Dr. Spiehs rips into Lawrence City Commission after New York Times article admits masks didn't work

Article/COVID-19 and Media - about 4 minute read

Many who were following The Kansas Constitutional last year know that we covered the campaign of Dr. Justin Spiehs (R) who was running for Douglas County Commissioner District 1 as he was treated unfairly and constantly being misrepresented in the mainstream media.

Two ways in which Dr. Spiehs spread his message was through his YouTube channel and by speaking at local government meetings. After having lost in the deep blue county, the Republican stopped attending meetings and consequently garnering attention from many of the Lawrence citizens. However, after an opinion piece published in the New York Times on February 21, 2023, titled, ‘The Mask Mandates Did Nothing. Will Any Lessons Be Learned?’ Dr. Spiehs appeared at the March 7, 2023 Lawrence City Commissioners meeting where he took three minutes to speak.

In his speech he opened by introducing himself and stating that he started protesting in July 2021 against the child mask mandate that lasted until March 2022.

“I’m here this evening to tell you I told you so about masks not being effective and masking not being based in science,” Dr. Spiehs said in his speech. “I’m saying I told you so to all you crazy liberal f***s here in Lawrence who tried to ruin my life over this.”

Dr. Spiehs went on to explain that despite never believing him, the left-leaning news source the New York Times recently published an article admitting the error of masks and mask policies.

The shortened version of the article that Dr. Spiehs read goes as follows:

“The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illnesses—including COVID-19—was published late last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist who is its lead author, were unambiguous.

“‘There is just no evidence that masks make any difference. Full stop.’

“What about N95 masks as opposed to lower quality surgical or cloth masks?

“‘Makes no difference. None of it,’ said Jefferson.

“What about the studies that initially persuaded policymakers to impose mask mandates?

“‘They were convinced by non-randomized studies, flawed observational studies.’

“What about the utility of masks in conjunction with other preventive measures, such as hand hygiene, physical distancing or air filtration?

“‘There’s no evidence that many of these things make any difference.’

“The conclusions were based on 78 randomized controlled trials. Six of them during the COVID pandemic.

“When it comes to the population level benefits of masking, the verdict is in: Mask mandates were a bust.

Dr. Spiehs broke away from reading the article to say, “Those skeptics who were furiously mocked as cranks and occasionally censored as ‘misinformers’ for opposing mask mandates were right. The mainstream experts and pundits who supported mandates were wrong. In a better world, it would behoove the latter group to acknowledge their error along with its considerable physical, psychological, pedagogical, and political costs. But the costs go deeper.”

Dr. Spiehs continued reading the article,

“When people say they ‘trust the science,’ what they presumably mean is that science is rational, empirical, rigorous, receptive to new information, sensitive to competing concerns and risks. Also: humble, transparent, open to criticism, honest about what it doesn’t know, willing to admit error.

“The CDC’s increasingly mindless adherence to its masking guidance is none of those things.

“Mask mandates were a fool’s errand from the start. They did almost nothing to advance safety itself. The Cochrane report ought to be the final nail in this particular coffin.

“There’s a final lesson. The last justification for masks is that, even if they proved to be ineffective, they seemed like a relatively low-cost, intuitively effective way of doing something against the virus in the early days of the pandemic. But ‘do something’ is not science, and it shouldn’t have been public policy. The people who had the courage to say as much deserved to be listened to, not treated with contempt. They may not ever get the apology they deserve, but vindication ought to be enough.”

To read the full article from the New York Times, you can click here. It is behind a paywall, so if you do not want to pay, the same article can be found here.

“We were right about masks not being effective and we’re right about the damage that the masks caused and we’re right about vaccines as well,” Dr. Spiehs said in closing before walking out the door.

After the meeting, Dr. Spiehs made a YouTube video telling how he wants to start going back to the meetings to tell the local politicians and people that he was right and read the NYT article so they know.

“The left wants to be the party of science but the party of science would be asking things… like hey you know we’re about ready to embark on this massive experiment that we’ve never done before, what are some things that could come of it,” Dr. Spiehs said in his video. “Nobody ever wanted to ask that… and we were just full-speed ahead with all of it and everyone around here went on board and was on board with mask mandates.”

The next Douglas County Commission Board meeting will occur Wednesday, March 8, 2023, starting at 4:00 p.m. Dr. Spiehs said he thinks he’ll be there, but isn’t sure yet.

---

Thank you for reading. Be sure to like, share, and subscribe. You can also help support independent journalism in Kansas by buying me a coffee at buymeacoffee.com.