: that judge!!!)

From the news: U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "

She wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."

https://www.npr.org/2020/09/29/917747123/you-literally-cant-believe-the-facts-tucker-carlson-tells-you-so-say-fox-s-lawye

NJ

Seems like Tucker is being used as a defense. Surely he'll figure out a way to make money off this: https://www.complex.com/life/lawyer-capitol-rioter-claims-client-had-foxitis-foxmania-from-watching-fox-news

mworden

gearheadgeek 1969,

Will you please share with us where you got the incorrect information about mask-wearing? A while back, someone else posted similar info. It appears that someone out there is maliciously spreading false info that could cause great harm and de-stabilize efforts to get American life back to normal. Is this coming from a news network, a chat group, FB or some other social media platform? This is really important. You are not the first person who came across this false info, believed it and shared it. It might be good for us to track it down and look at what else they're saying. Thanks.

gearheadgeek1969

Current scientific data based on almost two years of study DOES show that mask use has had a ZERO effect on the spread of the COVID-19 virus. That is a fact, not an opinion. Statistical analysis backs up that claim as well. Toss your mask as you will get sick either way if exposed, unless, of course, you have natural or vaccine-generated antibodies and you don't get sick. Kind of like the flu, and lots other dread diseases.

mworden

gearheadgeek, your information is completely false and wrong. Current scientific data show that masks can reduce transmission by 70%.

The following information is from the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA,) Feb 10, 2021. I'm going to quote heavily from the study because the assertion that masks have zero effect on the spread of covid can lead to deaths.

From JAMA: Prior to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the efficacy of community mask wearing to reduce the spread of respiratory infections was controversial because there were no solid relevant data to support their use.

During the pandemic, the scientific evidence has increased. Compelling data now demonstrate that community mask wearing is an effective nonpharmacologic intervention to reduce the spread of this infection, especially as source control to prevent spread from infected persons, but also as protection to reduce wearers’ exposure to infection...

Community mask wearing substantially reduces transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 2 ways.

First, masks prevent infected persons from exposing others to SARS-CoV-2 by blocking exhalation of virus-containing droplets into the air (termed source control). This aspect of mask wearing is especially important because it is estimated that at least 50% or more of transmissions are from persons who never develop symptoms or those who are in the presymptomatic phase of COVID-19 illness.1 In recent laboratory experiments, multilayer cloth masks were more effective than single-layer masks, blocking as much as 50% to 70% of exhaled small droplets and particles.2,3 In some cases, cloth masks have performed similar to surgical or procedure masks for source control.

Second, masks protect uninfected wearers. Masks form a barrier to large respiratory droplets that could land on exposed mucous membranes of the eye, nose, and mouth. Masks can also partially filter out small droplets and particles from inhaled air. Multiple layers of fabric and fabrics with higher thread counts improve filtration...

During a COVID-19 outbreak on the USS Theodore Roosevelt, persons who wore masks experienced a 70% lower risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection.4 Similar reductions have been reported in case contact investigations when contacts were masked5 and in household clusters in which household members were masked...

With the emergence of more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variants, it is even more important to adopt widespread mask wearing as well as to redouble efforts with use of all other nonpharmaceutical prevention measures until effective levels of vaccination are achieved nationally.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536

NJ

[thumbup]

CitizenJoe

mworden: you are right, and very, very patient.

NJ

I see your Statistical Analysis and raise with Scientific Analysis: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536

mworden

[smile]

CitizenJoe

gearheadgeek: well, I tried replying to you in a more pithy manner that did mworden, but the NRT says, "Your comment cannot be accepted due to the presence of profanity. Please remove any objectionable content from your comment and try again."

So, gearheadgeek, here is my emended response

:

Wretched722

If you have had the virus and recovered, you are immune and do not need the vaccine. Rand Paul has spoken of this many times, and he is a doctor, too.

CitizenJoe

Rise, immunity conferred by infection with the SARS-CoV-2 is less reliable, shorter lasting, and often less protective against other mutants (especially in Brazil recently) than are the mRNA vaccines in the U.S.

In the words of researchers who know a boatload more than does Rand Paul, "...natural protection, especially among older people, cannot be relied on."

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00575-4/fulltext

I would suggest you go to Google Scholar to learn more.

NJ

How irresponsible of you to not post a link to the rambling politician himself. I wonder if your glasses steamed up when you started to read the comments of how people felt about it: https://youtu.be/L_bogzQ-K0U [rolleyes]

mysteron

Rand Paul is an eye doctor, not a virologist. this is the same stupid and ignorant logic used to deny climate change because the local zoologist (a 'scientist') said so. Next time I need a brain surgeon I'll ask my local GP to do the surgery. They're all 'doctors' aren't they?

dejadoodoo

"The conservative opinion of Gods existence is used to rationalization disregard of medical science, ignore requests to wear masks, avoid large gatherings, and social distance to decrease infection rates is an exaggerated belief of religious opinion."

I'm a little surprised that you didn't include refusal to get vaccinated. I haven't heard anyone say that God came down with a new commandment of "Thou shalt not be immunized", in fact, I'd call it being Christian. Get the shots -- be part of the solution!

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.