In this monologue from The Dennis Prager Show, host Dennis Prager critiques a New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) perspective article that stated masks worn outside healthcare facilities offer little or no protection. Prager notes that the authors later issued a clarification claiming the original intent was to encourage more masking, not less, and argues this was a politically motivated reversal to appease the left. He emphasizes that the NEJM statement was meant to apply only to brief, passing encounters in public spaces, which he believes render masks ineffective outdoors. Prager further highlights the journal’s distinction that masks may help during sustained indoor interactions lasting 10–30 minutes. He accuses the scientists of lying under political pressure, asserts that asymptomatic carriers drive transmission, and concludes that he personally does not wear masks outdoors because they are useless. The segment ends with a promotional plug for the show.
Chapters
On the internet, there— when the New England Journal of Medicine article is cited where the doctors said wearing a mask outside healthcare facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection— New England Journal of Medicine— so there are people say, 'Ah, you're not telling the truth, the whole truth,' because they wrote a letter to the New England Journal of Medicine afterwards. Did you see that? I saw it. I, I was totally aware of it. And it, uh, it does nothing to undo what they said. They got, they got spooked. The left got to them. You can't let people think that masks are useless, you scientists in the New England Journal of Medicine. So they write, we understand that some people are citing our perspective article published on April 1st at newenglandjournalofmedicine.org as support for discrediting widespread masking. In truth, the intent of our article was to push for more masking, not less. It's not true at all. It's completely not true. They just don't want to be attacked by the left, so you lie. It is apparent that many people with SARS-CoV-2 infection are asymptomatic or presymptomatic yet highly contagious, and that these people account for a substantial fraction of all transmissions. Universal masking helps to prevent such people from spreading virus-laden secretions, whether they recognize that they are infected or not. We did state in the article that, quote, wearing a mask outside healthcare facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. So I will continue reading. So what the— if you were to take these doctors at their word, they have undone the point of the article. They should just say, we were wrong. But, but they weren't wrong. Okay, we did state that wearing a mask outside healthcare facilities offers little if any protection from infection, but as the rest of the paragraph makes clear— now listen carefully. We intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces. That's why I don't wear them out outside, because they're useless. That's exactly what the doctors have reinforced with their clarification letter. We intend— that we intended this statement to apply to passing encounters in public spaces. And you ready? Even in enclosed spaces, passing encounters do not count. Because they write, 'Not sustained interactions within closed environments.' That is right, sustained. And they said what sustained was? 10 to 30 minutes. If you are very close to somebody for 10 to 30 minutes face to face, then a mask might help indoors. Indoors. Just wanted you to know that. And yet people cite the letter as if it somehow negates their entire point. We live in the world of the lie. 1-800-PRAGER-776. The Dennis Prager Show, live from the Relief Factor Pain-Free Studio.
