Throughout the pandemic, which has now shifted to endemic, I’ve never heard of this doctor. But, he makes a rather interesting admission while whining about the judge killing off the transportation mandate
Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy
Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, called the recent ruling by a Florida judge striking down the federal mask mandate on mass transit “a real challenge.”
“This is not going to be the last of the need for public health measures we’ve taken for any crisis,” Osterholm told “This Week” Co-Anchor Martha Raddatz exclusively on Sunday. “And what could be the crisis of tomorrow?”
You know what? The government shouldn’t exceed it’s authority. Agencies shouldn’t exceed their authority. They shouldn’t be dictating mandates based on whim because they like the power. Should not be exceeding any emergency powers granted to them
The Transportation Security Administration announced last week that the travel mask requirement will no longer be enforced by the agency since the mandate was struck down. But the Department of Justice is appealing the decision after the Center for Disease Control weighed in.
“On precedence, this case is very, very important,” Osterholm added. “I think the confusion around the mask mandate itself and how effective it is, is a secondary issue, but one that is still important, too.”
Now, that’s an interesting admission. Whether forcing people to wear masks actually works? A hell of a thing. Obviously, they barely make a difference, since we saw huge spikes in cases, higher than during the initial 2020 spike, from Delta and Omicron, despite a good portion of the country forced to mask up, even with so many people getting the vaccine. Also remember, the same people were saying that if you got the vaccine you got your life back, but, they still mandated that the vaccinated wear masks.
If effectiveness is secondary, what’s the primary issue? That would have been a damned good question to ask Osterholm.
“Well, it is off. First of all, let me be really clear, I am very, very strongly in support of a respiratory protection,” he said. “Someone can do a great deal to protect themselves and protect others if they’re using an N95 respirator. But this virus is transferred by what we call aerosols. It’s very fine particles that float into the air. It’s like smoke. It’s like perfume. And you have to have a high-quality respiratory protection device to protect yourself.”
“I think that what we want to do is stop talking about masking and talking about effective respiratory protection,” Osterholm added.
“And how do you do that?” Raddatz asked.
“First of all, the U.S. public is done with the pandemic, even though the virus is not done with us,” Osterholm responded. “And we have to recognize that in public health.”
Yeah, most of us are done with it, except for some of the COVID cultists, who wear their masks in the car and such. You know what was really off? Telling people to wear a mask to protect other people, rather than to protect themselves. Nothing like some good old me me me to push people to do something. They are not going to get people to put on N95’s and such at this point voluntarily, and good luck imposing more mandates.
Despite his objections to cloth masks, Osterholm still strongly recommends the use of N95 respirators, “particularly if you’re an immune-compromised individual.”
“If everybody can do that, they would keep in on to the duration of a flight, not wear it underneath their nose, then that would be a very effective way to have a mandate,” Osterholm said.
Yeah, that sounds like the same old type of mandate, while requiring specific masks. Have you ever read a story where there was a big outbreak from a flight? Any? If they’re saying cloth masks really do not work, you would have thought there would be an outbreak. Or on buses. Or trains.
A mandate works if it is smart. Remember how it all went? First it was “don’t wear a mask unless you’re sick,” because the Powers That Be wanted to make sure medical professionals had them early on, even though those blue doctors masks would make no difference. And, really, if you’re sick, you should stay home. Then it was “wear a mask if you’re out and will be in close contact with people.” That same mandate also required masks inside except when you weren’t close to other people. That made sense. If I’m sitting well over 6 feet away from people, why do I need a mask? Then we got “wear a mask at all times inside. Period.” That was dumb. Especially when people had the antibodies/full vaccination.
Despite rising caseloads, hospitalizations stemming from the virus are still at all-time lows nationwide, something Osterholm called “good news.”
“But I want to emphasize that could all change tomorrow, and that’s what the public is not willing to hear,” he added. “They want this to be over.”
And if the CDC/government wants to do something, then they need to go through proper channels and explain this to the Citizens government works for, not dictate because they want to. We remember the hysteria and idiocy from the pandemic, like Gov Gretchen Whitmer stopping the sales of paint and seeds for the garden.
Again, if the effectiveness of masks is secondary, what’s the primary concern?
Read: Confusion On Whether Mask Mandate Is Effective Is Secondary Concern, You Know »
It’s all rather disturbing and yet somehow fitting in these doublespeak-steeped times.
When it comes to climate change, Connecticut has set ambitious goals. In 2008, we passed the 
A climate activist who 
In an economy that’s seeing both surging growth and debilitating inflation, Democrats and Republicans are telling very different stories about the overall economic picture ahead of midterm elections later this year.
