It turns out that Hydroxychloroquine is kind of meh. But that's not the most relevant, most important part to think about. It's how the media covered this issue that needs to be talked about.

When the very first person said “Vitamin D helps” and “Hydroxychloroquine is a miracle cure” and “masks don’t work”, that became the red letter, unchangeable, holy truth to the masses.

Facts:

    - Medical professionals are the ones who *started* talking about Hydroxychloroquine.
    - This issue became *highly politicized* with the media taking a very one-sided stance, even using hysterical 
      comparisons to "goat urine" in one case.
    - Efficacy of HCQ was correlated to very early dosing along with zinc. This was seldom covered in the press and
      was never mentioned in mainstream articles and analyses of results.
    - Studies which were widely criticized were mentioned time and again by the press, simply because it fit their chosen narrative

Just go and look at the numbers coming out of HCQ studies. This issue was nowhere near as one-sided as it was portrayed in the mainstream press. Go look at the numbers coming out of HCQ studies and compare them to Remdesivir, then go and compare the coverage of each. (That one goes to the level of WAT!?) Examine articles and coverage for emotional manipulation. The western press looks extremely fishy in this regard.

Again, it turns out that HCQ is kind of meh. Ivermectin does seem to be quite good, however. But of greatest importance, is how did the press acquit themselves in their coverage? It seems clear to me, that they care more about "saying the right thing" and following a narrative, and "it bleeds, it leads" than they care about providing accurate, unbiased information.

Science should not be politicized. Right now, our press is basically at the level of Lysenkoism. Ideologically motivated science coverage is what is preferred.

Very true. I see it very often.

But it also applies to the medical community.

Belief "Hydroxychloroquine does not work" is based on WHO Solidarity study where late stage patients were poisoned with high dosage hydroxychloroquine while a lot of research suggests that it may have positive effect on early treatment with low dosages.

The same applies to Ivermectin for example. There was one double-blind study in JAMA journal that was not able to display any effect. It has been also concluded by the medical community that Ivermectin does not help. Nobody appears to have seen the rebuttal that displays serious protocol failures of the study and highly likely placebo unblinding (placebo had different taste and Ivermectin was available over the counter and was advertised heavily as covid-cure in the region).

Other research (5 double-blind studies, about 400 participants in total) suggests that it has effect against SARS-COV-2 level in the body).

Is your mind open to accepting masks weren't that effective slowing covid-19?

I trust science will ultimately give us some answers. But it's going to take some time.

This post doesn't seem to be made in good faith.

> Is your mind open to accepting masks weren't that effective slowing covid-19?

There is a wealth of evidence[0] [1] [2] to confirm that masks are effective at reducing the spread of covid. Ignoring evidence does not mean you have an open mind. I would even argue it means the latter.

[0] https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118#sec-22

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...

[2] https://health.clevelandclinic.org/new-study-highlights-new-...

The truth might be more complicated that this. Masks are good against larger droplets but may be not effective in badly ventilated room. The best effect I have seen in practice is masks + very good ventilation.

What are you basing that on, the data mostly points the other direction.

So far just the observation that populations that tended to wear masks still saw high rates of infection and other cold viruses didn't seem to have the same drastic drop that flu did https://syndromictrends.com/metric/panel/rp/percent_positivi....

I'm not trying to make any claims. No harm in wearing a mask and everyone should be wearing one.

They may not have slowed covid-19 but they appear to have been effective against numerous other illnesses ( influenza, colds, etc.)

Replying to myself to add, which may have dramatically helped keep other hospitalizations and doctor visits lower allowing providers to focus on Covid-19.

When they said "masks don't work", that was a lie. It was an obvious lie.

Would you rather a sick person coughs and sneezes on you (a) with a mask; or (b) maybe on their hand or elbow if they react fast enough?

The more important question is would you trust the mask the sick person is wearing is protecting you if you are standing near that person.

Why is that the most important question? To me, the fact that experts are lying to me is more important.

I like science. I wish I could trust it to be presented honestly and fairly. But I can't, so I have to fill in some gaps, do some sanity checks, and read a few studies. That doesn't make me an expert, but it's the best I can do with limited time in a dishonest environment.

I really don’t care if it was a lie, or if it was incomplete knowledge, or if it was just the best the authorities could offer at the moment. I’m a layman. I know nothing about infectious diseases. I’m gonna follow the guidance from the experts. If that guidance changes 180 degrees tomorrow, then I’ll follow the new guidance. I don’t know what makes sense, I’m a layman! So many people are incapable of just listening to the experts and shutting their pie holes. Everyone with a YouTube account suddenly is an epidemiologist now, and advising their friend list on Facebook.

I am not. Therefore it is good to have clear rules in public indoor places, for example measured lines before counters in the supermarket, limit on visitors inside etc. But I am relaxed when passing people and I do not get anxious when they temporarily get close to me to pick something from the shelves.

Comparing to a sick person who doesn't wear mask?

Yes, a sick person wearing bad mask is still better.