It’s not enough for puritanical, anti-constitutional politicians and their bureaucrat acolytes in the COVID Cult to engage in fear-porn pantomime.
It’s not enough to see millions kept from their professions, loved ones, and preferred hobbies.
The pop media divisions of the Cult have been sure to assiduously avoid reality, and to suppress information that undercuts their inflated “pandemic” narrative...
...and to ignore a study of the big winter football extravaganzas, showing that -- contrary to the fearmongers’ unfounded “sky-will-fall” warnings – gatherings for the games did not cause a spike in COVID19 cases.
Don’t bother trying to find coverage of this on MSNBC, NBC, PBS, CBS, CNN, or ABC. Don’t bother looking for the info on sites like Jeff Bezos’ Washington Post, or the New York Times, or the Boston Globe. In order to get this objective information exposing Football-Fearmongering, one has to turn to the sports site OutKick, and a medical site called medRXiv.
As Clint Lamb writes for OutKick:
A recent study published on medRxiv found that having fans in the stands for NFL and college football games did not increase the spread of COVID-19.
Because even when based on the already-biased playing field the politicians and their cronies have created for determining COVID data, the football results are a touchdown for those who long have held that free will, commerce, and voluntary association are not only constitutionally protected and morally normative, but that lockdowns and punishments for voluntary gatherings are not constructive as prophylactics against this potential pathogen.
Lamb notes that the new research was conducted by Asmae Toumi, Haoruo Zhao, Jagpreet Chhatwal, Benjamin P. Linas and Turgay Ayer, and their findings are clear:
This time-series, cross-sectional matching study with a difference-in-differences design did not find an increase in COVID-19 cases per 100,000 residents in the counties where NFL and NCAA games were held with in-person attendance. Our study suggests that NFL and NCAA football games hosted with limited in-person attendance do not cause a significant increase in local COVID-19 cases.
This is significant not only for what it shows about “spread”, but also because it allows one to consider the absolute criminality of economy-killing, anti-constitutional lockdowns -- to consider all the opportunities lost, all the lives damaged.
Lamb explains that the researchers used a straight-forward technique, comparing two very different “gathering” approaches:
They ‘quantified the effect of interest by comparing daily changes in COVID-19 cases per 100,000 residents in counties that have held NFL/NCAA games with limited in-person attendance with those that did not hold NFL/NCAA games or have no attendance.’
Which echoes the information gleaned from a peer-reviewed study conducted by the European Journal of Clinical Investigation, a study that showed, “no clear, significant benefit” of government-imposed lockdowns.
And Lamb adds an important point about the significance of liberty in helping people gain information, the importance of people taking chances through the use of their own free will to allow themselves and others to see the results and modify their behavior and resource allocations.
Had those people pushing to cancel the season gotten their way, we would more than likely still be mulling over the effects of allowing fan attendance at sporting events — or even allowing those sporting events to happen at all.
Spot-on. Score. Touchdown.
However one wants to describe it, this is a victory for logic, reason, free will, and those who fight to maintain them.'