Mark Mallett is a former award-winning journalist with CTV News Edmonton (CFRN TV) and resides in Canada.
THERE perhaps is no issue more contentious than the mandatory mask laws spreading across the world. Aside from sharp disagreements on their effectiveness, the issue is dividing not only the general public but churches. Some priests have forbidden parishioners to enter the sanctuary without masks while others have even called the police on their flock.October 27th, 2020; lifesitenews.com Some regions have required that face coverings be enforced in one’s own home lifesitenews.com while some countries have mandated that individuals wear masks while driving alone in your car.Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, looptt.comDr. Anthony Fauci of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) goes even further saying that, aside from a facial mask, “If you have goggles or an eye shield, you should use it.”abcnews.go.com Democrat Joe Biden stated, “masks save lives — period,”usnews.com and that when he becomes President, his first action will be to force mask wearing across the board claiming, “These masks make a gigantic difference.”brietbart.com Some Brazilian scientists alleged that refusing to wear a facial covering is a sign of a “serious personality disorder.”the-sun.com And Eric Toner, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, flatly stated that mask wearing and social distancing will be with us for “several years”cnet.com as did a Spanish virologist.marketwatch.com
Given the extraordinary imposition this is, under pain of fines or jail;texastribune.org given that new strains of the coronavirus are emerging in Denmark sparking fears of a “new pandemic”;November 5th, 2020, theguardian.comgiven that none of this is going away soon… the question of the hour that should be relevant to politicians and bishops alike is whether enforced mask policy is actually sound science. This article is a followup to Unmasking the Plan — one of the most widely shared writings on this website — which was about the spiritual consequences of masking. The following is a resource for you and your families, based on scientific studies and data, about the physical consequences…
ASSUMPTIONS vs SCIENCE
“How could masks not work?” That’s the basic assumption behind most people who dutifully don their designer bandanas as they venture into the public. “It’s covering my mouth and nose so it must be doing something. Therefore, it’s the loving, charitable thing to do, right?”
In getting to the bottom of that question, one of the challenges today is getting past the media’s censorship monster. As I carefully explained in The Pandemic of Control, there is clearly a narrative being fed to the public that is strictly guarded and that even many accredited scientists and medical doctors are not allowed to challenge. The level of censorship is truly remarkable, unlike anything we’ve seen in the Western world until now. Recent news broke that a top medical journal has allowed authors to secretly alter data sets in their papers without publishing notices of correction, hence obscuring the weaponized origins The evidence, according to scientists, continues to mount that COVID-19 was possibly manipulated in a laboratory before it was accidentally or intentionally released into the populace. While some scientists in the UK assert that COVID-19 came from natural origins alone,(nature.com) a paper from South China’s University of Technology claims ‘the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.'(Feb. 16th, 2020; dailymail.co.uk) In early February 2020, Dr. Francis Boyle, who drafted the U.S. “Biological Weapons Act”, gave a detailed statement admitting that the 2019 Wuhan Coronavirus is an offensive Biological Warfare Weapon and that the World Health Organization (WHO) already knows about it.(cf. zerohedge.com) An Israeli biological warfare analyst said much the same.(Jan. 26th, 2020; washingtontimes.com) Dr. Peter Chumakov of the Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology and Russian Academy of Sciences claims that “while the Wuhan scientists’ goal in creating the coronavirus was not malicious—instead, they were trying to study the pathogenicity of the virus… They did absolutely crazy things… For example, inserts in the genome, which gave the virus the ability to infect human cells.”(zerohedge.com) Professor Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Prize winner for Medicine and the man who discovered the HIV virus in 1983, claims that SARS-CoV-2 is a manipulated virus that was accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan, China.(cf. mercola.com) A new documentary, quoting several scientists, points toward COVID-19 as an engineered virus.(mercola.com) A team of Australian scientists has produced new evidence the novel coronavirus shows signs “of human intervention.”(lifesitenews.com; washingtontimes.com) Former head of the British intelligence agency M16, Sir Richard Dearlove, said he believes the COVID-19 virus was created in a lab and spread accidentally.(jpost.com) A joint British-Norwegian study alleges that the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is a “chimera” constructed in a Chinese lab.(Taiwannews.com) Professor Giuseppe Tritto, an internationally known expert in biotechnology and nanotechnology and president of the World Academy of Biomedical Sciences and Technologies (WABT) says that “It was genetically engineered in the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s P4 (high-containment) lab in a program supervised by the Chinese military.”(lifesitnews.com) And respected Chinese virologist Dr. Li-Meng Yan, who fled Hong Kong after exposing Bejing’s knowledge of the coronavirus well before reports of it emerged, stated that “the meat market in Wuhan is a smoke screen and this virus is not from nature… It comes from the lab in Wuhan.”(dailymail.co.uk) of COVID-19.“Top Medical Journal Caught in Massive Cover-Up”, November 5th, 2020; mercola.com There truly is a massive Pandemic of Control breaking out.
So, here’s what your favorite news network is probably not reporting.
Up until COVID-19 was declared a “pandemic,” the science did not support mask wearing, even though social media lit up with black and white photos from the 1918 influenza pandemic of people wearing masks, as if this were proof that they worked. On the contrary, W.H. Kellogg, M.D., infectious diseases expert and then-executive officer of the California State Board of Health, made this observation in 1920 on the failure of masking to contain the rampant influenza spread:
The masks, contrary to expectation, were worn cheerfully and universally, and also, contrary to expectation of what should follow under such circumstances, no effect on the epidemic curve was to be seen. Something was plainly wrong with our hypotheses. —W Kellogg. “An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks.” Am J Pub Health,1920. 34-42.
Fast forward one hundred years, and the World Health Organization’s (WHO) own literature echoes the same:
Meta-analyses in systematic literature reviews have reported that the use of N95 respirators compared with the use of medical masks is not associated with any statistically significant lower risk of the clinical respiratory illness outcomes or laboratory-confirmed influenza or viral infections… The use of cloth masks (referred to as fabric masks in this document) as an alternative to medical masks is not considered appropriate for protection of health workers based on limited available evidence… At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID- 19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19. — “Guidance on the use of masks for the general public”, June 5th, 2020; who.int
Epidemiologist Dr. Andrew Bostom of Brown University likewise confirms that limited experimental observations…
…provide no rational, evidence-based justification for daily, prolonged mask usage by the general public to prevent infection with COVID-19. Moreover, a subsequent pooled (so-called “meta-”) analysis of ten controlled trials assessing extended, real-world, non-health-care-setting mask usage revealed that masking did not reduce the rate of laboratory-proven infections with the respiratory virus influenza. —July 11th, 2012; medium.com
Indeed, the very latest CDC statistics reveal that, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never wore a mask. “Community and Close Contact Exposures Associated with COVID-19 Among Symptomatic Adults ≥18 Years in 11 Outpatient Health Care Facilities”, United States, July 2020; cdc.gov It’s obviously noteworthy that with mask-wearing being enforced and increasing in countries, cases are still rising—which doesn’t make a good case for masks. Again, there are evidence-based reasons as to why. A policy review paper published in Emerging Infectious Diseases in May 2020—the CDC’s own journal—states:
Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza… In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs [randomized controlled trials] that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks… — “Emerging Infectious Diseases”, Abstract; pps. 97-972, Vol. 26, no. 5; cdc.gov
The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) also released similar study findingsCowling BJ, Zhou Y, Ip DKM, Leung GM, Aiello AE. “Face masks to prevent influenza transmission: a systematic review”, Epidemiol Infect, 2010,138:449–56/Bin-Reza F, Lopez VC, Nicoll A, Chamberland ME. “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence“, Influenza Other Respi Viruses, 2012,6:257–67 after the 2009 influenza outbreak.
The key findings include: Masks worn by ill individuals may protect uninfected individuals from virus transmission, but little evidence exists that mask use by well individuals avoids infection… — “Public health measures: Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Planning Guidance for the Health Sector”, December 18, 2018, 2.3.2, canada.ca
A study of 15 randomized trials, , , , , , , , , , , , , concluded in April 2020 that,
Compared to no masks there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases or influenzafor masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers. —”Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses”, April 7th, 2020;
A 2019 study published in the JAMA journal of 2862 participants showed that both N95 respirators and surgical masks “resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory confirmed influenza.”“N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel”, September3rd, 2019; jamanetwork.com
One study claiming to show “Decrease in Hospitalizations for COVID-19 after Mask Mandates in 1083 U.S. Counties” was just withdrawn by its authors. The revised Abstract states:
The authors have withdrawn this manuscript because there are increased rates of SARS- CoV-2 cases in the areas that we originally analyzed in this study. —November 4th, 2020; medrxiv.org
MASKS: ARE THEY SPREADING THE VIRUS?
Dr. Bostom points out that the authors of the meta-analyses he cites “further concluded with a caution that using face masks improperly might ‘increase the risk for (viral) transmission.”medium.com It does not take a scientist to know why. Spend five minutes in your local box store watching everyone from shoppers to cashiers adjusting their masks, pulling them off, putting them back on, touching merchandise, surfaces, keypads, etc. and, clearly, this is a failing experiment. As CBC News reported:
A face mask is meant to limit the spread of COVID-19. But if it slips below your nose, hovers around your chin, or you touch the outside with your hands, medical experts say that might be riskier than not wearing one at all. —cbc.ca
If not used properly, masks may lead to a greater risk of pandemic influenza transmission because of contamination… — “Public health measures: Canadian Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Planning Guidance for the Health Sector”, December 18, 2018, 18.104.22.168, canada.ca
Indeed, “Danish researchers recently conducted a randomized trial in an effort to prove the usefulness of face masks against COVID-19 infection but ended up proving the opposite.”mercola.com The unpublished study, which is currently only available in German,thieme-connect.com concluded:
…tens of millions of contaminations can occur each day as people use the masks inappropriately, touch their faces and neglect to wash their hands. For this reason, universal mask wearing may actually do more harm than good. This is clearly important information that should be disseminated to the general public, yet medical journals are shunning the paper, probably because it doesn’t align with their narrative that supports universal mask recommendations. —November 2nd, 2020; Dr. Joseph Mercola, mercola.com
Watch this brief video clip of a nurse demonstrating how easily touching your mask can spread a virus. It starts at 8:23 for about a minute and a half:
In fact, a South Korean study found that there was “greater contamination on the outer than the inner mask surfaces.”“Effectiveness of Surgical and Cotton Masks in Blocking SARS–CoV-2: A Controlled Comparison in 4 Patients”, July 7th, 2020; acpjournals.org As detailed in WHO’s guidance memo,“Guidance on the use of masks for the general public”, June 5th, 202o; who.int at the very least, you need to make sure your medical mask is:
- Changed when wet, soiled or damaged;
- Untouched. Do not adjust or displace it from your face for any reason. “If this happens, the mask should be safely removed and replaced; and hand hygiene performed”;
- Discarded and changed after caring for any patient on contact/droplet precautions for other pathogens;
- Staff who do not work in clinical areas do not need to use a medical mask during routine activities (e.g., administrative staff).”
Dr. Joseph Mercola therefore asks,
…if administrative hospital staff do not need to wear masks, why would healthy individuals need to wear them when walking around, especially in open-air areas? Broward county, Florida, has gone so far as to issue an emergency order mandating masks to be worn inside your own residence. But why, if administrative hospital staff aren’t even advised to wear them at work? — “WHO Admits: No Direct Evidence Masks Prevent Viral Infection”, August 3rd, 2020; mercola.com
Surgical masks used in healthcare settings, such as during surgery, are meant to prevent bacterial or viral infections by blocking respiratory droplets.Cowling BJ, Zhou Y, Ip DK, Leung GM, Aiello AE, “Face masks to prevent influenza transmission: a systematic review”, Epidemiol Infect, 2010; 138:449-56 The PHAC study states:
Face masks (i.e., disposable surgical, medical or dental procedure masks) provide a physical barrier that may help prevent the transmission of influenza viruses from an ill person to a well person by blocking large-particle respiratory droplets propelled by coughing or sneezing. —Ibid; 22.214.171.124 Use of Masks, canada.ca
So while it is true that surgical masks or highly dense cloth masks may reduced the transmission of respiratory droplets, they are completely ineffective in stopping the spread of aerosolized particles that the infected exhale. Here’s why, and it’s not rocket science. The coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) has a diameter of 0.06 to 0.14 microns. Medical N95 masks—which are considered the most effective—can filter particles as small as 0.3 microns, so their openings are too large. Surgical masks, homemade masks, T-shirts and bandanas are even more porous.“More Evidence Masks Don’t Work to Prevent COVID-19”, Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 11th, 2020; mercola.com
Second, most controlled studies have focused on influenza viruses that have revealed masks to be ineffective in stopping airborne flu particles. Thus, it’s totally illogical to assume that masks can stop COVID-19, which is roughly half the size of a flu virus. Thus, as stated by The National Academies of Sciences in its “Rapid Expert Consultation on the Effectiveness of Fabric Masks for the COVID-19 Pandemic” report:
The evidence from… laboratory filtration studies suggest that… fabric masks may reduce the transmission of larger respiratory droplets. There is little evidence regarding the transmission of small aerosolized particulates of the size potentially exhaled by asymptomatic or presymptomatic individuals with COVID-19. —April 8, 2020, nap.edu
Hence, the CDC’s own journal adds:
Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids. There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza. — “Emerging Infectious Diseases”, Vol. 26, no. 5, May 2020; cdc.gov
This is confirmed by the authors of a study in The New England Journal of Medicine:
We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic… —”Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era”, Michael Klompas, M.D., M.P.H., Charles A. Morris, M.D., M.P.H., Julia Sinclair, M.B.A., Madelyn Pearson, D.N.P., R.N., and Erica S. Shenoy, M.D., Ph.D.From the Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute (M.K.), Brigham and Women’s Hospital (M.K., C.A.M., J.S., M.P.), Harvard Medical School (M.K., C.A.M., E.S.S.), and the Infection Control Unit and Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital (E.S.S.) — all in Boston.; May 21, 2020; nejm.org
The science simply does not support any significant reduction of these viruses through facial coverings, much less non-standardized masks made out of a variety of cloths. Which is why Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in Holland, states, “Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence. There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.”August 1st, 2020; dailymail.co.uk Henning Bundgaard, chief physician at Denmark’s Rigshospitalet, worries that facials masks are giving the public a “false sense of security.”July 26th, 2020; bloombergquint.com Dutch Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark said: “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.”August 3rd, 2020; the-sun.com In the U.S., experts from the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy defended their report that there is “limited impact on lowering COVID-19 transmission” through wearing facial masks or coverings.April 1st, 2020; cidrap.umn.edu And Dr. Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert, stated:
The studies so far have not shown a dramatic effect, countries such as France and others, which have obligatory mask-wearing in place, have still experienced a big spread of the disease. —October 19th, 2020; newstatemen.com
Once again, here is the World Health Organization in its June 5th, 2020 interm “Guidance on the use of masks for the general public”:
Many countries have recommended the use of fabric masks/face coverings for the general public. At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider… —pg. 6, apps.who.int
Before we answer the obvious question emerging as to “why” governments are therefore not only recommending masks but forcing the public to wear them, it’s crucial to note the actual harm wearing masks can cause. Dr. Denis Rancourt, Ph.D. is a researcher with the Ontario Civil Liberties Association in Canada. They have written a letter to the WHO laying out several logical arguments against their demands that face masks be worn in the general public. Among their concerns,
In one of the randomized control trials, a big one that compared masks and N95 respirators among health care workers, the only statistically significant outcome they discovered and reported on was that the health care workers who wore the N95 respirators were much more likely to suffer from headaches. —July 19th, 2020; mercola.com; see study “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta‐analysis”, March 13th, 2020; wiley.com
A study involving 158 healthcare workers aged 21 to 35 years of age found that 81% developed headaches from wearing a face mask.“Headaches Associated With Personal Protective Equipment – A Cross‐Sectional Study Among Frontline Healthcare Workers During COVID‐19”, Jonathan J.Y. Ong et al.; published in Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, March 30th, 2020 Nationally recognized U.S. board-certified neurosurgeon, Dr. Russell Blaylock, warns that face masks can create other serious health risks to the wearer as well.
Now that we have established that there is no scientific evidence necessitating the wearing of a face mask for prevention… Several studies have indeed found significant problems with wearing such mask. This can vary from headaches, to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications… — “Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy”, May 11th, 2020; technocracy.news
He adds that, for those wearing these masks on a daily basis, especially if worn for several hours by an infected person, they will be constantly re-breathing the virus, 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.
Chief medical officer of health in New Brunswick, Canada, Dr. Jennifer Russell, agrees, warning that “people should wear masks for a short period of time.”cbc.ca But other provincial health officials are calling for the populace to make mask wearing a “habit” while Canada’s chief public health officer, Dr. Theresa Tam, actually recommends that Canadians wear a “non-medical mask or facial covering”.ctvnews.ca However, a 2015 study published in the BMJ military medical journal warns:
Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. —BMJ Journals, “A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers”, C Raina MacIntyre et al. bmjopen.bmj.com
The study also found that healthcare workers wearing cloth masks were found to have 13 times the risk of influenza-like illness than those wearing medical masks. As for habitually wearing masks, healthcare workers wearing cloth masks had significantly higher rates of influenza-like illness after four weeks of continuous on-the-job use, when compared to controls.BMJ Journals, “A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers”, C Raina MacIntyre et al. bmjopen.bmj.com
Tam revised her recommendations recently advising that people use paper towels or baby wipes to add a third layer to their masks.November 5th, 2020, globalnews.ca Dr. Anna Banerji, an infectious disease expert with the University of Toronto, says most two-layer cotton masks can be easily transformed into a three-layer filtered mask by ripping out the seams and adding a filtered material.November 5th, 2020, globalnews.ca However, MacIntyre et al.’s study concluded: “Observations during SARS suggested double-masking and other practices increased the risk of infection because of moisture, liquid diffusion and pathogen retention. These effects may be associated with cloth masks.”C Raina MacIntyre et al. bmjopen.bmj.com
Moreover, tearing apart one’s mask and adding non-medical propylene materials such as the above or “craft” fabric, could be dangerous. Researchers have found that “Loose particulate was seen on each type of mask”, which can be breathed into the deep tissue of the lungs.
If widespread masking continues, then the potential for inhaling mask fibers and environmental and biological debris continues on a daily basis for hundreds of millions of people. This should be alarming for physicians and epidemiologists knowledgeable in occupational hazards. —September 2020, researchgate.net
Surgical masks are made of polypropylene and are a known asthma trigger.saswh.ca And dentists are now warning of “mask mouth” since wearing a mask increases dryness of the mouth and a buildup of bad bacteria.
We’re seeing inflammation in people’s gums that have been healthy forever, and cavities in people who have never had them before. About 50% of our patients are being impacted by this, [so] we decided to name it ‘mask mouth’. —Dr. Rob Ramondi, August 5th, 2020; newyorkpost.com
Typically, a good quality fitting mask will be tight around your nose. So, as a result, what people are doing is they’re breathing through their mouth. And when you’re breathing through your mouth it will dry out your mouth… A dry mouth can lead to oral-health issues. The bacteria in your mouth will have a more fertile breeding ground, you’ll be more likely to have tooth decay, you’ll smell bad breath, those sorts of things. —Dentist, Justin Russo, ABC11.com
I have also learned that teachers are reporting increased eye infections among children wearing masks. In a press conference, Dr. James Meehan, MD testifies:
I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections. Reports coming from my colleagues, all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise. Why might that be? Because untrained members of the public are wearing medical masks, repeatedly… in a non-sterile fashion… They’re becoming contaminated. They’re pulling them off of their car seat, off the rearview mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time. New research is showing that cloth masks may be increasing the aerosolization of the SARS-COV-2 virus into the environment causing an increased transmission of the disease. —August 18th, 2020; activistpost.com
And then there are also hidden emotional and psychological dangers caused by the stress of such heavy-handed mandates as mask wearing. Rancourt notes that the prolonged stress of these measures can actually make one more susceptible to disease.
Psychological stress is proven to be a factor that can measurably depress the immune system and induce diseases, including: immune response dysfunction, depression, cardiovascular disease and cancer. —Letter to Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO, June 21st, 2020; ocla.ca
And here’s where all of this takes a bizarre turn. Dr. Anthony Fauci, one of the lead members of the Trump administration’s White House Coronavirus Task Force, stated on 60 Minutes in March of 2020:
Right now, in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks. There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask may make people feel a little bit better, and it might even stop a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. —March 8th, 2020; cbsnews.com
Not long after, Fauci did a complete turnabout. In an interview with Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerberg, Fauci claimed that it was “evolving” science that changed his mind (though he cited no evidence). Astonishingly, he goes on to tell Zuckerberg that there is no indication whatsoever that wearing a mask “has any deleterious effects” and that he wears a mask when he’s outside “all the time”, even while running.July 17th, 2020; NBC News, youtube.com
UPDATE: On November 10th, 2020, the CDC released a new brief on mask-wearing citing several studies. It is notable that in most of the cited studies that claimed some benefit in mask wearing, they occurred at the same time that social distancing and lockdowns as well as hand hygiene protocols were put into place. Several of the studies noted that these were not factored into their studies.
The decrease in […] infections could be confounded by other interventions inside and outside of the health care system, such as restrictions on elective procedures, social distancing measures, and increased masking in public spaces, which are limitations of this study. Despite these local and statewide measures, the case number continued to increase in Massachusetts throughout the study period… —July 14th, 2020, “Association Between Universal Masking in a Health Care System and SARS-CoV-2 Positivity Among Health Care Workers”, Xiaowen Wang, MD et al., jamanetwork.com
Indeed, as mentioned earlier, one study that purported to show the benefits of mask wearing in several American states had to be withdrawn on November 4th, 2020, as cases were increasing in these same areas after the study was published. Since the physics of masks hasn’t changed—and that science has already established their limitations—the only thing that has changed is social distancing, etc. How many of the studies cited in this new brief by the CDC will end up having to revise their studies as “positive tests” continue to rise nearly everywhere now, even while mask-wearing has become the norm, if not mandatory?medrxiv.org
A new Danish study published on November 18th, 2020 in the Annals of Internal Medicine, and which involved 4862 who completed the study, found that between those who wore masks and those who didn’t, “the difference observed was not statistically significant” in those who became infected with SARS-CoV-2.
In this community-based, randomized controlled trial conducted in a setting where mask wearing was uncommon and was not among other recommended public health measures related to COVID-19, a recommendation to wear a surgical mask when outside the home among others did not reduce, at conventional levels of statistical significance, incident SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with no mask recommendation. —”Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers”, Henning Bundgaard, DMSc et. al., November 18th, 2020; acpjournals.org
Finally, a new study published on November 20th, 2020 in the prestigious Nature journal perhaps gives the strongest evidence yet that mask-wearing by the healthy (ie. asymptomatic) is unnecessary. It found that…
There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases… Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no “viable virus” in positive cases detected in this study. —”Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China”, Shiyi Cao, Yong Gan et. al, nature.com
In other words, the healthy are not a threat to public safety.
WHY MANDATED MASKS THEN?
Since the science almost unanimously fails to support the effectiveness of a healthy general population wearing face masks, and that they may actually be spreading the virus more rapidly as such, why are governments desperate to impose these laws while threatening fines or prison for those not in compliance? The authors of the New England Journal of Medicine study concluded:
…masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask… Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19. —May 21, 2020; nejm.org
Of course, barring people from Mass, threatening healthy people with fines, forcing uncomfortable masks that make breathing, talking, and hearing more difficult, arguably increases anxiety.
Perhaps the World Health Organization’s June 2020 reportJune 5th, 2020; who.int gives us a bit clearer picture of the “benefits” of wearing masks that actually have little to do with personal health:
- Reduced potential stigmatization of individuals wearing masks to prevent infecting others or of people caring for COVID-19 patients in nonclinical settings;
- Making people feel they can play a role in contributing to stopping spread of the virus;
- Reminding people to be compliant with other measures.
In other words, it’s an opportunity for virtue-signaling and psychological game-play. But the WHO does not stop there. They also cite…
- Potential social and economic benefits:
Encouraging the public to create their own fabric masks may promote individual enterprise and community integration… The production of non-medical masks may offer a source of income for those able to manufacture masks within their communities. Fabric masks can also be a form of cultural expression, encouraging public acceptance of protection measures in general. —June 5th, 2020; who.int
Yes, while governments continue to wipe out the small business sector by unprecedented lockdowns, at least “Jimmy the Mask Maker” can thrive.
This is utterly bizarre and contradictory. People should not be threatened with 180 days in prison for choosing not to virtue-signal and actually protect their health based on sound science.
If that’s you, you’re not alone. America’s Frontline Doctors (AFLD), a “diverse, exceedingly well-credentialed” growing group of doctors have characterized mask wearing as “completely irrelevant to blocking the… virus.”October 29th, 2020, lifesitenews.com They’ve taken their message to the steps of the White House with videos that have gone viral—and, of course, that have been promptly censored. Their message is to counter “the massive disinformation campaign regarding the pandemic.”americasfrontlinedoctors.com
And then there is The Great Barrington Declaration, which was spearheaded by doctors from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford University. They warn that current pandemic policies targeting the healthy are having “damaging physical and mental health impacts” and recommend letting the healthy “live their lives normally to build up immunity through natural infection,” while improving safeguards for the elderly and others at greater risk of death from COVID-19.October 8th, 2020, washingtontimes.com The Declaration has been signed now by over 33,000 scientists and doctors from around the globe. Of course, they too are being attacked by both governments and armchair critics for what amounts to common sense and sound science, given that the CDC reports a recovery rate of 99.5% for everyone beneath the age of 69.September 10th, 2020; cdc.gov As a meme circulating on the internet said, “It’s now ‘conspiracy theory’ to believe the immune system is capable of doing the job it was designed to do.”
In their letter to the WHO, the Ontario Civil Liberties Association warned that countries such as Canada are quickly sliding into totalitarianism through the extreme measures that are pounding the public into submission and destroying local economies.
The way to slow that and prevent it is for people to object and to scale it back. As soon as you agree with an irrational order, an irrational command that is not science-based, then you are doing nothing to bring back society towards the free and democratic society that we should have. You are allowing this slow march towards totalitarianism. —Letter to Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO, June 21st, 2020; ocla.ca
Hence, organizations such as the U.S. nonprofit Stand for Health Freedom are urging citizens to practice peaceful civil disobedience to protect their “health” and “liberty.”
THE GREAT RESET
It would be wrong not to bring this article around to the “big picture.” Clearly, as social media censors the facts, as the mainstream media controls the narrative, as billion dollar pharmaceutical companies prepare for mandatory vaccines, as the economic sector is being destroyed… there is more here than meets the eye.
In February and March we were told not to wear masks. What changed? The science didn’t change. The politics did. This is about compliance. It’s not about science… —Dr. James Meehan, August 18th, 2020; press conference, activistpost.com
There could be no better proof of this than my own province of Saskatchewan, Canada. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, only 25 people have died as of this writing, and just one in the past few months—hardly a pandemic. Because we are entering a colder season, people are staying indoors and getting less Vitamin D while testing is increasing; it is no surprise then that cases are now rising. But deaths are not. And yet, tomorrow, the province is set to make masks mandatory under penalty. It’s as if the science no longer matters; leaders are now promoting a practice that science clearly shows may be doing more harm than good.
The public is indeed being forced into submission while curiously, with one, sudden common voice, global leaders are now telling us why: it is to completely “reset” the entire global system—the “Great Reset” they’re calling it. As I explained in that article and The Pandemic of Control, the ultimate goal is global Communism. To enter this Reset, compliance by not just individuals but entire nations is compulsory and will likely include a vaccination, a Digital ID, and the surrender of private property in order to “reset” ballooning global debt. Everything I’ve just stated is directly from the United Nations’ websites and their affiliates.
A Catholic exorcist in Ireland is pulling no punches.
…the current pandemic and its economic aftermath is a dress rehearsal for the advent of the Antichrist and the great tribulation (Rev 7:14) which will precede the second coming of Jesus. —Fr Pat Collins, CM; September 24th, 2020; theirishcatholic.com
But don’t worry. The Great Reset is for the common good. Just like mandatory masks.
On how Thieves or Good Samaritan Oil can fight viruses: The Real Witchcraft
Your support and prayers are why
you are reading this today.
Bless you and thank you.
To journey with Mark in The Now Word,
click on the banner below to subscribe.
Your email will not be shared with anyone.
|↑1||October 27th, 2020; lifesitenews.com|
|↑3||Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, looptt.com|
|↑11||November 5th, 2020, theguardian.com|
|↑12||The evidence, according to scientists, continues to mount that COVID-19 was possibly manipulated in a laboratory before it was accidentally or intentionally released into the populace. While some scientists in the UK assert that COVID-19 came from natural origins alone,(nature.com) a paper from South China’s University of Technology claims ‘the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.'(Feb. 16th, 2020; dailymail.co.uk) In early February 2020, Dr. Francis Boyle, who drafted the U.S. “Biological Weapons Act”, gave a detailed statement admitting that the 2019 Wuhan Coronavirus is an offensive Biological Warfare Weapon and that the World Health Organization (WHO) already knows about it.(cf. zerohedge.com) An Israeli biological warfare analyst said much the same.(Jan. 26th, 2020; washingtontimes.com) Dr. Peter Chumakov of the Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology and Russian Academy of Sciences claims that “while the Wuhan scientists’ goal in creating the coronavirus was not malicious—instead, they were trying to study the pathogenicity of the virus… They did absolutely crazy things… For example, inserts in the genome, which gave the virus the ability to infect human cells.”(zerohedge.com) Professor Luc Montagnier, 2008 Nobel Prize winner for Medicine and the man who discovered the HIV virus in 1983, claims that SARS-CoV-2 is a manipulated virus that was accidentally released from a laboratory in Wuhan, China.(cf. mercola.com) A new documentary, quoting several scientists, points toward COVID-19 as an engineered virus.(mercola.com) A team of Australian scientists has produced new evidence the novel coronavirus shows signs “of human intervention.”(lifesitenews.com; washingtontimes.com) Former head of the British intelligence agency M16, Sir Richard Dearlove, said he believes the COVID-19 virus was created in a lab and spread accidentally.(jpost.com) A joint British-Norwegian study alleges that the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is a “chimera” constructed in a Chinese lab.(Taiwannews.com) Professor Giuseppe Tritto, an internationally known expert in biotechnology and nanotechnology and president of the World Academy of Biomedical Sciences and Technologies (WABT) says that “It was genetically engineered in the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s P4 (high-containment) lab in a program supervised by the Chinese military.”(lifesitnews.com) And respected Chinese virologist Dr. Li-Meng Yan, who fled Hong Kong after exposing Bejing’s knowledge of the coronavirus well before reports of it emerged, stated that “the meat market in Wuhan is a smoke screen and this virus is not from nature… It comes from the lab in Wuhan.”(dailymail.co.uk)|
|↑13||“Top Medical Journal Caught in Massive Cover-Up”, November 5th, 2020; mercola.com|
|↑14||“Community and Close Contact Exposures Associated with COVID-19 Among Symptomatic Adults ≥18 Years in 11 Outpatient Health Care Facilities”, United States, July 2020; cdc.gov|
|↑15||Cowling BJ, Zhou Y, Ip DKM, Leung GM, Aiello AE. “Face masks to prevent influenza transmission: a systematic review”, Epidemiol Infect, 2010,138:449–56/Bin-Reza F, Lopez VC, Nicoll A, Chamberland ME. “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence“, Influenza Other Respi Viruses, 2012,6:257–67|
|↑16||, , , , , , , , , , , , ,|
|↑17||“N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel”, September3rd, 2019; jamanetwork.com|
|↑21||“Effectiveness of Surgical and Cotton Masks in Blocking SARS–CoV-2: A Controlled Comparison in 4 Patients”, July 7th, 2020; acpjournals.org|
|↑22||“Guidance on the use of masks for the general public”, June 5th, 202o; who.int|
|↑23||Cowling BJ, Zhou Y, Ip DK, Leung GM, Aiello AE, “Face masks to prevent influenza transmission: a systematic review”, Epidemiol Infect, 2010; 138:449-56|
|↑24||“More Evidence Masks Don’t Work to Prevent COVID-19”, Dr. Joseph Mercola, September 11th, 2020; mercola.com|
|↑25||From the Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute (M.K.), Brigham and Women’s Hospital (M.K., C.A.M., J.S., M.P.), Harvard Medical School (M.K., C.A.M., E.S.S.), and the Infection Control Unit and Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital (E.S.S.) — all in Boston.|
|↑26||August 1st, 2020; dailymail.co.uk|
|↑27||July 26th, 2020; bloombergquint.com|
|↑28||August 3rd, 2020; the-sun.com|
|↑29||April 1st, 2020; cidrap.umn.edu|
|↑30||“Headaches Associated With Personal Protective Equipment – A Cross‐Sectional Study Among Frontline Healthcare Workers During COVID‐19”, Jonathan J.Y. Ong et al.; published in Headache: The Journal of Head and Face Pain, March 30th, 2020|
|↑33||BMJ Journals, “A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers”, C Raina MacIntyre et al. bmjopen.bmj.com|
|↑34||November 5th, 2020, globalnews.ca|
|↑35||November 5th, 2020, globalnews.ca|
|↑36||C Raina MacIntyre et al. bmjopen.bmj.com|
|↑38||Sept. 26th, 2020; youtube.com; cf. sott.net|
|↑39||July 17th, 2020; NBC News, youtube.com|
|↑41||June 5th, 2020; who.int|
|↑42||October 29th, 2020, lifesitenews.com|
|↑44||October 8th, 2020, washingtontimes.com|
|↑45||September 10th, 2020; cdc.gov|