PETER HITCHENS: If masks are pointless, will I get an apology?

The research is in. Wearing bits of cloth over your mouth and nose is almost certainly pointless, unless you are a bank robber trying to hide his ­identity. 

The news comes from a Cochrane Review, one of the most reliable and thorough forms of ­scientific research.

The review, which focused on masks and hand-washing, looked at evidence from 78 randomised trials with more than 610,000 participants. 

It found that wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to influenza-like or Covid-19-like illness transmission.

This is no great surprise. Before the great panic plunged the world into isolation, house arrest and inflation three years ago, the expert view was that face-coverings were of little help in protecting against the spread of viruses. 

The research is in. It found that wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to influenza-like or Covid-19-like illness transmission.

Government documents of the time said so, as did the World Health Organisation (WHO). A BBC medical reporter found that the WHO later reversed its view on the subject for political and not medical reasons.

Somebody somewhere thought that mass mask-wearing, enforced by law, would help maintain an atmosphere of permanent worry and conformism.

In September 2020, Australian police in Melbourne were photographed placing cloth strips over the faces of arrested, handcuffed demonstrators, as if to emphasise the repressive nature of the measure. 

As a document from the Government’s own Sage advisory body said on March 22, 2020: ‘A substantial number of ­people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened.’ 

It added: ‘The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging.’

Still no justice for victims of the Post Office scandal

Post Office victim Francis Duff, 80, has had most of his compensation clawed back in tax and bankruptcy proceedings

And still the people whose lives were ruined by a Post Office computer malfunction – which nobody would admit – cannot get justice. 

Francis Duff, 80, has had most of his compensation for the gross injustice he suffered clawed back in tax and bankruptcy proceedings. 

Is there nobody with a sense of justice in government, who can ensure that these unforgivably persecuted individuals can at least live their last few years in serenity and security?

Contrast the unfair treatment of these innocents with the uncontrolled, barely monitored spending by officials and MPs awarded government credit cards.

Well, that was then. There was plenty of evidence that this was all mistaken at the time, which I tried to bring to my readers. But others, including The Mail on Sunday’s

Dr Ellie Cannon, honestly believed that mask-wearing was a good thing. And this paper quite rightly gave a platform to both views. 

But the Cochrane Review is so powerful that Dr Cannon recently wrote in her column: ‘I was very firmly in favour of them especially in healthcare settings, but now it seems we might finally have a definitive answer. 

‘Following a review of 80 international studies, the conclusion reached is that, yes, facemasks are pointless. Probably.’

It took a good deal of guts for her to say that. And I applaud her. 

But a lot of other people still need to climb down, especially the hospitals, GP and dental surgeries, opticians and workplaces where mask-wearing is still encouraged, and naked faces are frowned upon. 

I would personally hope for a sign of contrition from the Independent Press Stan­dards Organisation, which in 2021 censured me for saying a major study had found masks to be useless. 

This was an obvious piece of comment, not a news report. 

And it was my firmly held opinion. Nonetheless, IPSO forced this newspaper to publish a correction.

The irony of this was that I was also the author of one of the very few accurate accounts of the Danish Mask Study, which had come to much the same conclusion as the Cochrane Review, only a lot earlier.

The panic is over. Those who went too far in so many ways have a lot of confessing and apologising to do. 

So, if you wish to cover your face, it’s your business, and please recognise that the rest of us are just as entitled to refrain from doing so.

Even Zelensky doubted Russia would attack 

A year ago, I did not know that Russia was going to invade Ukraine. Nor, in my view, did ­anyone else apart from Vladimir Putin himself.

I thought and said and believed that Putin would be mad to do such a thing, and now think that he was mad to do so.

As well as being cruel and lawless, the invasion is a disaster for Russia from which it may never recover. 

They should note that one of the main doubters of Vladimir Putin invading was President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine

But a certain type of person nowadays likes to pretend that everyone knew the ­invasion was a certainty, and that even to doubt it was some sort of thought crime.

They should note that one of the main doubters was President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. 

On February 12 and 13, 2022, news media reported that the much-admired leader was far from convinced that an invasion was coming. 

For instance: ‘Mr Zelensky also cast doubts on US reports of an imminent invasion, requesting, “If anyone has any additional information about a 100 per cent chance of an invasion, give it to us.”‘ 

And Ukrainian president Volod­ymyr Zelensky also called on Washington to share intelligence which suggests Russia is planning to invade his country on Wednesday. 

He told the US, “If you have 100 per cent certain information about a Russian ­invasion of Ukraine, please share it with us.” ‘

The famed Ukrainian novelist and patriot Andrey Kurkov wrote from Kiev at the same time about how ‘Zelensky again reassured Ukrainians and said that everything was under control. 

‘He has repeatedly accused Western politicians of exaggerating the danger of a Russian attack’. 

Quite reas­onable, in my view. Intelligence claims just aren’t always right.

At last…a film that tells the painful truth about divorce 

Steven Spielberg has made enough successful, profitable films to risk making a dangerous one. 

The Fabelmans, illuminated by the beauty of Michelle Williams, left, and full of great music, will upset a lot of people. 

It is pretty much Spielberg’s autobiography up to the age of 18. And, as far as I can recall, it is the only major Hollywood film to show just how painful and miserable a marriage break-up is for the children of parents who split up.

The modern world likes to pretend that divorce is fine and the children cope perfectly well and no damage is done. 

But this is very often a huge lie, and it is shown here as a lie. It is about time, but it will not be popular.

It is also a clever re-creation of the feeling of much of that strange era, which stretched from the mid-1950s to the end of the 1960s – the once-overarching power of the movies as the most potent art form we had ever seen, Davy Crockett hats, suburban luxury (as it then seemed to be) and then the disturbing sound of the new music that would sweep away almost everything we had known.

Steven Spielberg’s The Fabelmans, illuminated by the beauty of Michelle Williams, left, as far as I can recall, is the only major Hollywood film to show just how painful and miserable a marriage break-up is for the children of parents who split up

How clever to choose the nonsensical lyrics of Da Doo Ron Ron (the work of the crazed Phil Spector) to herald the end of the young Spielberg’s domestic security. 

Yes, it was all very thrilling and the sound of it still wafts me back to impossibly distant summer evenings. 

But after it was over, it left a lot of pain behind it.

If you want to comment on Peter Hitchens click here 

Source: Read Full Article