Are face masks effective? Dangerous?

[shalom]

Project Fear’s success: If face coverings are so effective, why weren’t maskists advocating them during 2018 killer flu epidemic?

Neil Clark

is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @neilclark66



29 Jul, 2020 13:58


Why are excessive measures such as mandatory mask wearing being introduced now in the UK as a new ‘social norm,’ when nothing of the kind was even considered before, when the public health threat was greater?

What a difference a week makes.



Last week, when out and about in my local city centre, it looked like things, at long last, were beginning to get back to at least something resembling normal. The vast majority of people were not wearing masks. Now, following the government’s change of policy – they are, and it all feels totally abnormal again.



Having been advised not to wear face coverings when the Covid-19 was supposedly at its peak in March, we are ordered to wear them now, in mid-summer, when daily deaths associated with the virus – but not necessarily ‘from’ it – have dropped significantly to very low levels. For the past five weeks, deaths have been below the five-year average: in fact, since the end of May they have been hovering near to, or below the average. In other words, just when the fear should be going, the government decides to ramp it up.



Deaths have been close to the 5 year average since 29 May. The mask law has no health rationale. All it does is fuel social division, test the limits of the British public’s appetite for repression, and create a group to scapegoat if there is a recurrence. t.co/RHuicQ7yzt



— Aran Lewis (@aranmlewis) July 28, 2020

Astonishingly, most seemed to have accepted the government u-turn on masks without question. To reinforce the message, a whole host of politicians, public figures and ‘celebrity’ influencers have exhorted the public to ‘mask up,’ some more politely than others.



Things not really worth getting upset/angry about, part 547: 1) Who wins a footballer of the year award. 2) Having to wear a mask for a few minutes in a shop.



— Gary Lineker (@garylineker) July 24, 2020

Put a f***ing mask on! Put a f***ing mask on! Put a flippen mask on! Put a f***ing mask on! t.co/t5m2ALrSJe



— Jonathan Pie (@jonathanpienews) July 24, 2020

But if masks are really so effective, why weren’t we told to wear them in March? The current Establishment-sponsored cult of Maskism isn’t driven by science but by politics. We know this from the WHO. Not the rock group, but the World Health Organisation. The BBC’s medical correspondent Deborah Cohen revealed: “We had been told by various sources WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying. The point was put to WHO who did not deny.”



Revelation from BBC medical corr @deb_cohen 'We had been told by various sources WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying. This point was put to WHO who did not deny'. So much for WHO's new pro-muzzle 'advice'.



— Peter Hitchens (@clarkemicah) July 14, 2020

Another way we know that something isn’t quite right is to look back to 2018. It didn’t get too much coverage at the time but that was a particularly bad winter for excess deaths in the UK. In January 2018, 64,157 people sadly died in England and Wales, a 42 percent increase on the December 2017 figure.



“Circulating influenza” was named as a contributing factor for the spike. The flu claimed the old and the young, as detailed here.



Even allowing for the over-counted Covid/Coronavirus figures (it was revealed earlier this month that Public Health England was counting as virus deaths anyone who had tested positive and who had died subsequently of any cause, many more people died in one month in 2018 than have died from the virus in the UK in 2020.




Yet the virtue-signallers and authoritarians ordering us to “just put a bloody mask on” now, were silent two years ago. If masks are effective in helping to stop viruses spreading, then surely January 2018 and not July 2020 was the most appropriate time to wear them?



The fact is that most people are only wearing masks now because they have been told to do so, not because they’ve actually analysed the evidence.



The willingness of people to obey official diktats, however absurd and illogical, is likely to lead to even more restrictions. Anyone who naively believes that they’ll have to wear masks for ‘just a few weeks’ is in for a rude awakening. The government directive itself lasts for a year and is not up for review for at least six months. And don’t think that it’ll stop at shops.



I urge everyone to read the new document Preparing for a Challenging Winter 2020/1, which is available to read on the UK government website.



Pay particularly close attention to Page 32, where it states “Further research is needed into: the value of face coverings in specific sub-groups (e.g. children); the effectiveness of face coverings in different settings (e.g. households in reducing transmission); and how face coverings could be encouraged as a social norm.”



Do we really want to see face coverings established as a ‘social norm’ including in our own homes? But this is where the most successful ‘Project Fear’ in history is taking us – unless there is a major public awakening. The next time you get accosted online or offline by someone telling you to ‘put a bloody mask’ on, ask them if they were saying the same thing in early 2018. And, if not, why not?


link

[schwartzie]

Horowitz: Our government openly warned against universal masking during wildfires — It should apply to virus too

Daniel Horowitz · August 4, 2020

If you want to ascertain the science behind a given policy, look at the literature on the issue before it became political and a tool for social control. Thus, if one were to do that regarding the efficacy of masks, the side effects of long-term wearing, and the advice on children wearing them, he’d discover that the research was all on one side … until it became political.



One common public health challenge that might lead people to cover their faces is annual wildfire season in affected areas. For those who don’t live near forests, particularly out west, this might sound like a foreign concept, but for millions of Americans, dealing with the contaminated air from wildfires is a common occurrence. What’s also particularly helpful about researching forest fires is that the issue has not been politicized, at least not yet. So, what have governmental agencies said about covering one’s face in areas saturated with smoke from seasonal wildfires?



The California Department of Public Health has a section on mask wearing in its Q&A page for protecting against smoke inhalation from wildfires. In response to the question, “Should I wear a mask during a wildfire, even if it’s not really smoky where I am?” the California government could not be any clearer:



“Surgical masks, dust masks, bandanas or other face coverings do not offer protection from particle pollution. Inexpensive paper “comfort” or “dust” masks commonly found at hardware stores are designed to trap large particles and do not provide enough protection for your lungs.”



In other words, everyone understood until recently that masks are for visible contamination or perhaps larger bacteria, but not for microscopic particles, such as smoke particles or viruses. At least 90% of smoke particles are less than 1 micron (1,000 nanometers), which is 1/100th the size of the width of a human hair.



SARS-CoV-2 particles are even smaller, between 60-140 nanometers, which is approximately 1/10th the size of the smoke particles for which masks don’t help. There is no equivocation in this statement – the same way the CDC, as late as May 2020, was certain that masks don’t help against virus particles



To the contrary, the California Department of Health, which now obsesses about the use of masks, warned about the inherent harm in wearing masks, especially outdoors:



“Mask use may give the wearer a false sense of security, which might encourage too much physical activity and time spent outdoors. Also, wearing a mask may actually be harmful to some people with heart or lung disease because it can make the lungs work harder to breathe.”



How come nobody is raising any concern about universal masking given the obvious observation that covering one’s face makes the lungs work harder?



Also, their point about a false sense of security during wildfires applies to the virus as well. While the media and politicians are dramatically overstating the risk of the virus, it certainly is potentially deadly for those who are immunocompromised. I have seen a lot of people I know go indoors with many people around thinking that a mask will protect them. This is one area where the mask cult is actually being too lenient by creating a mystical placebo out of masks.







The CA Department of Health does note that NIOSH N95 or P100 masks, “when worn correctly, have been shown to filter particles and improve the quality of the air being inhaled.” In other words, a form-fitted N95 can possibly make a dent in the amount of inhalation of contaminated micro particles (although virus particles are 10 times smaller). However, they state clearly that “Children should not wear these masks – they do not fit properly and can impede breathing.”



But if this is a problem for children, it should be a problem for adults too. As the Sacramento County Department of Health Services states, “N95 respirator can make it more difficult for the wearer to breathe due to carbon dioxide buildup, which reduces the intake of oxygen, increased breathing rates, and heart rates.”



In the EPA’s guidance on protecting against smoke inhalation from wildfires, they advise people to stay home, but if they go out, they recommend “using a tightfitting N95 or P100 respirator.” There is no mention of the absurdity of wearing another type of mask altogether.



The EPA also warns about the side effects. They observe that “wearing a respirator can make it harder to breathe and that “wearing a respirator, especially if it’s hot or you are physically active, can increase the risk of heat-related illness.” And, of course, they warn against children wearing them.



Again, if this is the known side effect of N95s, one has to wonder if there is at least some harm with oxygen loss with surgical masks when worn for entire school days – putting aside the fact that they do not filter out virus particles. Who is to say people will not suffer the worst of both worlds – some degree of carbon dioxide poisoning while failing to filter out the virus as a jail cell would fail to contain a fly? This is especially true when these masks are worn all day in excessive heat.



What is self-evident from reading the government literature on masks before the issue became political is that they were extremely empathic and consistent about the fact that random masks do not filter out microbiology.



“Surgical masks and one-strap dust masks will not protect your lungs,” wrote the EPA with regards to ash disposal workers. “They are not designed to seal tightly to the face.”



The only thing that was thought to help was an N95, but it was clear it had to be form-fitting, one had to be clean shaven while wearing it, and they were designed to be worn only for short periods of time because of the side effects.



The Montana Department of Health was just as emphatic about the inability of surgical masks to filter out microbiology and the risk of side effects with more form-fitted ones:



Surgical masks or dust masks commonly found at hardware stores trap large particles. These masks will not protect your lungs from smoke. An “N95” mask, properly worn, will offer some protection. If you decide to keep a mask on hand, see the Respirator Fact Sheet provided by CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Filtering face-piece respirators and masks can make the work of breathing more difficult and can lead to increased breathing rates and heart rates. They can also contribute to heat stress. Because of this, respirator use by those with heart and respiratory diseases should only be done under a doctor’s supervision. A wet towel or bandana is not recommended either. While they may stop large particles, fine ones can still get into the lungs.



We already see how masks don’t work even in the countries and settings with 100% compliance. It makes sense because a 2019 study of 2,862 randomized participants published in JAMA found that even N95 masks don’t work against influenza, which is much smaller than smoke particles. “Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza,” concluded the study by Radonovich, L.J. et al. in 2019.



Now it will be interesting to watch the side effects. Until then, we will be told to shut up and make our lungs work harder contrary to unrefuted research by our government before this became a political tool of social control.

link

[Midnight]

Mask mandates are a fraud

BLAZETV STAFF

On Monday's program, Steve Deace delivered game-changing commentary about mask mandates.



POLL: Will Joe Biden still be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate when wSteve Deace: 'The verdict is in. These maskholes don't know what the hell they are talking about.'

e get to November?

"I am not anti-mask. I do not believe any of us have the right not to be inconvenienced during extraordinary times," Deace began. "I do think though we are entitled to the truth."



Deace explained that the great state of Hawaii had mostly isolated itself from the mainland for months and had some form of mask mandate implemented since April 20. But, neither safety measure is working to fight the "invisible enemy."



"[Hawaii] sits over 2,000 miles away from its closest neighbor. And yet, even with 2,000 miles of social distancing, and over three months of a mask mandate, Hawaii has a 700% increase in coronavirus cases," Deace said.



Deace continued destroying the mask mandate and listed a host of mainstream media sources that for months touted Hong Kong as having been "right about coronavirus and face masks."



Media coverage dating back to March 12, gave a snapshot of the misinformation put out by Time, the Wall Street Journal, Vanity Fair, CNN, VOX, and many more. Deace read article after article and illustrated how sold the nation was on Hong Kong's use of masks. On July 29, Deace explained, CNBC reported that Hong Kong is now on the verge of an outbreak that could lead to the hospital system's collapse.



"So the masks work until they don't," Deace said. "The verdict is in. These maskholes don't know what the hell they are talking about." Watch the video for more.



link

[songbird]

Europe's Top Health Officials Say Masks Aren't Helpful in Beating COVID-19

The top medical experts in the world can’t decide if masks are helpful in reducing the spread of COVID-19 or just make things worse.

Thursday, August 6, 2020




Politics Masks COVID-19 Spontaneous Order Europe Sweden Denmark

Denmark boasts one of the lowest COVID-19 death rates in the world. As of August 4, the Danes have suffered 616 COVID-19 deaths, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University.



That’s less than one-third of the number of Danes who die from pneumonia or influenza in a given year.



Despite this success, Danish leaders recently found themselves on the defensive. The reason is that Danes aren’t wearing face masks, and local authorities for the most part aren’t even recommending them.



This prompted Berlingske, the country’s oldest newspaper, to complain that Danes had positioned themselves “to the right of Trump.”



“The whole world is wearing face masks, even Donald Trump,” Berlingske pointed out.



This apparently did not sit well with Danish health officials. They responded by noting there is little conclusive evidence that face masks are an effective way to limit the spread of respiratory viruses.



“All these countries recommending face masks haven’t made their decisions based on new studies,” said Henning Bundgaard, chief physician at Denmark’s Rigshospitale, according to Bloomberg News.



Denmark is not alone.



Despite a global stampede of mask-wearing, data show that 80-90 percent of people in Finland and Holland say they “never” wear masks when they go out, a sharp contrast to the 80-90 percent of people in Spain and Italy who say they “always” wear masks when they go out.



Dutch public health officials recently explained why they’re not recommending masks.



"From a medical point of view, there is no evidence of a medical effect of wearing face masks, so we decided not to impose a national obligation," said Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark.



Others, echoing statements similar to the US Surgeon General from early March, said masks could make individuals sicker and exacerbate the spread of the virus.



“Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,” said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. “There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.”



In Sweden, where COVID-19 deaths have slowed to a crawl, public health officials say they see “no point” in requiring individuals to wear masks.



“With numbers diminishing very quickly in Sweden, we see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” said Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert.



What’s Going on With Masks?

Lots more at the link

[PrisonerOfHope]

[maybetoday]

Project Fear’s success: If face coverings are so effective, why weren’t maskists advocating them during 2018 killer flu epidemic?

Neil Clark

is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. His award winning blog can be found at www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @neilclark66



29 Jul, 2020 13:58

Project Fear’s success: If face coverings are so effective, why weren’t maskists advocating them during 2018 killer flu epidemic?


Why are excessive measures such as mandatory mask wearing being introduced now in the UK as a new ‘social norm,’ when nothing of the kind was even considered before, when the public health threat was greater?

What a difference a week makes.



Last week, when out and about in my local city centre, it looked like things, at long last, were beginning to get back to at least something resembling normal. The vast majority of people were not wearing masks. Now, following the government’s change of policy – they are, and it all feels totally abnormal again.



Having been advised not to wear face coverings when the Covid-19 was supposedly at its peak in March, we are ordered to wear them now, in mid-summer, when daily deaths associated with the virus – but not necessarily ‘from’ it – have dropped significantly to very low levels. For the past five weeks, deaths have been below the five-year average: in fact, since the end of May they have been hovering near to, or below the average. In other words, just when the fear should be going, the government decides to ramp it up.



Deaths have been close to the 5 year average since 29 May. The mask law has no health rationale. All it does is fuel social division, test the limits of the British public’s appetite for repression, and create a group to scapegoat if there is a recurrence. t.co/RHuicQ7yzt



— Aran Lewis (@aranmlewis) July 28, 2020

Astonishingly, most seemed to have accepted the government u-turn on masks without question. To reinforce the message, a whole host of politicians, public figures and ‘celebrity’ influencers have exhorted the public to ‘mask up,’ some more politely than others.



Things not really worth getting upset/angry about, part 547: 1) Who wins a footballer of the year award. 2) Having to wear a mask for a few minutes in a shop.



— Gary Lineker (@garylineker) July 24, 2020

Put a flippen mask on! Put a flippen mask on! Put a flippen mask on! Put a flippen mask on! t.co/t5m2ALrSJe



— Jonathan Pie (@jonathanpienews) July 24, 2020

But if masks are really so effective, why weren’t we told to wear them in March? The current Establishment-sponsored cult of Maskism isn’t driven by science but by politics. We know this from the WHO. Not the rock group, but the World Health Organisation. The BBC’s medical correspondent Deborah Cohen revealed: “We had been told by various sources WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying. The point was put to WHO who did not deny.”



Revelation from BBC medical corr @deb_cohen 'We had been told by various sources WHO committee reviewing the evidence had not backed masks but they recommended them due to political lobbying. This point was put to WHO who did not deny'. So much for WHO's new pro-muzzle 'advice'.



— Peter Hitchens (@clarkemicah) July 14, 2020

Another way we know that something isn’t quite right is to look back to 2018. It didn’t get too much coverage at the time but that was a particularly bad winter for excess deaths in the UK. In January 2018, 64,157 people sadly died in England and Wales, a 42 percent increase on the December 2017 figure.



“Circulating influenza” was named as a contributing factor for the spike. The flu claimed the old and the young, as detailed here.



Even allowing for the over-counted Covid/Coronavirus figures (it was revealed earlier this month that Public Health England was counting as virus deaths anyone who had tested positive and who had died subsequently of any cause, many more people died in one month in 2018 than have died from the virus in the UK in 2020.



ALSO ON RT.COM

More evidence emerges of inflated Covid-19 fatality rates – are we being intimidated?

Yet the virtue-signallers and authoritarians ordering us to “just put a bloody mask on” now, were silent two years ago. If masks are effective in helping to stop viruses spreading, then surely January 2018 and not July 2020 was the most appropriate time to wear them?



The fact is that most people are only wearing masks now because they have been told to do so, not because they’ve actually analysed the evidence.



The willingness of people to obey official diktats, however absurd and illogical, is likely to lead to even more restrictions. Anyone who naively believes that they’ll have to wear masks for ‘just a few weeks’ is in for a rude awakening. The government directive itself lasts for a year and is not up for review for at least six months. And don’t think that it’ll stop at shops.



I urge everyone to read the new document Preparing for a Challenging Winter 2020/1, which is available to read on the UK government website.



Pay particularly close attention to Page 32, where it states “Further research is needed into: the value of face coverings in specific sub-groups (e.g. children); the effectiveness of face coverings in different settings (e.g. households in reducing transmission); and how face coverings could be encouraged as a social norm.”



Do we really want to see face coverings established as a ‘social norm’ including in our own homes? But this is where the most successful ‘Project Fear’ in history is taking us – unless there is a major public awakening. The next time you get accosted online or offline by someone telling you to ‘put a bloody mask’ on, ask them if they were saying the same thing in early 2018. And, if not, why not?


link

[ShofarSoGood]

Face masks at home: The latest sign that public health officials have lost any sense of perspective

Rob Lyons

Rob Lyons is a UK journalist specialising in science, environmental and health issues. He is the author of 'Panic on a Plate: How Society Developed an Eating Disorder'.



4 Aug, 2020 14:13

Face masks at home: The latest sign that public health officials have lost any sense of perspective


There’s still no universal agreement on whether face masks can really prevent the spread of Covid-19, but it’s now being suggested they should be worn even at home. So, where is this appetite for restrictions going to end?

Anyone who’s followed the demands of public health authorities in recent years will know that no level of restriction on personal autonomy is ever enough. There’s always another big idea that will save us from ourselves. To tackle obesity, for example, it’s never sufficient to tell people to eat less and move more. In the UK, we've had taxes on sugary drinks, restrictions on the size of chocolate bars and other snacks, and endless nagging campaigns. So, it’s no surprise that once a government starts to make face masks mandatory in one place, it soon deems it necessary to wear them in other places.


For months, the UK government held the line that the evidence on the effectiveness of masks in controlling Covid-19 was weak. Indeed, following the line from the World Health Organization, senior health officials argued that routinely wearing a mask was not only useless but could make matters worse. The virus is too small to be stopped by anything but the most non-porous masks, we were assured. Moreover, untrained people wearing a flimsy ‘surgical’ mask or a simple cloth mask would inevitably fiddle with them, it was suggested. If they happened to be infected themselves, they could touch the mask and then touch other surfaces, infecting those surfaces with the virus.



Since the early days of the pandemic, some have argued that this advice was wrong. Face masks, they said, could be useful. In June, the World Health Organization amended its advice to say face masks were advisable in situations where social distancing was impossible, such as on crowded public transport. While the UK government then made regulatory the wearing of masks on trains, Tubes and buses, it seemed less than convinced that they should be worn in shops or other public places.



But since then, there has been a bout of mask mania. Whether to wear a mask or not has become entwined with the wider culture wars. Not wearing a mask is seen as a defiant statement of autonomy, while wearing a mask is a signal you are an educated, caring individual who puts protecting society above personal inconvenience. By mid-July, just a day after senior ministers had publicly declared they weren’t necessary, masks became mandatory in shops.



And the result! A call for masks to be worn in more and more places. Last week, British PM Boris Johnson announced that mandatory mask-wearing would be extended to other enclosed public spaces, such as museums, churches and cinemas. Yet social distancing is perfectly possible in these places. Museums only ever get seriously crowded when they are either tourist hotspots or during blockbuster exhibitions, when rarely seen artworks are put on show for a limited time, and those problems can easily be dealt with by restricting ticket sales.



ALSO ON RT.COM

Project Fear’s success: If face coverings are so effective, why weren’t maskists advocating them during 2018 killer flu epidemic?

In Spain, many regions demand that everyone wears a mask anywhere outside their own homes. This is clearly bonkers. There is a very low risk of catching this virus outdoors and donning a face mask would make precious little difference to that.



Now, news comes from the US that even the respite of being able to close your front door and take off your mask might be taken away. Dr Deborah Birx, the White House’s coronavirus task force co-ordinator, has warned that the rise in positive tests marks a “new phase” of the pandemic.



Birx told CNN that Americans “definitely need to take more precautions”. She added: “If you’re in multi-generation households and there’s an outbreak in your rural area or in your city, you need to really consider wearing a mask at home, assuming … you have individuals in your house with comorbidities.”



Some people, such as the elderly and those with an existing serious illness, certainly do need to take extra care. If they contract the virus, the resulting disease is more likely to lead to hospitalisation and even death. If someone in your own home has the disease, there might indeed be sense in taking every possible precaution. But routinely wearing masks at home if there is simply an outbreak in your city is just crazy. Even where there are apparent outbreaks, the risk still seems low.



For example, the English city of Leicester recently had lockdown regulations re-imposed because it was estimated that 0.15% of the population was infected. Large parts of north-west England are now facing restrictions on households meeting each other due to infection rates that are far lower even than those in Leicester.



At what point would Birx trigger an alert for everyone to wear masks 24/7? Is there any end to the impositions that will be placed on us in the name of stopping coronavirus?



READ MORE

Pandemic propaganda? NY Times implies outings to the beach or the park are to blame for Covid-19's spreadPandemic propaganda? NY Times implies outings to the beach or the park are to blame for Covid-19's spread

Meanwhile, the Netherlands has taken a different approach. In keeping with the WHO’s advice, wearing a face mask on public transport is mandatory. But everywhere else, the Dutch government doesn’t even advise people to wear masks, never mind make them compulsory. Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, said: “Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence. There is no benefit and there may even be a negative impact.”



If the science on face masks is so clear cut, why are countries taking such different approaches to the question?



The stories of significant virus outbreaks suggest it’s transmitted in situations where there is sustained, close personal contact. Recent clusters in the UK have included a farm where migrant workers lived close together in dormitories, and a call centre. Other notable outbreaks around the world have occurred in meat-processing plants, in churches, at networking conferences and even as a result of choir practices – all places and occasions where people couldn’t keep their distance from one another or where it had yet to be realised that close contact could be dangerous.



What we don’t hear about is sustained transmission from meeting people outdoors or in shops. Perhaps in other countries, people are more gregarious in the supermarket, but Brits rarely say a word to strangers while grabbing their groceries. The only people they really talk to are the workers at the checkout, who are now safely behind Perspex screens. Face masks in these situations surely make little or no difference.



The call for wearing face masks at home shows how public health officials will always chase every small possible risk. It’s up to the politicians to balance the marginal benefit from every extra precaution against the imposition on our personal liberty, but many are as enthusiastic about more clampdowns as the medics.



Back in the 1980s, in response to the AIDS pandemic, the American author Susan Sontag noted the “striking readiness of so many to envisage the most far-reaching of catastrophes”. Not so much ‘Apocalypse Now’ as ‘Apocalypse From Now On’. The overblown reaction to Covid-19, and the complete loss of perspective among public health officials, seems to confirm her point.


link

[bloodbought]

[maybetoday]

Tammy K Herrema Clark on Face Mask Effectiveness

[maybetoday]

The Miserable Pseudo-Science Behind Face Masks, Social Distancing And Contact Tracing

Masks, Social Distancing And Contact Tracing


Once upon a time, there was something called science. It included the discovery of truth about nature, the elements, the universe, etc. It was practiced by honest and accountable practitioners called scientists and engineers. They often invented cool new things as a result of their studies, but generally they had no primal urge to use their knowledge to dominate other people, groups or even entire societies.



Then certain other scientists and engineers rose up and made a discovery of their own. If true science was ever-so-slightly skewed and engineering disciplines were applied to society at large, then they could indeed use their “knowledge” to dominate and control other people, groups, entire societies or even, heaven forbid, the entire planet.



The first group pursued science. The second group pursued pseudo-science.



Merriam-Webster defines pseudo-science as “a system of theories, assumptions, and methods erroneously regarded as scientific.” The Oxford dictionary clarifies by stating, “a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method.“



Pseudo-science quickly emerged as the principal domain of Technocrats, but they soon found that scientific debate with those promoting real science was most inconvenient to their social engineering goals. The solution was simple: claim that their own pseudo-science was indeed the real science, and then refuse debate by excluding all other voices to the contrary.



In the context of pseudo-science, this report will examine the three primary tools of fighting COVID-19: face masks, social distancing and contact tracing.



Face masks

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) website plainly states that cloth face masks “Will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.”



But, what about surgical masks? OHSA is clear here also that they “will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.”



But then right under these statements, OSHA furiously backpedaled by adding an FAQ section on COVID-19 directly underneath and stated,



OSHA generally recommends that employers encourage workers to wear face coverings at work. Face coverings are intended to prevent wearers who have Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) without knowing it (i.e., those who are asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic) from spreading potentially infectious respiratory droplets to others. This is known as source control.



Consistent with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendation for all people to wear cloth face coverings when in public and around other people, wearing cloth face coverings, if appropriate for the work environment and job tasks, conserves other types of personal protective equipment (PPE), such as surgical masks, for healthcare settings where such equipment is needed most.



So, wearing a face mask cannot protect you from getting COVID, but it is supposedly able to keep someone else from getting it from you? OSHA is speaking out of both sides of its mouth. What it calls “source control” likely puts the real motive out in the open: since you are the source, it’s about controlling YOU. There is no true scientific rationale for anyone but the sick and medical workers to wear masks.



The truly healthy have no business wearing a mask, period.



But, what about asymptomatic carriers?



On June 8, 2020, Maria Van Herkhove, PhD., head of the World Health Organization’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit released a compilation of a number of contact tracing programs from various nations and plainly stated “From the data we have, it still seems to be very rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual.”



This writer hates to think what happened to Dr. Herkhove overnight at the hands of her WHO handlers, because the next day she also furiously backpedaled and stated “I used the phrase ‘very rare,’ and I think that that’s misunderstanding to state that asymptomatic transmission globally is very rare. I was referring to a small subset of studies.”



It is clear that Dr. Herkhove’s first statement that naively repeated the clear facts of the matter did not follow the WHO’s justification for non-infectious people to wear masks. In fact, the entire mask wearing narrative hangs on the single pseudo-scientific idea that asymptomatic people can spread the virus.



In a recent Technocracy News article authored by highly-respected neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD titled Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy, he concluded, “there is insufficient evidence that wearing a mask of any kind can have a significant impact in preventing the spread of this virus.” (Blaylock represents real science.)



Nevertheless, in the face of clear evidence of the worthlessness of face masks for preventing disease,



States and municipalities are mandating that face masks be worn by all citizens when outside their home

Large and small companies are forcing their employees to wear masks

People at large are scared to death to not wear a face mask for fear of getting sick or being mask-shamed by others if they take it off.

Breath Is Vital To Life

Many people believe that face masks lower the percentage of oxygen available for inhaling because you rebreathe much of your exhausted breath. However, a face mask itself does not retain a significant amount of your exhaled breath since most of it is exhaled through the mask into the open atmosphere. Furthermore, when you inhale, most of the air delivered to your lungs comes from outside the mask.



The real science is much more complicated than the amount of residual air contained within a face mask.



The real problem with breathing through a mask is that the lungs and chest muscles must exert a lot of extra energy to inhale and exhale. In other words, you must work harder to breathe the same amount of fresh air that you would normally breathe without a mask.



For this reason, those who already have impaired lung functions, minor as they may be, should never wear a mask unless it is for a specific purpose for a very short period of time. The older you are, especially those over 70, lung capacity and muscle strength decline rapidly.



This writer has already encountered several retail store employees, forced by their employers to wear a face mask during work hours, who exhibit symptoms like headache, shortness of breath or dizziness. When asked if they relate their symptoms to wearing the mask, every single one has emphatically said “Yes!”.



Workers with the most physically demanding jobs are the most likely to exhibit these kind of symptoms. Other considerations are age, any preexisting conditions of the lungs (like pleurisy, COPD, chronic bronchitis, pneumonia, etc.) or chest muscles and factors like poor physical condition and obesity. Actually, any debilitating health condition should be a red flag. In other words, those who are prone to get winded without a face mask will immediately be at a disadvantage when wearing a mask. The net effect is that the lungs receive less fresh air with vital oxygen even as the body is under more physical stress.



Every employer and government entity that mandates the wearing of face masks should be required to do two things: first, they should carefully consider each employee as an individual to determine their suitability for wearing a mask. All factors mentioned above should be included, and in any case, no one should be required to wear a mask if it puts too much stress on their lungs.



Many state-level politicians are now mandating the wearing of face masks for all citizens in public places. They have fallen prey to pseudo-science and are now putting entire populations at risk for physical harm that has nothing to do with the COVID-19 virus.



In sum, lung strength, physical condition, age, pre-existing conditions, physical demands of the job, etc., should all be carefully considered by all. A blanket statement that all employees or all citizens should wear face masks it wholly inappropriate.



Social Distancing

Adding to the fear of contagion, people across the nation are driven to practice social distancing, or staying 6 feet apart at all times. This is practiced to excess in almost every commercial establishment with markers taped or painted on the floor and shopping isles converted into one-way travel only.



Yet, two real scientists at the University of Oxford in Britain, Professors Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, wrote in The Telegraph (UK) recently that “the two-metre rule has no basis in science.” Their article was titled There is no scientific evidence to support the disastrous two-metre rule.



According to these scientists,



The influential Lancet review provided evidence from 172 studies in support of physical distancing of one metre or more. This might sound impressive, but all the studies were retrospective and suffer from biases that undermine the reliability of their findings. Recall bias arises in research when participants do not remember previous events accurately, and it is problematic when studies look back in time at how people behaved, including how closely they stood from others.



More concerning was that only five of the 172 studies reported specifically on Covid exposure and proximity with infection. These studies included a total of merely 477 patients, with just 26 actual cases of infection. In only one study was a specific distance measure reported: “came within six feet of the index patient”. The result showed no effect of distance on contracting Covid.



Heneghan and Jefferson further noted,



On further independent inspection of 15 studies included in the review, we found multiple inconsistencies in the data, numerical mistakes and unsound methods in 13 of them. When assumptions over distance were made, we could not replicate any of them.



This is the hallmark of modern pseudo-science: inconsistencies in the data, numerical mistakes, unsound methods and inability to replicate results.



What is the real purpose of social distancing? It certainly is not to curtail contagion. The only other possibility is to curtail economic activity and prevent social cohesion. Humans are social beings, after all, and lack of close proximity leads to depression, anxiety and even serious health consequences.



Contact Tracing

Contact tracing is an established practice in modern medicine. It is useful for the early stages of serious infectious diseases like Ebola, tuberculosis and sexually transmitted diseases like chlamydia.



Every credible expert on contact tracing says that it is effective only up to the point of mass distribution. In other words, during the early stages of a contagion or a slow moving or very serious disease.



In the case of COVID-19, the horse has already left the barn. Except to harass people, there is nothing useful that contact tracing can accomplish.



Yet, almost every state in America is implementing a wide-ranging contact tracing program that may ultimately employ some 300,000 tracers.



The Center for Disease Control website states that “Contact tracing will be conducted for close contacts (any individual within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes) of laboratory-confirmed or probable COVID-19 patients.”



Furthermore, CDC complete definition of “close contact” is,



Someone who was within 6 feet of an infected person for at least 15 minutes starting from 2 days before illness onset (or, for asymptomatic patients, 2 days prior to specimen collection) until the time the patient is isolated.



If you are “exposed” to such a person, your personal information will be collected and you will be contacted by the “tracer” to be instructed to quarantine for up to two weeks. The infected person could have been mistaken about having contact with you. They could be someone who just wants to get you in trouble. If you live in Washington state, where all restaurants are now required to record the contact information of every patron, you might not have a clue who was infected, but you will be quarantined anyway.



Now, the CDC’s declaration of “6 feet” above takes us back to social distancing, where we just learned above that there is “no effect of distance on contracting COVID” in the first place.



Thus, find that contact tracing misses the mark on two main points: first, the virus is too widespread throughout the population to make tracing effective and second, the criteria of six feet for defining a “contact” is bogus.



So, why are governors, mayors and health departments ramping up for a nationwide exercise in obtrusive contact tracing? Again, pursuing a path of pseudo-science, the intended outcome is control over people.



Conclusion

The American public is being spoon-fed a steady diet of pseudo-science in order to justify the wearing of face masks, social distancing and contact tracing. Yet, the actual science points in the polar opposite direction.



Furthermore, those who try to present the real science are shamed, ridiculed and bullied for having such narrow-minded views.



This is a clear sign of Technocrats-at-work. Instead, these are the ones who should be exposed, shamed and ridiculed.



In sum, these dangerous and destructive policies are designed to curtail economic activity, break down social cohesion and control people. Moreover, they fit the original mission statement of Technocracy as far back as 1938:



Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population…



It is highly doubtful that most state and local leaders understand the lack of real and verified science behind their actions and mandates. Nevertheless, they are implementing policies that are destructive to our economic system, harmful to our personal health and ruinous to personal liberty.



This writer suggests that you print multiple copies of this report and deliver it to every political leader, every commercial establishment, all family and friends, etc.


link

[Berean]

"There Is No Proven Effectiveness" - Netherlands Refuses To Mandate Mask Wearing In Public

by Tyler Durden


American public health experts, led by Dr. Anthony Fauci, have struggled over the past couple of months to push a specific narrative on the public: Wearing a mask doesn't so much protect you from being infected with SARS-CoV-2, but if you are infected, wearing a mask could stop you from passing the virus to someone else.



The mainstream media has backed up these assertions with vague references to "science" and "research", while a coalition of celebrities and progressive activists have tried to tar anybody who doubts this narrative - or, worse, refuses to wear a mask at all times outside their home - as a "denier".



Well, if everybody who is skeptical of the "masks save lives, period" is a "denier", then how does one explain the Dutch government's decision to refuse to mandate mask wearing (the only place where masks must be worn in the Netherlands is on public transit).



On Thursday, Reuters reported that the Dutch government had decided the day before that it would not advise the public to wear masks to slow the spread of coronavirus because their effectiveness has not yet been proven.



The decision was announced by the Netherlands Minister for Medical Care Tamara van Ark following a review by the country's National Institute for Health. Following a resurgence in cases over the past week or so, the Dutch government has decided it will instead seek better adherence to social distancing rules.



"Because from a medical perspective there is no proven effectiveness of masks, the Cabinet has decided that there will be no national obligation for wearing non-medical masks” Van Ark said.



Many European countries have made masks mandatory in public indoor stores and in crowded outdoor places. The US has generally followed suit, though some overzealous governors and local officials are also requiring people to wear masks in most outdoor scenarios, even when they aren't in a large crowd. And NY Gov Andrew Cuomo has pledged to launch an "investigation" into a "drive thru" concert on Long Island where the Chainsmokers and "DJ D-Sol" provided entertainment. This, despite the fact that a growing body of research and experience suggests that outdoor gatherings don't present a major risk of spread. Case in point: Cuomo and Mayor de Blasio are allowing protests to continue unabated, without question, despite the complete absence of evidence to suggest that COVID-19 cares about your personal politics.



Last week, nearby Belgium made face masks mandatory in more public places, and in England they have become compulsory in shops.



Even President Donald Trump has done an about-face on masks, swallowing his tremendous ego and donning a mask for the press.









However, in the Netherlands, masks are mandatory only on public transport. And Van Ark and her peers on the government committee aren't the only experts to question whether masks contribute anything. Anne Wensing, a virologist at the University Medical Center Utrecht, has also questioned whether masks “actually contribute anything extra."



The Dutch government insists that it's strictly following the advice of the experts in the so-called Outbreak Management Team, which doesn’t believe in the general use of masks.



Dutch virologist Jaap van Dissel from the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment said Wednesday that masks can lead to a "false sense of security". When wearing masks, people might not follow other social distancing rules like keeping their distance which also help prevent spread.



Mask-wearing may also prompt people to touch their face more frequently, putting them at risk of accidentally infecting themselves while adjusting their masks.



Belgium and the Netherlands both managed to flatten the curve. However, it's become clear that it's tilting upward once again.







As Politico points out, there are also questions about legality surrounding compulsory mask wearing.



Moreover, legal experts in the country are skeptical about the legality of compulsory masks. One law professor, Jan Brouwer, told NRC that a widespread mask mandate goes against the constitution. According to Brouwer and other experts, there needs to be a separate law on masks to make this regulation possible.



But critics charge that the evidence is sufficient to implement masks in places such as hairdressers, reports NOS. In a letter to Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Health Minister Hugo de Jonge, a group of experts, including epidemiologist Arnold Bosman, called for quick action.



Belgian virologist Marc Van Ranst, meanwhile, warned the Dutch government on Wednesday that it will have to make masks mandatory in crowded places if the Dutch want to avoid a complete lockdown.



"As in Belgium, the corona curve in the Netherlands has been increasing since July 10," he told local media. "If the number of infections continues to rise, you will not be able to avoid a face mask obligation."



Over the past week, almost 1,400 new COVID-19 cases were reported, or 342 more than the prior week, in the Netherlands.



NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST

ZEROHEDGE DIRECTLY TO YOUR INBOX



Receive a daily recap featuring a curated list of must-read stories.



Your email...

Those who insist that masks can stop the outbreak (yes, many Americans have apparently bought into this notion, despite little in the way of evidence to back it up) might benefit from reflecting on how we go there. As Politico reports, the science surrounding wearing a face mask in the community has evolved during the pandemic. In March, the WHO said that healthy people don't need to wear masks unless they're caring for a sick person.



Then in early April, the WHO changed its view, saying that in countries where other preventive measures are hard to adopt, the widespread use of masks could be useful. After that, the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control issued a new recommendation signaling support for masks. Last month, the WHO issued advice suggesting masks worn in public could help stop the spread of the virus. During the early days of the outbreak, some countries like the Czech Republic and Slovakia saw promising results as they mandated mask wearing. In April and May, Greece, Spain and Germany mandated masks in spaces where social distancing was impossible - including shops.



Research suggests that social distancing measures, including the selective wearing of masks, help slow the spread of the outbreak. But the notion that "science" has proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that wearing masks in public can protect the wearer and/or - more importantly - innocent bystanders simply isn't true.



Which begs the question: Why is the media so determined to sell it as fact - and denounce all who question as demented loons or, worse, self-dealing snakeoil sellers - when dissent is still so obviously warranted?


link

[J.J.Gibbs]

The response is interesting, especially in light of the facts that (a) masks are useless in preventing the spread of viruses of any kind, (b) they can actually make people sick, and (c) the information shared here and by JD Farag about Occult Ritual Transformation.

I've been saying for a while now that we're going to see a lot of people getting sick in the next few months, because their immune systems have been compromised by wearing a mask. Also, with flu season soon upon us, and with many of the symptoms being similar, a lot of flu cases will probably be attributed to Covid.  All in preparation for The Great Reset.  

[maybetoday]

Doctors And Nurses: Wearing Masks Can Be Harmful In Several Ways!

POSTED ONMAY 27, 2020HEALTH AND WELLNESS

2.1K89

Like

By Neenah Payne



Note: This article is for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment provided by a qualified healthcare provider.



When people wear COVID-19 masks, they think they are protecting themselves and others from a deadly pandemic. However, the warnings from articles cited below may change their minds. That is especially true since Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease at the National Institutes of Health said in an article published on March 26 that COVID-19 is just a seasonal flu. Dr. Fauci is also a member of the White House Corona Task Force.



In Blaylock: Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy, Dr. Russell Blaylock says that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. If you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask. He warns,



By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain….With the advent of the so-called COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen a number of medical practices that have little or no scientific support as regards reducing the spread of this infection. One of these measures is the wearing of facial masks, either a surgical-type mask, bandana or N95 respirator mask….



It is also instructive to know that until recently, the CDC did not recommend wearing a face mask or covering of any kind, unless a person was known to be infected, that is, until recently. Non-infected people need not wear a mask. When a person has TB we have them wear a mask, not the entire community of non-infected. The recommendations by the CDC and the WHO are not based on any studies of this virus and have never been used to contain any other virus pandemic or epidemic in history.



Now that we have established that there is no scientific evidence necessitating the wearing of a face mask for prevention, are there dangers to wearing a face mask, especially for long periods? Several studies have indeed found significant problems with wearing such a mask. This can vary from headaches, to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications.



The article includes a video in which Nica Bueno, a cardiac nurse, explains why wearing a mask is highly ineffective against viruses. In addition, she says wearing a mask disrupts the pH balance of your blood which is crucial to maintain at all times. She says that in wearing a mask, you are not getting fresh air and are hurting your body by breathing in your own carbon dioxide and your own bacteria. She asks “Why are we working against our immune system instead of for our immune system?” Nurse Bueno ended by saying that she knows she may get a lot of flak for revealing this information, but she doesn’t care because she thinks it’s time for people to stand up for what they know to be true.





Wearing a mask restricts your oxygen intake – making you more subject to infections! The article says:



The importance of these findings is that a drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) is associated with an impairment in immunity. Studies have shown that hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections….This sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19 and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infections and if so, having a much worse outcome.



People with cancer, especially if the cancer has spread, will be at a further risk from prolonged hypoxia as the cancer grows best in a microenvironment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen also promotes inflammation which can promote the growth, invasion and spread of cancers. Repeated episodes of hypoxia has been proposed as a significant factor in atherosclerosis and hence increases all cardiovascular (heart attacks) and cerebrovascular (strokes) diseases.







The article warns:



There is another danger to wearing these masks on a daily basis, especially if worn for several hours. When a person is infected with a respiratory virus, they will expel some of the virus with each breath. If they are wearing a mask, especially an N95 mask or other tightly fitting mask, they will be constantly rebreathing the viruses, raising the concentration of the virus in the lungs and the nasal passages. We know that people who have the worst reactions to the coronavirus have the highest concentrations of the virus early on. And this leads to the deadly cytokine storm in a selected number.



It gets even more frightening. Newer evidence suggests that in some cases the virus can enter the brain. In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.



Report: Wearing Masks Is Useless and Harmful!

The article concludes:



It is evident from this review that there is insufficient evidence that wearing a mask of any kind can have a significant impact in preventing the spread of this virus. The fact that this virus is a relatively benign infection for the vast majority of the population and that most of the at-risk group also survive, from an infectious disease and epidemiological standpoint, by letting the virus spread through the healthier population we will reach a herd immunity level rather quickly that will end this pandemic quickly and prevent a return next winter….One should not attack and insult those who have chosen not to wear a mask, as these studies suggest that is the wise choice to make.







Growing debate: Should Americans wear face masks to curb the spread of Covid 19 raises the question but provides no answers! However, the Choosing Life article says about the use of face masks:



Masks do not protect the wearer. Medical masks are ineffective against viruses, and cloth masks provide breeding grounds for them. A 2015 study in the British Medical Journal found that healthcare workers caught viruses from their patients 13 times more often if they wore a cloth mask than if they wore a medical mask, and a Chinese study found that a medical mask was no more protective against viruses than wearing no mask at all. The World Health Organization warns that wearing a medical mask “may create a false sense of security” against COVID-19 and that “no evidence is available on its usefulness to protect non-sick persons.”



Masks are harmful to the wearer. COVID-19 kills by causing severe hypoxia (low levels of oxygen in the blood). People wearing masks rebreathe some of their exhaled air, lowering the amount of oxygen they are breathing. “Wearing respirators come with a host of physiological and psychological burdens. These can interfere with task performances and reduce work efficiency. These burdens can even be severe enough to cause life-threatening conditions if not ameliorated,” wrote the author of a 2016 article in the Journal of Biological Engineering. When the N95 respirator was tested in use in 2010, the “dead-space oxygen and carbon dioxide levels did not meet the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s ambient workplace standards.” So, why are we being required to wear masks?



Wearing a Mask is Horribly Immune Suppressive!

Wear Your Face Mask And Savor Your CO2 Breath warns:



When a healthy person wears a face mask, they continuously re-rebreathe a portion of the CO2 that comes out of their lungs. Of course, there are many different types of masks that vary in such CO2 concentration, but the principal remains the same. Breathing air that is too rich in CO2 has its own negative health effects!



The article includes a video interview by Robyn Openshaw with Judy Mikovits, Ph.D, a top US virologist. Dr. Mikovits says, “We have to breathe oxygen. We can’t breathe back in our own toxic air. That’s why we exhale.” She says that wearing a mask is “horribly immune suppressive for healthy people. You’re not getting fresh air….You’re activating endogenous viruses”. She says that because a mask is warm and wet, you are making yourself sick when you wear it.



In addition, she points out that wearing a mask is abnormal and uncomfortable. She says “These are all things that are immune draining, not immune boosting….It makes no sense. You are not preventing infection. You’re not preventing spread.” Dr. Mikovita explains that you are not coughing any viruses – and you certainly are not coughing them six feet! So, the social distancing rules make no more sense than the requirements to wear masks! Dr. Mikovita advises: “If you’re healthy, take off the mask. Go outside….This is what we do in any flu season.”





Robin also interviewed Dr. Rashid Buttar, and Emergency Room MD and asked him “Is wearing a mask good for us in any way? Is wearing a mask keeping us from getting a virus?” Dr. Buttar warns, “Wearing a mask is making everything worse! Remember that we breathe in oxygen. When you wear a mask, you are reducing the flow of oxygen.” Dr. Buttar explains that the reduced oxygen suppresses your immune system — which could make you more vulnerable to an opportunistic infections!



The COVID-19 health policies are wildly out of sync with common sense and best medical practices.



Businesses Face Customer Push-back on Masks!

The article points out:



As states proceed to re-start their economies, companies like Costco are requiring and demanding that all shoppers put on face masks before being allowed into the store. Certainly, others will follow. Although their logic for doing this is totally flawed, shoppers have a decision to make: Will you or won’t you? If you want to attempt to sort this out when faced with such a challenge, create a little card like this to show to the store manager or anyone else who demands that you wear a face mask.



The article shows a card to print out asserting you are disabled and invoking your rights as a disabled person under the American Disability Act (ADA) which exempts anyone who opts not to wear a mask in public during the COVID-19 pandemic. The article says you are not required to explain your disability. It claims that stores that refuse to allow people to shop without masks can be fined $75,000 for the first offense and $150,000 for the second offense. However, this information is not accurate.







ADA Implications: I Don’t Want To Wear A Mask points out:



During the COVID-19 pandemic we have seen multiple shifts in views by the public and employees. Initially, the issue was what to do if an employee requested a face mask. However, businesses are now facing different questions: 1. Can you require employees to wear a face mask? 2. Can you require customers or members of the public to wear a face mask when coming into your business? What most do not realize is that both of these questions raise potential ADA issues.



So what can a business do if a customer says that he or she cannot wear a face mask and, possibly go so far as to allege that requiring one is a violation of the ADA for the business to refuse to allow him/her in? Unfortunately, there is no simple answer. First and foremost, it is important to remember that this implicates the ADA. Unlike with employees, businesses are very limited in what questions and/or documentation they can ask the customer to provide regarding a disability under the ADA.



With regard to masks, generally the ADA prohibits places of public accommodation having restrictions that would limit access to an individual with a disability. However, the ADA does allow restrictions when an individual would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others. As of March 2020, the EEOC has declared that the COVID-19 pandemic meets the direct threat standard, based on guidance from the CDC and public health authorities regarding the risk of community spread and institution of restrictions.



IMPORTANT – This standard may change and so businesses must stay up-to-date. Since the COVID-19 pandemic is currently considered a direct threat by the EEOC, a business would likely be on solid ground to require customers to wear face masks or covering when entering into their premises.



This standard is most likely to change as more people go maskless in public and shop at stores that don’t require masks. When stores see they are losing business by enforcing a mask policy, they will have an incentive to revise their policies. Take whatever steps make you feel comfortable. I have never worn a mask even when it was required by New York State and my co-op. If I go in a store that requires a mask, I have found that many don’t enforce the policy. All those that do have been comfortable with my just briefly raising my neck scarf over my nose as a gesture of limited compliance for a minute.



Do What Makes You Feel Comfortable

My co-op requires that we wear masks. However, I have never worn one. When the super in my building asked me recently where my mask was, I explained that the top doctors warn that wearing masks is not only not protecting us but is actually harmful in several key ways. End of discussion.



It takes courage to assert your right to go maskless and protect your health. However, no one should be forced to undermine their health in the illusion that they are protecting “the community”. When everyone around you is going along with the mask policies, it can feel very lonely to be the only one standing up for health as opposed to the illusion of health. So, you have a choice to make now. You can agree to continue to damage your health by wearing a mask so you don’t stand out or rock the boat – or you can protect your body and let the chips fall where they may. When one person goes maskless, it encourages others to follow suit.



While New York City stopped enforcing the mask policy a couple of weeks ago, about 90% of my neighbors are still wearing masks. That is probably out of ignorance of the harm they cause. Most people still believe that COVID-19 is a “pandemic” that threatens to kill millions of Americans and that the health policies are designed to protect them and others.



However, Are COVID-19 Death Rates Falsified? shows that the death rates are being massively inflated in a number of ways. In addition, on March 26, Dr. Anthony Fauci published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine called Covid-19 – Navigating the Uncharted in which he admitted that, “the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a fatality rate of approximately 0.1%.”



Clearly, whoever devised the COVID-19 “health policies” – lockdown, masks, and social distancing – knows nothing about health! These policies have cost the economy over $2 trillion, put over 38 million people out of work, and are leading to record suicides – all for a seasonal flu! Following these policies is letting the blind lead the blind. That’s why Dr. Ron Paul, Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, and the John Birch Society have called for Dr. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a leading member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, to be fired.



No one should be forced to harm himself! There is a time for civil disobedience as Henry David Thoreau wrote in the 19th century in his historic Civil Disobedience and On the Duty of Civil Disobedience. Thomas Jefferson said: “If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so”. In the 1960s Black Americans stood up in the Civil Rights Movement to assert their constitutional freedoms. Perhaps we need a health rights movement now to reclaim our health freedoms!







Nothing Changes As Long As You Obey

Exceptionally Cruel and Insensitive Health Officials by Dr. Mark Sircus should be read in full. Much of it is quoted here. Dr. Sircus says:



Not only are they cruel and insensitive but they are outright liars (they love scary predictions that do not come true) and do not want to listen to anyone who disagrees with their insensible plans to destroy human civilization. They are destroyers of human existence, human activity, human happiness and even human health. To be in favor of lock-downs is to be for death of the world economy, increased death by suicide, increased death by over a million from tuberculous, vastly increased homelessness, and for millions to die of starvation. That is the short list.



Medical Nightmare Turning Apocalyptic



It has not completely sunk in yet but the real nightmare is just getting started. More than four out of five people in the global labor force of 3.3 billion have been hit by full or partial workplace closures, according to the International Labor Organization, which says 1.6 billion workers in the informal economy “stand in immediate danger of having their livelihoods destroyed.” How a few men got the politicians of the world to do this is something that history will have to eventually answer.



More than 36 million have filed for unemployment in the United States since mid-March. It is not a depression we are entering but a collapse that could halt most human activity. If the coronavirus pandemic continues to drive unemployment levels as high as predicted, homelessness will increase 40% to 45% by the end of the year, according to an analysis by a Columbia University economics professor. That would mean 250,000 more people in the US would experience homelessness compared with last year, bringing the total number of those experiencing homelessness to above 800,000.



How can we possibly measure the human suffering as a consequence of what is being done following the orders of health care officials? For those who oppose the orders it might be a good time to revisit the teaching of Martin Luther King Jr. “Martin King, was a minister who exposed the truth that obedience keeps us in chains. His crucial synthesis was to combine disobedience with goodness. His crucial work (and this is greatly under-appreciated) was to hold disobedience and goodness together.”



There is open lockdown rebellion in Pennsylvania and demonstrations in England and Germany…. World health officials are not practicing medicine or public health they are practicing cold-hardheartedness. They along with politicians are acting like the original communists and fascists who believed that their way was the only way, killing or censoring anyone who disagrees. Certain epidemiologists have said there is very little sturdy evidence to base lockdown policies on, but this has not prevented politicians from acting as if everything they say or do is based on solid science….



While many European cities begin the process of reviving their economies, the Big Apple — America’s coronavirus epicenter — remains shut as authorities fear sparking another wave of COVID-19 infections. So let the city die and long live fear! Sweden never closed down in the first place and they are not having more difficulties with the virus than countries that have lockdown their people. We have let the fears of health authorities choke the world and create a form of hysteria never seen before.”



The article links to an article about Dr. King: Nothing Changes As Long As You Obey. Also see Dr. Sircus’ articles Greatest Civilization Collapse in History and Medical Coup D’état – The Culling of Humanity.



End The Lockdown Now!

Dr Dan Erickson and Dr Artin Massihi counter the official narrative discusses is a video in which these front-line doctors in California discuss conclusions they have drawn from the data they collected about COVID-19. Dr. Erickson and Dr. Massihi report that their findings show COVID-19 is similar to the a seasonal flu we have every year. Therefore, they say we should end the lockdown now because it is not necessary and the costs are too high. Those costs are not just economic — as astronomical as those are.







Over 38 million Americans have lost their jobs since March. The costs include loss of revenue, depression, alcoholism, spousal abuse, child abuse, suicide, etc. These society-destroying costs will mount unless the lockdown is ended NOW! They point out that these things “are significantly more detrimental to society than a virus that has proven similar in nature to the seasonal flu we have every year”. In other words – the “cure” is much worse than the disease! The policy has been a dangerous over-reaction.



These front-line MDs explain that the policies we have been told to adopt are putting us all more at risk because they lower our immune system and make us more vulnerable when the lockdown ends! These policies include the lockdown itself which is unprecedented and unnecessary for healthy people. They include wearing masks, social distancing, excessive washing of hands, and use of disinfectants. These policies make us more vulnerable to opportunistic infections what can result in a “second wave” which will be used to justify another destructive lockdown!



Dr. Erickson read their joint statement which points out



We also need to put measures in place so economic shutdown like this does not happen again. We want to make sure that we understand that quarantining the sick is what we do not quarantining the healthy. We need to make sure if you are going to dance on someone’s constitutional rights, you better have a good reason. You better have a really good scientific reason and not just theory.



Dr. Erickson and Dr. Massihi point out that Emergency Room physicians across the country are coming to the same conclusions they have. Their recommendations are in line with those of a growing number of prominent doctors. It makes sense for our health policy to be based now on solid data from the field rather than on speculative models that are destroying our economy and undermining our freedoms.



See Social Distancing — Attack on First Amendment! for more information about our rights.



JBS: Freedom Is The Cure!

The John Birch Society site says:



Do we live in America or a Communist dictatorship? When is it ok for governments to force the closure of businesses? Or to forcibly close places of worship? When will this end and what will happen when the virus flares up again this fall? The over-the-top response from all levels of government to the COVID-19 coronavirus has betrayed the very foundations of our Republic. Rights have been trampled.







It points out:



During the lockdown of America, schools, businesses, churches, and individuals are being bullied by government based on an unwarranted emergency. Will we get those rights back? That depends on you! Your Rights Are Not Negotiable!



Americans Must Respond! Given the absolute hype by the media and government at every level, most Americans are submitting to these draconian orders. After all, Americans are ruled by laws, so we willingly want to comply. But when the government tramples our rights, their orders must be met with swift and Constitutional pushback from the proper authorities…..Terrorists couldn’t do any better to tank the U.S. economy, take away our freedoms, and cause mass hysteria among the American people. It’s time to stop the tyranny and clear the way for American healthcare to treat the virus!



86% of New Yorkers Who Died With Chinese Virus Had Other Illnesses, Conditions



Get Informed: Click here to download “Freedom Is the Cure” a 48-page special report on the coronavirus pandemic by April 20, 2020 issue of The New American magazine.

link

[bloodbought]

These 12 Graphs Show Mask Mandates Do Nothing To Stop COVID

No matter how strictly mask laws are enforced nor the level of mask compliance the population follows, cases all fall and rise around the same time.

Yinon WeissBy Yinon Weiss

OCTOBER 29, 2020


Masks have become a political tool and a talisman. When COVID-19 hit, governments panicked and created enormous fear. The Centers for Disease Control currently estimates a COVID-19 survival rate of 99.99 percent for people younger than 50, but the damage created by the panic was too great to undo.



It is likely that some politicians eventually realized their mistake and needed a way to back-pedal without admitting their lockdowns were a policy disaster. Their solution was for people to put any old piece of cloth across their face and magically believe that it’s okay to go out shopping again.



Masks are not merely a small inconvenience. They have inadvertently become a key impediment to returning to a more normal life, a desirable goal for those seeking to twist the pandemic for political and electoral purposes.



Masks dehumanize us, and ironically serve as a constant reminder that we should be afraid. People can now be spotted wearing masks while camping by themselves in the woods or on a solo sailing trip. They have become a cruel device on young children everywhere, kindergarten students covered by masks and isolated by Plexiglas, struggling to understand the social expressions of their peers. Face coverings are causing real harm to the American psyche, provide little to no medical benefit, and distract us from more important health policy issues.



The mask dogma had many cracks in it from the start. For one, the U.S. surgeon general and the Centers for Disease Control both previously said that “masks are NOT effective in preventing [the] general public from catching coronavirus,” so they were already starting with a credibility deficit. Furthermore, many officials have been frequently caught without masks when they think the cameras are off them. Dr. Anthony Fauci, for example, has been caught doing this multiple times.





Chicago’s mayor and local media were all caught taking off their masks and violating social distancing as soon as a press conference ended. This was caught in a now deleted YouTube video that was shared by a now deleted Twitter account after being retweeted more than 26,000 times. As of the date of this publication, it is still available to view in a crude video of a video that has yet to be deleted on YouTube.



Clearly, some people do not want you to see what politicians do behind the scenes. Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, a strong advocate for mandatory masking, was caught off camera laughing about how wearing masks is an act of “political theater.”



Faking ‘Science’ to Achieve Political Goals

These same politicians and health officials are so desperate to make people believe in masks that they doctor charts to make their case, even when their own data actually undermines them. So what is the actual science behind masks? Let’s begin by reviewing the leading scientific studies.



The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at Oxford University summarized six international studies which “showed that masks alone have no significant effect in interrupting the spread of ILI or influenza in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.” Oxford went on to say that “that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.” They prophetically warned that this has “left the field wide open for the play of opinions, radical views and political influence.”



A study of health-care workers in more than 1,600 hospitals showed that cloth masks only filtered out 3 percent of particles. An article in the New England Journal of Medicine stated, “[W]earing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection” and that “[T]he desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”



There are many other credible studies showing lack of mask efficacy, such as studies published in the National Center for Biotechnology Information, Cambridge University Press, Oxford Clinical Infectious Diseases, and Influenza Journal, just to name a few.



Studies do show masks can help in the case of direct respiratory droplets, which would matter if somebody is coughing, breathing, or sneezing directly on your face. That happens normally in a tight and highly confined space.



But the plentiful evidence we have indicates masks would not meaningfully help with aerosol transmission, where two people are just in the same area, or even the same room. This is because the two people end up breathing the same air, with or without a mask, as visually demonstrated in this video.



Now for Graphs about International Mask Mandates - At link

[Honoria]

Check out this excerpt from the article:  

"Picture classrooms of children wearing face masks. This image is repulsive to me on so many levels. Yet, updated CDC guidelines on May 19th, 2020 and posted on their site titled Considerations for Schools, recommends that children older than the age of 2 wear face masks. In part, it says, “Teach and reinforce use of cloth face coverings.” 

In other words, teach them to be good, obedient little minions of the One World Government.    I'm so glad we're outta here SOON! 


The Risks vs. Benefits of Face Masks- Is There an Agenda?


There has been a shifting of positions on the use of face masks with the COVID-19 outbreakIs there sound medical or scientific basis for the recommendations? Is much of it simply virtue signaling? Is there a legitimate rationale to do it to protect the vulnerable? And if so, at what cost to the rest of society? There are many important considerations including the risk versus the reward.









childrenshealthdefense.org/news/the-risks-vs-benefits-of-face-masks-is-there-an-agenda/



Link copied





By Dr. Alan Palmer, Contributing Writer







There has been a shifting of positions on the use of face masks with the COVID-19 outbreak. Initially it was not recommended, then we had different signals from the U.S. Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams and representatives of the CDC, the NIH and other agencies. More recently, the policies recommending wearing face masks have become more prevalent and often mandated in public places. Is there sound medical or scientific basis for the recommendations? Is much of it simply virtue signaling? Is there a legitimate rationale to do it to protect the vulnerable? And if so, at what cost to the rest of society? There are many important considerations including the risk versus the reward. So, what are the risks vs. the benefits? And would there be a partisan reason for some policy makers to push for one over the other? Because as unfortunate as it is, all decisions and policies have to be viewed from at least two lenses, politics and who stands to benefit financially?



Let’s look at the two camps in the debate:



The benefit is greater than the risk—

Proponents of face masks use the following arguments:



We can prevent sick or asymptomatic infected people from infecting others by wearing masks – There may be some credible evidence to suggest this, but in doing so the infected person wearing the mask may be making their infection much worse as a result. The “wear them only in a medical setting” arguments below will prove this out. N-95 masks have been shown to block 95% of airborne particles with a median diameter >0.3 μm2 (greater than 0.3 micrometers or microns squared), whereas standard face masks may block 50-70% of particles depending on the mask. (http://medcraveonline.com/JLPRR/JLPRR-01-00021.pdf)



If healthy people wear face masks, they will be protected from those that may be infected- The counterpoint in the next section will make the argument against that logic.



If you wear a mask, you are less likely to touch your nose, mouth or eyes, which is where the vast majority of infections begin- Some claim this to be true, but an argument can be made that people handle their mask frequently when adjusting them on their face and to remove them and put them on. All this touching of the mask raises the potential that viral transmission to the mask can then transfer to the nasal and oral cavities. Recent video of the Coronavirus Task Force news conferences has underscored this, as Dr Fauci and others from the task force are seen frequently fiddling with their masks in the background.



Face masks should not be worn by healthy individuals to protect themselves from acquiring respiratory infection because there is no evidence to suggest that face masks worn by healthy individuals are effective in preventing people from becoming ill.

The risk is greater than the benefit (except in a medical setting)—

Detractors from the regular use of face masks cite the following:



Face masks do not protect the wearer from transmission by others-



The American Medical Association just released a position paper on masks:

“Face masks should be used only by individuals who have symptoms of respiratory infection such as coughing, sneezing, or, in some cases, fever. Face masks should also be worn by healthcare workers, by individuals who are taking care of or are in close contact with people who have respiratory infections, or otherwise as directed by a doctor. Face masks should not be worn by healthy individuals to protect themselves from acquiring respiratory infection because there is no evidence to suggest that face masks worn by healthy individuals are effective in preventing people from becoming ill. Face masks should be reserved for those who need them because masks can be in short supply during periods of widespread respiratory infection. Because N95 respirators require special fit testing, they are not recommended for use by the general public.” (Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA); April 21, 2020 Volume 323, Number 15 jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762694)



A recent careful examination of the literature, in which 17 of the best studies were analyzed, concluded that, “None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.” (bin-Reza F et al. The use of mask and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: A systematic review of the scientific evidence. Resp Viruses 2012;6(4):257-67. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/)

Face masks restrict the elimination of virus, recirculating the virus into the nasal/sinus and upper respiratory passages-



“By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.” Article by Russell Blaylock M.D., published May 14, 2020 in Technocracy News & Trends. Dr. Blaylock is a prominent retired neurosurgeon and author of health-related books. “We know that people who have the worst reactions to the coronavirus have the highest concentrations of the virus early on. And this leads to the deadly cytokine storm in a selected number.” (Blaylock: Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy; www.technocracy.news/blaylock-face-masks-pose-serious-risks-to-the-healthy/)

This direct rebreathing of the virus back into the nasal passages can contribute to the migration of the virus to the brain. (1, 2) “Newer evidence suggests that in some cases the virus can enter the brain. In most instances it enters the brain by way of the olfactory nerves (smell nerves), which connect directly with the area of the brain dealing with recent memory and memory consolidation. By wearing a mask, the exhaled viruses will not be able to escape and will concentrate in the nasal passages, enter the olfactory nerves and travel into the brain.”(3)

Baig AM et al. Evidence of the COVID-19 virus targeting the CNS: Tissue distribution, host-virus interaction, and proposed neurotropic mechanisms. ACS Chem Neurosci 2020;11:7:995-998.

Wu Y et al. Nervous system involvement after infection with COVID-19 and other coronaviruses. Brain Behavior, and Immunity.

Perlman S et al. Spread of a neurotropic murine coronavirus into the CNS via the trigeminal and olfactory nerves. Virology 1989;170:556-560.

Wearing a face can cause headaches and reduce oxygen levels- A recent study involving 159 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask… That is, a reduction in blood oxygenation (hypoxia) or an elevation in blood CO2 (hypercapnia). It is known that the N95 mask, if worn for hours, can reduce blood oxygenation as much as 20%. And proper oxygenation of the blood is essential for energy, mental clarity, focus and emotional well-being. (Ong JJY et al. Headaches associated with personal protective equipment- A cross sectional study among frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19. Headache 2020;60(5):864-877.)



Wearing a face mask causes one to re-breath the carbon dioxide (CO2), that the lungs are attempting to expel- This in turn reduces the immune response, negatively affects epithelial cell function (cells in the lungs and blood vessels) and lowers the amount of oxygen exchange across the alveolar membranes. From the article:



“Hypercapnia, the elevation of carbon dioxide (CO2) in blood and tissues, commonly occurs in severe acute and chronic respiratory diseases, and is associated with increased risk of mortality. Recent studies have shown that hypercapnia adversely affects innate immunity, host defense, lung edema clearance and cell proliferation. Airway epithelial dysfunction is a feature of advanced lung disease….These changes in gene expression indicate the potential for hypercapnia to impact bronchial epithelial cell function in ways that may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute or advanced chronic lung diseases.”



This clearly can have a negative impact with a disease like COVID-19. (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-32008-x.pdf)



Wearing a face mask can increase your risk of infections- The last point discussed the drop of oxygen levels after wearing a mask. A drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia), is associated with an impairment in immunity. Studies have shown that hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections called the CD4+ T-lymphocyte. This occurs because the hypoxia increases the level of a compound called hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1), which inhibits T-lymphocytes and stimulates a powerful immune inhibitor cell called the T-regs. This sets the stage for contracting any infection, including COVID-19 and making the consequences of that infection much graver. In essence, your mask may very well put you at an increased risk of infections and if so, having a much worse outcome. In addition, reduced oxygenation can accelerate cancer growth. (1. Shehade H et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1 negatively regulates Th1 function. J Immunol 2015;195:1372-1376. 2. Westendorf AM et al. Hypoxia enhances immunosuppression by inhibiting CD4+ effector T cell function and promoting Treg activity. Cell Physiol Biochem 2017;41:1271-84. 3. Sceneay J et al. Hypoxia-driven immunosuppression contributes to the premetastatic niche. Oncoimmunology 2013;2:1 e22355.)



Wearing face masks is a constant reminder that we should fear this invisible enemy or “monster” as some politicians have called it- There is no doubt that wearing a mask reinforces the worry and fear about COVID-19. Even being in public mask-less and seeing that most people are wearing masks leaves one with a sense of angst. Fear, worry and anxiety are powerful immune suppressing emotions. This is another factor relating to the immunosuppressive effects of face masks. This is a link to a section of a 2007 book titled, Cytokines: Stress and Immunity– Second Edition 2007. You can read Chapter 2 titled Worried to Death? Worry, and Immune Dysregulation in Health and HIV. Interestingly, HIV is a viral infection as is SARS-C0V-2 (COVID-19).



What are some government agencies saying?

On April 27, 2020, the Ventura County California Public Health Department released a Pros and Cons one-sheet summary about face masks (link at end of this section). One thing they warn against is the general public buying and using N-95 masks, because of the shortage of PPE for medical personnel. This is very wise advice. (https://www.simivalley.org/home/showdocument?id=22324)



It also cites some other limited benefits of preventing transmission, pretty well characterized by this quote:



“There is a ‘very slight protective advantage’ to wearing a medical mask as opposed to wearing nothing at all in a community setting. The risk of acquiring a viral infection is reduced by 6%. When both ill and well wear a medical mask in a household, the risk is reduced by 19%. There is more “evidence to support the use of medical masks for short periods of time by particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient high-risk situations.”



Altogether, common fabric cloth masks are not considered protective against respiratory viruses and their use should not be encouraged.

But what else does it say?

And what scientific evidence do they present that describes the effectiveness of masks and that warns against the use of face masks by the general public? Here is a good sampling…



With near universal use of cloth and medical masks worn in public in Wuhan, China during the 2019-2020 flu season leading up to the COVID-19 outbreak, the outbreak spread virtually unchecked.

“Available evidence shows that (cloth masks)… may even increase the risk of infection due to moisture, liquid diffusion and retention of the virus. Penetration of particles through cloth is reported to be high.” “Altogether, common fabric cloth masks are not considered protective against respiratory viruses and their use should not be encouraged.”

(https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/ppe-strategy/face-masks.html)



“Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.”

The virus may survive on the surface of the facemasks.”

“Self-contamination through repeated use and improper doffing is possible.” (https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577)

Textile materials (that can be used for cloth masks) can contain harmful chemicals and dyes (i.e. formaldehyde). There is no research available regarding the safety of breathing through such materials but formaldehyde is a gas that can irritate a person’s eyes, nose, throat and lungs, or trigger an asthma attack, even at low concentrations. Prolonged exposure to formaldehyde can cause cancer. (https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/formaldehyde and www.gao.gov/new.items/d10875.pdf)

Wearing cloth masks in public can create a false sense of security and complacency in which people may neglect other hygiene practices. (https://www.who.int/publications-detail/advice-on-the-use-of-masks-in-the-community-during-home-care-and-in-healthcare-settings-in-the-context-of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak)

Frequent washing and drying of a cloth mask can decrease the filtration capacity of the mask. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6599448/)

“Neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS–CoV-2 during coughs by infected patients… the size and concentrations of SARS–CoV-2 in aerosols generated during coughing are unknown. Oberg and Brousseau demonstrated that surgical masks did not exhibit adequate filter performance against aerosols measuring 0.9, 2.0, and 3.1 μm in diameter. Lee and colleagues showed that particles 0.04 to 0.2 μm can penetrate surgical masks. The size of the SARS–CoV particle from the 2002–2004 outbreak was estimated as 0.08 to 0.14 μm; assuming that SARS-CoV-2 has a similar size, surgical masks are unlikely to effectively filter this virus.” (https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2764367)

In total, the document presented 18 arguments and studies against the effectiveness and use of masks and 10 showing some limited benefit. After careful scrutiny of the pros and cons, I am landing squarely against the use of them other than by medical personnel in a clinical setting, or if an individual that is in close proximity of an infected person with the risk of being directly coughed or sneezed on, as in when caring for or visiting a sick person. (https://vcportal.ventura.org/CEO/VCNC/2020-05-05_VCNC_Masks_Pros_and_Cons.pdf)



The conclusion of the Russell Blaylock M.D. article states the following:



“It is evident from this review that there is insufficient evidence that wearing a mask of any kind can have a significant impact in preventing the spread of this virus. The fact that this virus is a relatively benign infection for the vast majority of the population and that most of the at-risk group also survive, from an infectious disease and epidemiological standpoint, by letting the virus spread through the healthier population we will reach a herd immunity level rather quickly that will end this pandemic quickly and prevent a return next winter.”



“During this time, we need to protect the at-risk population by avoiding close contact, boosting their immunity with compounds that boost cellular immunity and in general, care for them. One should not attack and insult those who have chosen not to wear a mask, as these studies suggest that is the wise choice to make.”



So, what’s the motivation behind the mask?

Given all of that information, it’s time to ask the obvious question. What would be the possible motivation for pushing the narrative about face masks and in some cases even mandatory face mask rules? And how does that motivation interface with the extended stay-at-home orders? We have “flattened the curve” to prevent the risk of overwhelming our health care system (but so did Sweden without lockdowns – a great topic for another post), so why the continued extreme social distancing and face mask mantra?



Here is a hypothesis, but in the form of two questions. It implies malintent which I cannot prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, but just indulge me for a moment. In the end, each person must decide that for themselves. Here we go….



1. If you wanted to prevent the population from gaining herd immunity, which would further support the need and desire for a vaccine, what would be the best way to do that?

2. If you were successful at preventing people from developing natural immunity by keeping all the healthy and young low-risk people apart from one another and thus wanted to increase the chances for a second wave of the virus in a few months, how could you increase the chances of those people becoming infected and ensuring a second wave once they are released from quarantine and begin mingling?



Now match those two questions with the proper answers:



A. Suppress their immune systems with fear, loss of income, lack of exercise and sunshine and face masks whenever going away from home.

B. Keep the young and healthy people at home and sequestered from each other.



If you paired 1 with B, and 2 with A, congratulations! Welcome to the growing number of free-thinking people that are connecting the dots.



One thing for certain is that so many people have taken the wearing of face masks and social distancing to a bizarre extreme. A few days ago, I saw one woman in the neighborhood out for a walk in the heat of the day. I commented to her that it sure was a hot time of day to be out for a walk. She looked at me with an odd look of concern on her face and said, “yeah, but at least there are no other people out now”. Other common examples are the people driving alone in their car with a face mask on and people walking through parking lots and down uncrowded sidewalks or at a park wearing face masks. My purpose on mentioning these examples is not to be condescending or critical of individuals that are overly fearful or are unaware of the harm face masks may cause them. These individuals have been duped by a complicit media that has continued to run with the absolutely, ridiculously, outrageously inaccurate models and never adjusted their level of hype and fear mongering long after those models had been exposed for what they were—ridiculous. In the meantime, people that are living with an irrational level of fear as a result, are being harmed physically and emotionally.



The reduced oxygen levels will increase anxiety, fatigue and brain fog, decrease learning capacity due to decreased oxygen to the brain, weaken their immune systems and can lead to an increased rate and severity of all types of infections, not just COVID-19.

CDC’s recommendations for opening schools require children to wear face masks

Picture classrooms of children wearing face masks. This image is repulsive to me on so many levels. Yet, updated CDC guidelines on May 19th, 2020 and posted on their site titled Considerations for Schools, recommends that children older than the age of 2 wear face masks. In part, it says, “Teach and reinforce use of cloth face coverings.” It then goes on to say…



Note: Cloth face coverings should not be placed on:



Children younger than 2 years old

Anyone who has trouble breathing or is unconscious

Anyone who is incapacitated or otherwise unable to remove the cloth face covering without assistance (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/community/schools-childcare/schools.html)

And many in the government and educational system are echoing these preposterous recommendations. My opinion based on the science we just looked at is that this would be a huge mistake. Making children wear face masks has the potential to cause long-term psychological, emotional and physical damage. It promotes an excessive fear of germs (phobia) and of social interaction. The reduced oxygen levels will increase anxiety, fatigue and brain fog, decrease learning capacity due to decreased oxygen to the brain, weaken their immune systems and can lead to an increased rate and severity of all types of infections, not just COVID-19. We know that children are at very low risk of complications from COVID-19. Yet, this practice of wearing face masks could potentially increase that level of risk.



Teaching children good hygiene practices and that their immune system can help prevent and fight “germs” if they eat healthy food, exercise and practice good health habits would go a long way to empower them with positive and practical knowledge that they can learn and use throughout their lives.



Going forward

As we learn about the miscalculations from the hugely exaggerated models, the inaccurate coding and calculations of COVID-19 deaths bloating the numbers, the large percentages of people that are already immune because they have had the infection and recovered, many not even knowing they were sick, we realize that the mortality rate from COVID-19 is nowhere near what we had thought. Then there are the mistakes made within nursing homes and long-term care facilities, including sending positive COVID patients into those facilities and the mistakes with the way we treated many cases with ventilators. In a retrospective analysis of all of these factors, I believe that we will realize that mortality from COVID-19 is not even as bad as a “normal” flu and pneumonia season.



This is not to say that initially we shouldn’t have viewed COVID-19 as a serious potential health crisis, but so is 50,000 to 80,000 people dying from flu and pneumonia every winter. My greatest concern is the destruction of the economy, loss of jobs, loss of small businesses, the effects on marriages and families, skyrocketing mental health disorders, stress related diseases and the deaths due to despair and loss of hope, people not getting the medical attention for things like heart issues, high blood pressure and cancer they would otherwise get if they had access to hospitals and routine procedures. These are all the unintended consequences of what we have already done, and if we continue to ignore the new evidence of the data, science and doctors’ experiences on the front lines, we will certainly cause much more harm than good. Going forward with the current situation (and should a viral outbreak occur in the future), risk versus benefit of every decision must be considered.


link

[maybetoday]

Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy

By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD

Makes don't work to protect people from Covid19.

Masks and respirators do not work.



There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.



Furthermore, the relevant known physics and biology, which I review, are such that masks and respirators should not work. It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.



The present paper about masks illustrates the degree to which governments, the mainstream media, and institutional propagandists can decide to operate in a science vacuum, or select only incomplete science that serves their interests. Such recklessness is also certainly the case with the current global lockdown of over 1 billion people, an unprecedented experiment in medical and political history.

Very informative but long article continues at link

[Berean]

Results of Denmark Study on Mask Efficacy Published: Masks are useless against Covid and otherwise dangerous to health
(and Fauci knows it)



Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask WearersFREE

A Randomized Controlled Trial

- Annals of Internal Medicine

Landmark Danish study here

[shalom]

Bacterial Pneumonia and Other Health Risks of Wearing Masks Alarm Doctors

Ernest Dempsey


You are told to wear a mask to prevent coronavirus infection. But do you know that wearing masks can cause way more dangerous, even life-threatening health effects as shown by scientific studies and professional observation of medical experts?



While the authorities worldwide have thoughtlessly imposed wearing face masks on unsuspecting public, medical doctors critical of the establishment’s health policies are speaking up against the mask mandate and citing health risks associated with wearing masks.



In August, Dr. James Meehan warned of the serious health risks that come with masks at a press conference, the video of which was posted in The Activist Post last month. He summarized the health risks associated with wearing masks, ranging from skin infections to bacterial pneumonia. Dr. Meehan said that reports from around the world are pointing at a notable rise in bacterial pneumonia among people using masks. He said such health issues arise when people suffer reduced oxygen supply due to wearing masks. He also told of an incidence where one patient wearing a mask passed out due to low oxygen while at work and fell off a ladder, resulting in serious physical injuries.



The Activist Post wrote that Dr. Meehan and other concerned doctors as well as some business owners have filed a lawsuit against the mayor and health department of Tulsa, OK, over their mask mandates. The business owners say in light of the science showing the health risks associated with masks, they do not want to put their employees at risk by enforcing the mask mandate required by the city.



In related news, a couple of months ago, The New York Post reported on the oral health damage associated with wearing masks. Dr. Rob Ramondi was cited by the paper telling that they are seeing patients with no previous history of oral diseases develop decaying teeth and diseased gums due to wearing masks for long hours, a condition the doctors dubbed “mask mouth”.


link

[maybetoday]

Here is a more detailed account of the pneumonia itself.  Some of the symptoms sound like Covid; maybe hats why they made them mandatory, so people get sick with this then can be labelled as a Covid case.
  The deception in the world today is astonishing, yet people go along like sheep to the slaughter!  

IT’S NOT GOOD

Pneumococcal pneumonia
could take you out of your
daily routine for weeks.



Overview

Causes

Symptoms

Severity


Pneumococcal pneumonia is an infectious, potentially serious bacterial lung disease you can catch anytime, anywhere. In severe cases, it can put you in the hospital and even be life-threatening.



Pneumococcal pneumonia can be passed from person to person. You can catch it from a cough or close contact.



Many people think it’s a cold or the flu, but it’s not.

Unlike a cold or the flu, which are caused by viruses, pneumococcal pneumonia is caused by bacteria. Symptoms can be severe and hit you without warning. In fact, it can take weeks before you feel like yourself again—the fatigue can make it hard to get through the day.

Video and more at the link

[schwartzie]

Polite woman is done with Covid .stands her ground!