It is not unreasonable to conclude that surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are being used (without other forms of PPE protection), have no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus. Current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful. The body of evidence indicates that face masks are largely ineffective.
The Evidence on COVID-19 Face Masks and Mask Mandates and Harms
MASK-INEFFECTIVENESS
1) Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers, Bundgaard, 2021“Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8 percent) and 53 control participants (2.1 percent). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95 percent CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results … the recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50 percent in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use.”
“Our study showed that in a group of predominantly young male military recruits, approximately 2 percent became positive for SARS-CoV-2, as determined by qPCR assay, during a 2-week, strictly enforced quarantine. Multiple, independent virus strain transmission clusters were identified … all recruits wore double-layered cloth masks at all times indoors and outdoors.”
“There is low certainty evidence from nine trials (3507 participants) that wearing a mask may make little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI) compared to not wearing a mask (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95 percent confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.18. There is moderate certainty evidence that wearing a mask probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza compared to not wearing a mask (RR 0.91, 95 percent CI 0.66 to 1.26; 6 trials; 3005 participants) … the pooled results of randomised trials did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks during seasonal influenza.”
“The available clinical evidence of facemask efficacy is of low quality and the best available clinical evidence has mostly failed to show efficacy, with fourteen of sixteen identified randomized controlled trials comparing face masks to no mask controls failing to find statistically significant benefit in the intent-to-treat populations. Of sixteen quantitative meta-analyses, eight were equivocal or critical as to whether evidence supports a public recommendation of masks, and the remaining eight supported a public mask intervention on limited evidence primarily on the basis of the precautionary principle.”
“Evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza … none of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group … the overall reduction in ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza cases in the face mask group was not significant in either studies.”
“We agree that the data supporting the effectiveness of a cloth mask or face covering are very limited. We do, however, have data from laboratory studies that indicate cloth masks or face coverings offer very low filter collection efficiency for the smaller inhalable particles we believe are largely responsible for transmission, particularly from pre- or asymptomatic individuals who are not coughing or sneezing … though we support mask wearing by the general public, we continue to conclude that cloth masks and face coverings are likely to have limited impact on lowering COVID-19 transmission, because they have minimal ability to prevent the emission of small particles, offer limited personal protection with respect to small particle inhalation, and should not be recommended as a replacement for physical distancing or reducing time in enclosed spaces with many potentially infectious people.”
“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 …. The calculus may be different, however, in health care settings. First and foremost, a mask is a core component of the personal protective equipment (PPE) clinicians need when caring for symptomatic patients with respiratory viral infections, in conjunction with gown, gloves, and eye protection … universal masking alone is not a panacea. A mask will not protect providers caring for a patient with active Covid-19 if it’s not accompanied by meticulous hand hygiene, eye protection, gloves, and a gown. A mask alone will not prevent health care workers with early Covid-19 from contaminating their hands and spreading the virus to patients and colleagues. Focusing on universal masking alone may, paradoxically, lead to more transmission of Covid-19 if it diverts attention from implementing more fundamental infection-control measures.”
“This systematic review found limited evidence that the use of masks might reduce the risk of viral respiratory infections. In the community setting, a possible reduced risk of influenza-like illness was found among mask users. In health care workers, the results show no difference between N95 masks and surgical masks on the risk of confirmed influenza or other confirmed viral respiratory infections, although possible benefits from N95 masks were found for preventing influenza-like illness or other clinical respiratory infections. Surgical masks might be superior to cloth masks but data are limited to 1 trial.”
“Nevertheless, high-efficiency masks, such as the KN95, still offer substantially higher apparent filtration efficiencies (60 percent and 46 percent for R95 and KN95 masks, respectively) than the more commonly used cloth (10 percent) and surgical masks (12 percent), and therefore are still the recommended choice in mitigating airborne disease transmission indoors.”
“Exercising with facemasks may reduce available Oxygen and increase air trapping preventing substantial carbon dioxide exchange. The hypercapnic hypoxia may potentially increase acidic environment, cardiac overload, anaerobic metabolism and renal overload, which may substantially aggravate the underlying pathology of established chronic diseases. Further contrary to the earlier thought, no evidence exists to claim the facemasks during exercise offer additional protection from the droplet transfer of the virus.”
“Following the commissioning of a new suite of operating rooms air movement studies showed a flow of air away from the operating table towards the periphery of the room. Oral microbial flora dispersed by unmasked male and female volunteers standing one metre from the table failed to contaminate exposed settle plates placed on the table. The wearing of face masks by non-scrubbed staff working in an operating room with forced ventilation seems to be unnecessary.”
“By intention-to-treat analysis, facemask use did not seem to be effective against laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 2.1, p = 0.18) nor against clinical respiratory infection (OR, 1.1; 95 percent CI, 0.9 to 1.4, p = 0.40).”
“Results obtained in the study show that common fabric materials may provide marginal protection against nanoparticles including those in the size ranges of virus-containing particles in exhaled breath.”
“The study indicates that N95 filtering facepiece respirators may not achieve the expected protection level against bacteria and viruses. An exhalation valve on the N95 respirator does not affect the respiratory protection; it appears to be an appropriate alternative to reduce the breathing resistance.”
“We conclude that the protection provided by surgical masks may be insufficient in environments containing potentially hazardous sub-micrometer-sized aerosols.”
“We included three trials, involving a total of 2106 participants. There was no statistically significant difference in infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials … from the limited results it is unclear whether the wearing of surgical face masks by members of the surgical team has any impact on surgical wound infection rates for patients undergoing clean surgery.”
“From the limited results it is unclear whether wearing surgical face masks results in any harm or benefit to the patient undergoing clean surgery.”
“We conclude that the filter efficiency test using the phi-X174 phage aerosol may overestimate the protective performance of nonwoven fabrics with filter structure compared to that against real pathogens such as the influenza virus.”
The use of masks and respirators to preventtransmission of influenza: a systematic review of thescientific evidence”None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection. Some evidence suggests that mask use is best undertaken as part of a package of personal protection especially hand hygiene.”
“Compared with surgical masks, N95 respirators perform better in laboratory testing, may provide superior protection in inpatient settings and perform equivalently in outpatient settings. Surgical mask and N95 respirator conservation strategies include extended use, reuse or decontamination, but these strategies may result in inferior protection. Limited evidence suggests that reused and improvised masks should be used when medical-grade protection is unavailable.”
“Standard N95 mask performance was used as a control to compare the results with cloth masks, and our results suggest that cloth masks are only marginally beneficial in protecting individuals from particles<2.5 μm.”
“Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.”
“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.”
“A survey of peer-reviewed studies shows that universal mask wearing (as opposed to wearing masks in specific settings) does not decrease the transmission of respiratory viruses from people wearing masks to people who are not wearing masks.”
“In fact, it is not unreasonable at this time to conclude that surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful.”
Face masks in public was not associated with reduced incidence.
“It would appear that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks. For instance, high rates of infection with cloth masks could be due to harms caused by cloth masks, or benefits of medical masks. The numerous systematic reviews that have been recently published all include the same evidence base so unsurprisingly broadly reach the same conclusions.”
“We observed no association of risk of transmission with reported mask usage by contacts, with the age or sex of the index case, or with the presence of respiratory symptoms in the index case at the initial study visit.”
“Ten RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, and there was no evidence that face masks are effective in reducing transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
“31 eligible studies (including 12 RCTs). Narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analysis of attack rates for primary and secondary prevention in 28 studies were performed. Based on the RCTs we would conclude that wearing facemasks can be very slightly protective against primary infection from casual community contact, and modestly protective against household infections when both infected and uninfected members wear facemasks. However, the RCTs often suffered from poor compliance and controls using facemasks.”
“The healthy people in our society should not be punished for being healthy, which is exactly what lockdowns, distancing, mask mandates, etc. do …. Children should not be wearing face coverings. We all need constant interaction with our environments and that is especially true for children. This is how their immune system develops. They are the lowest of the low-risk groups. Let them be kids and let them develop their immune systems …. The “Mask Mandate” idea is a truly ridiculous, knee-jerk reaction and needs to be withdrawn and thrown in the waste bin of disastrous policy, along with lockdowns and school closures. You can vote for a person without blindly supporting all of their proposals!”
“1,951,905 children in Sweden (as of December 31, 2019) who were 1 to 16 years of age, were examined … social distancing was encouraged in Sweden, but wearing face masks was not …. No child with Covid-19 died.”
“Wearing two masks offers limited benefits in preventing the spread of droplets that could carry the coronavirus compared to one well-fitted disposable mask, according to a Japanese study that modeled the dispersal of droplets on a supercomputer.”
“There was insufficient evidence to provide a recommendation on the use of facial barriers without other measures. We found insufficient evidence for a difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators and limited evidence to support effectiveness of quarantine.”
“Non-medical facemasks include a variety of products. There is no reliable evidence of the effectiveness of non-medical facemasks in community settings. There is likely to be substantial variation in effectiveness between products. However, there is only limited evidence from laboratory studies of potential differences in effectiveness when different products are used in the community.”
“It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all but operating in silence. Whatever its relation to contamination, bacterial counts, or the dissemination of squames, there is no direct evidence that the wearing of masks reduces wound infection.”
“As recently as 2010, the US National Academy of Sciences declared that, in the community setting, “face masks are not designed or certified to protect the wearer from exposure to respiratory hazards.” A number of studies have shown the inefficacy of the surgical mask in household settings to prevent transmission of the influenza virus.”
“Facemask use does not prevent clinical or laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections among Hajj pilgrims.”
“The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression.”
“None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection. Some evidence suggests that mask use is best undertaken as part of a package of personal protection especially hand hygiene.”
“Most studies found little to no evidence for the effectiveness of face masks in the general population, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.”
“These results indicate that the use of face masks might be reconsidered. Masks may be used to protect the operating team from drops of infected blood and from airborne infections, but have not been proven to protect the patient operated by a healthy operating team.”
“Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges.”
“First RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection … the rates of all infection outcomes were highest in the cloth mask arm, with the rate of ILI statistically significantly higher in the cloth mask arm (relative risk (RR)=13.00, 95 percent CI 1.69 to 100.07) compared with the medical mask arm. Cloth masks also had significantly higher rates of ILI compared with the control arm. An analysis by mask use showed ILI (RR=6.64, 95 percent CI 1.45 to 28.65) and laboratory-confirmed virus (RR=1.72, 95 percent CI 1.01 to 2.94) were significantly higher in the cloth masks group compared with the medical masks group. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97 percent and medical masks 44 percent.”
“Rather than proving the need to sow more panic, fear, and control over people, the story from India — the source of the “Delta” variant — continues to refute every current premise of COVID fascism …. Masks failed to stop the spread there.”
“No studies were needed to justify this practice since most understood viruses were far too small to be stopped by the wearing of most masks, other than sophisticated ones designed for that task and which were too costly and complicated for the general public to properly wear and keep changing or cleaning. It was also understood that long mask wearing was unhealthy for wearers for common sense and basic science reasons.”
The vast evidence shows that masks are ineffective.
“Seven studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness (9 studies; 3507 people); and probably makes no difference in how many people have flu confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 3005 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported, but included discomfort.”
“The use of masks in public spaces is questionable simply because of the lack of scientific data. If one also considers the necessary precautions, masks must even be considered a risk of infection in public spaces according to the rules known from hospitals …. If masks are worn by the population, the risk of infection is potentially increased, regardless of whether they are medical masks or whether they are so-called community masks designed in any way. If one considers the precautionary measures that the RKI as well as the international health authorities have pronounced, all authorities would even have to inform the population that masks should not be worn in public spaces at all. Because no matter whether it is a duty for all citizens or voluntarily borne by the citizens who want it for whatever reason, it remains a fact that masks can do more harm than good in public.”
“Kids need to see faces,” Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, told The Post. “Youngsters watch people’s mouths to learn to speak, read and understand emotions,” he said. “We have this idea that this disease is so bad that we must adopt any means necessary to stop it from spreading,” he said. “It’s not that masks in schools have no costs. They actually do have substantial costs.”
“This is important because children and/or students do not have the speech or language ability that adults have — they are not equally able and the ability to see the face and especially the mouth is critical to language acquisition which children and/or students are engaged in at all times. Furthermore, the ability to see the mouth is not only essential to communication but also essential to brain development.”
“Face Covering Mandates And Why They AREN’T Effective.”
“In truth, the CDC’s, U.K.’s, and WHO’s earlier guidance was much more consistent with the best medical research on masks’ effectiveness in preventing the spread of viruses. That research suggests that Americans’ many months of mask-wearing has likely provided little to no health benefit and might even have been counterproductive in preventing the spread of the novel coronavirus.”
“New research reveals that cloth masks filter just 10 percent of exhaled aerosols, with many people not wearing coverings that fit their face properly.”
“Mask mandates and lockdowns have had no discernible impact.”
“The 21 percent lower incidence in schools that required mask use among students was not statistically significant compared with schools where mask use was optional …. With tens of millions of American kids headed back to school in the fall, their parents and political leaders owe it to them to have a clear-sighted, scientifically rigorous discussion about which anti-COVID measures actually work and which might put an extra burden on vulnerable young people without meaningfully or demonstrably slowing the spread of the virus … that a masking requirement of students failed to show independent benefit is a finding of consequence and great interest.”
“This is a question on Austria. The Austrian Government has a desire to make everyone wear a mask who’s going into the shops. I understood from our previous briefings with you that the general public should not wear masks because they are in short supply. What do you say about the new Austrian measures? … I’m not specifically aware of that measure in Austria. I would assume that it’s aimed at people who potentially have the disease not passing it to others. In general WHO recommends that the wearing of a mask by a member of the public is to prevent that individual giving the disease to somebody else. We don’t generally recommend the wearing to masks in public by otherwise well individuals because it has not been up to now associated with any particular benefit.”
“Although N95 respirators appeared to have a protective advantage over surgical masks in laboratory settings, our meta-analysis showed that there were insufficient data to determine definitively whether N95 respirators are superior to surgical masks in protecting health care workers against transmissible acute respiratory infections in clinical settings.”
“We found evidence to support universal medical mask use in hospital settings as part of infection control measures to reduce the risk of CRI and ILI among HCWs. Overall, N95 respirators may convey greater protection, but universal use throughout a work shift is likely to be less acceptable due to greater discomfort …. Our analysis confirms the effectiveness of medical masks and respirators against SARS. Disposable, cotton, or paper masks are not recommended. The confirmed effectiveness of medical masks is crucially important for lower-resource and emergency settings lacking access to N95 respirators. In such cases, single-use medical masks are preferable to cloth masks, for which there is no evidence of protection and which might facilitate transmission of pathogens when used repeatedly without adequate sterilization …. We found no clear benefit of either medical masks or N95 respirators against pH1N1 …. Overall, the evidence to inform policies on mask use in HCWs is poor, with a small number of studies that is prone to reporting biases and lack of statistical power.”
“Use of N95 respirators, compared with medical masks, in the outpatient setting resulted in no significant difference in the rates of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”
The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza. It suggests that N95 respirators should not be recommended for general public and nonhigh-risk medical staff those are not in close contact with influenza patients or suspected patients. “No RCT study with verified outcome shows a benefit for HCW or community members in households to wearing a mask or respirator. There is no such study. There are no exceptions. Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public (more on this below). Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask, yet several large meta-analyses, and all the RCT, prove that there is no such relative benefit.”
“Mandating masks has not kept death rates down anywhere. The 20 U.S. states that have never ordered people to wear face masks indoors and out have dramatically lower COVID-19 death rates than the 30 states that have mandated masks. Most of the no-mask states have COVID-19 death rates below 20 per 100,000 population, and none have a death rate higher than 55. All 13 states that have death rates higher 55 are states that have required the wearing of masks in all public places. It has not protected them.”
“From the limited randomized trials it is still not clear that whether wearing surgical face masks harms or benefit the patients undergoing elective surgery.”
“The current study suggests that routine use of face masks during CAPD bag exchanges may be unnecessary and could be discontinued.”
“The wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room environmental contamination and probably work only to redirect the projectile effect of talking and breathing. People are the major source of environmental contamination in the operating room.”
“Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all experiments. Since the microspheres were not identified on the exterior of these face masks, they must have escaped around the mask edges and found their way into the wound.”
“Prospectively evaluated the experience of 504 patients undergoing percutaneous left heart catheterization, seeking evidence of a relationship between whether caps and/or masks were worn by the operators and the incidence of infection. No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used. Thus, we found no evidence that caps or masks need to be worn during percutaneous cardiac catheterization.”
“A questionnaire-based survey, undertaken by Leyland’ in 1993 to assess attitudes to the use of masks, showed that 20 percent of surgeons discarded surgical masks for endoscopic work. Less than 50 percent did not wear the mask as recommended by the Medical Research Council. Equal numbers of surgeons wore the mask in the belief they were protecting themselves and the patient, with 20 percent of these admitting that tradition was the only reason for wearing them.”
“The mask that has the highest collection efficiency is not necessarily the best mask from the perspective of the filter-quality factor, which considers not only the capture efficiency but also the air resistance. Although surgical mask media may be adequate to remove bacteria exhaled or expelled by health care workers, they may not be sufficient to remove the sub-micrometer-sized aerosols containing pathogens to which these health care workers are potentially exposed.”
“The CDC did not include its finding that “required mask use among students was not statistically significant compared with schools where mask use was optional” in the summary of its report.”
“Rather than proving the need to sow more panic, fear, and control over people, the story from India — the source of the “Delta” variant — continues to refute every current premise of COVID fascism …. Unless we do that, we must return to the very effective lockdowns and masks. In reality, India’s experience proves the opposite true; namely: 1) Delta is largely an attenuated version, with a much lower fatality rate, that for most people is akin to a cold. 2) Masks failed to stop the spread there.3) The country has come close to the herd immunity threshold with just 3 percent vaccinated.
While not definitive in the LANCET publication, it can be inferred that the nurses were all masked up and had PPE etc. as was the case in Finland and Israel nosocomial outbreaks, indicating the failure of PPE and masks to constrain Delta spread.
“The mask that has the highest collection efficiency is not necessarily the best mask from the perspective of the filter-quality factor, which considers not only the capture efficiency but also the air resistance. Although surgical mask media may be adequate to remove bacteria exhaled or expelled by health care workers, they may not be sufficient to remove the submicrometer-size aerosols containing pathogens to which these health care workers are potentially exposed.”
“Particle contamination of the wound was demonstrated in all aexperiments. Since the microspheres were not identified on the exterior of these face masks, they must have escped around the mask edges and found their way into the wound. The wearing of the mask beneath the headgear curtails this route of contamination.”
“Decades of the highest-level scientific evidence (meta-analyses of multiple randomized controlled trials) overwhelmingly conclude that medical masks are ineffective at preventing the transmission of respiratory viruses, including SAR-CoV-2 … those arguing for masks are relying on low-level evidence (observational retrospective trials and mechanistic theories), none of which are powered to counter the evidence, arguments, and risks of mask mandates.”
“Oral masks in healthy individuals are ineffective against the spread of viral infections.”
“The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza. It suggests that N95 respirators should not be recommended for general public and nonhigh-risk medical staff those are not in close contact with influenza patients or suspected patients.”
“However, the use of a mask alone is insufficient to provide an adequate level of protection or source control, and other personal and community level measures should also be adopted to suppress transmission of respiratory viruses.”
“Health authorities have warned that surgical masks may not be an effective protection against the virus. Those masks are only effective so long as they are dry,” said Professor Yvonne Cossart of the Department of Infectious Diseases at the University of Sydney.” As soon as they become saturated with the moisture in your breath they stop doing their job and pass on the droplets.” Professor Cossart said that could take as little as 15 or 20 minutes, after which the mask would need to be changed. But those warnings haven’t stopped people snapping up the masks, with retailers reporting they are having trouble keeping up with demand.”
MASK MANDATES
1) Mask mandate and use efficacy for COVID-19 containment in US States, Guerra, 2021“Calculated total COVID-19 case growth and mask use for the continental United States with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. We estimated post-mask mandate case growth in non-mandate states using median issuance dates of neighboring states with mandates … did not observe association between mask mandates or use and reduced COVID-19 spread in US states.”
“Masks can work well when they’re fully sealed, properly fitted, changed often, and have a filter designed for virus-sized particles. This represents none of the common masks available on the consumer market, making universal masking much more of a confidence trick than a medical solution …. Our universal use of unscientific face coverings is therefore closer to medieval superstition than it is to science, but many powerful institutions have too much political capital invested in the mask narrative at this point, so the dogma is perpetuated. The narrative says that if cases go down it’s because masks succeeded. It says that if cases go up it’s because masks succeeded in preventing more cases. The narrative simply assumes rather than proves that masks work, despite overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.”
“How long do our politicians get to ignore the results? … The results: When comparing states with mandates vs. those without, or periods of times within a state with a mandate vs. without, there is absolutely no evidence the mask mandate worked to slow the spread one iota. In total, in the states that had a mandate in effect, there were 9,605,256 confirmed COVID cases over 5,907 total days, an average of 27 cases per 100,000 per day. When states did not have a statewide order (which includes the states that never had them and the period of time masking states did not have the mandate in place) there were 5,781,716 cases over 5,772 total days, averaging 17 cases per 100,000 people per day.”
“The first ecological study of state mask mandates and use to include winter data: “Case growth was independent of mandates at low and high rates of community spread, and mask use did not predict case growth during the Summer or Fall-Winter waves.”
“Infections have been driven primarily by seasonal and endemic factors, whereas mask mandates and lockdowns have had no discernible impact”
“There was no reduction in per-population daily mortality, hospital bed, ICU bed, or ventilator occupancy of COVID-19-positive patients attributable to the implementation of a mask-wearing mandate.”
MASK HARMS
1) Corona children studies: Co-Ki: First results of a German-wide registry on mouth and nose covering (mask) in children, Schwarz, 2021“The average wearing time of the mask was 270 minutes per day. Impairments caused by wearing the mask were reported by 68 percent of the parents. These included irritability (60 percent), headache (53 percent), difficulty concentrating (50 percent), less happiness (49 percent), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44 percent), malaise (42 percent) impaired learning (38 percent) and drowsiness or fatigue (37 percent).”
“Masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria.”
“Laboratory testing of used masks from 20 train commuters revealed that 11 of the 20 masks tested contained over 100,000 bacterial colonies. Molds and yeasts were also found. Three of the masks contained more than one million bacterial colonies …. The outside surfaces of surgical masks were found to have high levels of the following microbes, even in hospitals, more concentrated on the outside of masks than in the environment. Staphylococcus species (57 percent) and Pseudomonas spp (38 percent) were predominant among bacteria, and Penicillium spp (39 percent) and Aspergillus spp. (31 percent) were the predominant fungi.”
“Considering our findings, pulse rates of the surgeon’s increase and SpO2 decrease after the first hour. This early change in SpO2 may be either due to the facial mask or the operational stress. Since a very small decrease in saturation at this level, reflects a large decrease in PaO2, our findings may have a clinical value for the health workers and the surgeons.”
“The thing is we really don’t know for sure what the effect may or may not be. But what we do know is that children, especially in early childhood, they use the mouth as part of the entire face to get a sense of what’s going on around them in terms of adults and other people in their environment as far as their emotions. It also has a role in language development as well …. If you think about an infant, when you interact with them you use part of your mouth. They are interested in your facial expressions. And if you think about that part of the face being covered up, there is that possibility that it could have an effect. But we don’t know because this is really an unprecedented time. What we wonder about is if this could play a role and how can we stop it if it would affect child development.”
“Healthcare providers may develop headaches following the use of the N95 face-mask.”
“Although use of double masking or knotting and tucking are two of many options that can optimize fit and enhance mask performance for source control and for wearer protection, double masking might impede breathing or obstruct peripheral vision for some wearers, and knotting and tucking can change the shape of the mask such that it no longer covers fully both the nose and the mouth of persons with larger faces.”
“Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression.”
“European study found that children wearing masks for only minutes could be exposed to dangerous carbon dioxide levels …. Forty-five children were exposed to carbon dioxide levels between three to twelve times healthy levels.”
“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 rear-view mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time.”
“Wearing a mask is not without side effects. Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. In addition, the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity. Some experts even warn of an increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask.”
“At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on Covid19 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 Covid19. Contamination of the upper respiratory tract by viruses and bacteria on the outside of medical face masks has been detected in several hospitals. Another research shows that a moist mask is a breeding ground for (antibiotic resistant) bacteria and fungi, which can undermine mucosal viral immunity. This research advocates the use of medical / surgical masks (instead of homemade cotton masks) that are used once and replaced after a few hours.”
“The two potential side effects that have already been acknowledged are: (1) Wearing a face mask may give a false sense of security and make people adopt a reduction in compliance with other infection control measures, including social distancing and hands washing. (2) Inappropriate use of face mask: people must not touch their masks, must change their single-use masks frequently or wash them regularly, dispose them correctly and adopt other management measures, otherwise their risks and those of others may increase. Other potential side effects that we must consider are: (3) The quality and the volume of speech between two people wearing masks is considerably compromised and they may unconsciously come closer. While one may be trained to counteract side effect n.1, this side effect may be more difficult to tackle. (4) Wearing a face mask makes the exhaled air go into the eyes. This generates an uncomfortable feeling and an impulse to touch your eyes. If your hands are contaminated, you are infecting yourself.”
“Respiratory pathogens on the outer surface of the used medical masks may result in self-contamination. The risk is higher with longer duration of mask use (> 6 h) and with higher rates of clinical contact. Protocols on duration of mask use should specify a maximum time of continuous use, and should consider guidance in high contact settings.”
“After considering all the testimony and other information we received, the committee concluded that there is currently no simple, reliable way to decontaminate these devices and enable people to use them safely more than once. There is relatively little data available about how effective these devices are against flu even the first time they are used. To the extent they can help at all, they must be used correctly, and the best respirator or mask will do little to protect a person who uses it incorrectly. Substantial research must be done to increase our understanding of how flu spreads, to develop better masks and respirators, and to make it easier to decontaminate them. Finally, the use of face coverings is only one of many strategies that will be needed to slow or halt a pandemic, and people should not engage in activities that would increase their risk of exposure to flu just because they have a mask or respirator.”
“The exhaled aerosols generated by coughing, talking, and breathing were sampled in 50 subjects using a novel mask, and analyzed using PCR for nine respiratory viruses. The exhaled samples from a subset of 10 subjects who were PCR positive for rhinovirus were also examined by cell culture for this virus. Of the 50 subjects, among the 33 with symptoms of upper respiratory tract infections, 21 had at least one virus detected by PCR, while amongst the 17 asymptomatic subjects, 4 had a virus detected by PCR. Overall, rhinovirus was detected in 19 subjects, influenza in 4 subjects, parainfluenza in 2 subjects, and human metapneumovirus in 1 subject. Two subjects were co-infected. Of the 25 subjects who had virus-positive nasal mucus, the same virus type was detected in 12 breathing samples, 8 talking samples, and in 2 coughing samples. In the subset of exhaled samples from 10 subjects examined by culture, infective rhinovirus was detected in 2.”
“Wearing a surgical mask modifies significantly and clinically dyspnea without influencing walked distance.”
“The German researchers used two types of face masks for their study—surgical masks and so-called FFP2 masks, which are mainly used by medical personnel. The measurements were carried out with the help of spiroergometry, in which patients or in this case the test persons exert themselves physically on a stationary bicycle—a so-called ergometer—or a treadmill. The subjects were examined without a mask, with surgical masks and with FFP2 masks. The masks therefore impair breathing, especially the volume and the highest possible speed of the air when exhaling. The maximum possible force on the ergometer was significantly reduced.”
“They contain microplastics—and they exacerbate the waste problem …” Many of them are made of polyester and so you have a microplastic problem.” Many of the face masks would contain polyester with chlorine compounds: “If I have the mask in front of my face, then of course I breathe in the microplastic directly and these substances are much more toxic than if you swallow them, as they get directly into the nervous system,” Braungart continues.”
“Children do not readily acquire SARS-CoV-2 (very low risk), spread it to other children or teachers, or endanger parents or others at home. This is the settled science. In the rare cases where a child contracts Covid virus it is very unusual for the child to get severely ill or die. Masking can do positive harm to children—as it can to some adults. But the cost benefit analysis is entirely different for adults and children—particularly younger children. Whatever arguments there may be for consenting adults—children should not be required to wear masks to prevent the spread of Covid-19. Of course, zero risk is not attainable—with or without masks, vaccines, therapeutics, distancing or anything else medicine may develop or government agencies may impose.”
“With that clarion call, we pivot and refer here to another looming concern and this is the potential danger of the chlorine, polyester, and microplastic components of the face masks (surgical principally but any of the mass-produced masks) that have become part of our daily lives due to the Covid-19 pandemic. We hope those with persuasive power in the government will listen to this plea. We hope that the necessary decisions will be made to reduce the risk to our populations.”
“The case is not only causing speculation in Germany about possible poisoning with carbon dioxide. Because the student “was wearing a corona protective mask when she suddenly collapsed and died a little later in the hospital,” writes Wochenblick. Editor’s Review: The fact that no cause of death was communicated nearly three weeks after the girl’s death is indeed unusual. The carbon dioxide content of the air is usually about 0.04 percent. From a proportion of four percent, the first symptoms of hypercapnia, i.e. carbon dioxide poisoning, appear. If the proportion of the gas rises to more than 20 percent, there is a risk of deadly carbon dioxide poisoning. However, this does not come without alarm signals from the body. According to the medical portal netdoktor, these include “sweating, accelerated breathing, accelerated heartbeat, headaches, confusion, loss of consciousness”. The unconsciousness of the girl could therefore be an indication of such poisoning.”
“During the month of April, three cases of students suffering sudden cardiac death (SCD) while running during gym class have been reported in Zhejiang, Henan and Hunan provinces. Beijing Evening News noted that all three students were wearing masks at the time of their deaths, igniting a critical discussion over school rules on when students should wear masks.”
“In fact, the mask has the potential to “trigger strong psychovegetative stress reactions via emerging aggression, which correlate significantly with the degree of stressful after-effects”. Prousa is not alone in her opinion. Several psychologists dealt with the mask problem — and most came to devastating results. Ignoring them would be fatal, according to Prousa.”
“Wearing an N95 mask for 4 hours during HD significantly reduced PaO2 and increased respiratory adverse effects in ESRD patients.”
“Respiratory alkalosis and hypocarbia were detected after the use of N95. Acute respiratory alkalosis can cause headache, anxiety, tremor, muscle cramps. In this study, it was quantitatively shown that the participants’ symptoms were due to respiratory alkalosis and hypocarbia.”
“But in filtering those particles, the mask also makes it harder to breathe. N95 masks are estimated to reduce oxygen intake by anywhere from 5 to 20 percent. That’s significant, even for a healthy person. It can cause dizziness and lightheadedness. If you wear a mask long enough, it can damage the lungs. For a patient in respiratory distress, it can even be life threatening.”
“In an open letter to the Flemish Minister of Education Ben Weyts (N-VA), 70 doctors ask to abolish the mandatory mouth mask at school, both for the teachers and for the students. Weyts does not intend to change course. The doctors ask that Minister Ben Weyts immediately reverses his working method: no mouth mask obligation at school, only protect the risk group and only the advice that people with a possible risk profile should consult their doctor.”
“Other potential side effects that we must consider, however, are 1) The quality and volume of speech between people wearing masks is considerably compromised and they may unconsciously come closer2) Wearing a mask makes the exhaled air go into the eyes. This generates an impulse to touch the eyes. 3) If your hands are contaminated, you are infecting yourself, 4) Face masks make breathing more difficult. Moreover, a fraction of carbon dioxide previously exhaled is inhaled at each respiratory cycle. Those phenomena increase breathing frequency and deepness, and they may worsen the burden of covid-19 if infected people wearing masks spread more contaminated air. This may also worsen the clinical condition of infected people if the enhanced breathing pushes the viral load down into their lungs, 5) The innate immunity’s efficacy is highly dependent on the viral load. If masks determine a humid habitat where SARS-CoV-2 can remain active because of the water vapour continuously provided by breathing and captured by the mask fabric, they determine an increase in viral load (by re-inhaling exhaled viruses) and therefore they can cause a defeat of the innate immunity and an increase in infections.”
“Children under the age of 2 shouldn’t wear masks because they can make breathing difficult and increase the risk of choking, a medical group has said, launching an urgent appeal to parents as the nation reopens from the coronavirus crisis …. Masks can make breathing difficult because infants have narrow air passages,” which increases the burden on their hearts, the association said, adding that masks also raise the risk of heat stroke for them.”
“The rebreathing of our exhaled air will without a doubt create oxygen deficiency and a flooding of carbon dioxide. We know that the human brain is very sensitive to oxygen depravation. There are nerve cells for example in the hippocampus, that can’t be longer than 3 minutes without oxygen—they cannot survive. The acute warning symptoms are headaches, drowsiness, dizziness, issues in concentration, slowing down of the reaction time—reactions of the cognitive system. However, when you have chronic oxygen depravation, all of those symptoms disappear, because you get used to it. But your efficiency will remain impaired and the undersupply of oxygen in your brain continues to progress. We know that neurodegenerative diseases take years to decades to develop. If today you forget your phone number, the breakdown in your brain would have already started 20 or 30 years ago …. The child needs the brain to learn, and the brain needs oxygen to function. We don’t need a clinical study for that. This is simple, indisputable physiology. Conscious and purposely induced oxygen deficiency is an absolutely deliberate health hazard, and an absolute medical contraindication.”
“Data from the first registry to record children’s experiences with masks show physical, psychological and behavioral issues including irritability, difficulty concentrating and impaired learning.Since school shutdowns in spring 2020, an increasing number of parents are seeking drug treatment for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) for their children.Evidence from the U.K. shows schools are not the super spreaders health officials said they were; measured rates of infection in schools were the same as the community, not higher.A large randomized controlled trial showed wearing masks does not reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2.”
“Ventilation, cardiopulmonary exercise capacity and comfort are reduced by surgical masks and highly impaired by FFP2/N95 face masks in healthy individuals. These data are important for recommendations on wearing face masks at work or during physical exercise.”
“Most healthcare workers develop de novo PPE-associated headaches or exacerbation of their pre-existing headache disorders.”
“Wearing a mask is not without side effects. Oxygen deficiency (headache, nausea, fatigue, loss of concentration) occurs fairly quickly, an effect similar to altitude sickness. Every day we now see patients complaining of headaches, sinus problems, respiratory problems, and hyperventilation due to wearing masks. In addition, the accumulated CO2 leads to a toxic acidification of the organism which affects our immunity. Some experts even warn of increased transmission of the virus in case of inappropriate use of the mask.”
“For the public, they should not wear facemasks unless they are sick, and if a healthcare worker advised them. For the average member of the public walking down a street, it is not a good idea,” Dr. Harries said. “What tends to happen is people will have one mask. They won’t wear it all the time, they will take it off when they get home, they will put it down on a surface they haven’t cleaned,” she added. “Further, she added that behavioral issues could adversely put themselves at more risk of getting the infection. For instance, people go out and don’t wash their hands, they touch parts of the mask or their face, and they get infected.”
“Americans today have pretty good chompers on average, at least relative to most other people, past and present. Nevertheless, we do not think enough about oral health as evidenced by the almost complete lack of discussion regarding the effect of lockdowns and mandatory masking on our mouths.”
“A group of parents in Gainesville, FL, sent 6 face masks to a lab at the University of Florida, requesting an analysis of contaminants found on the masks after they had been worn. The resulting report found that five masks were contaminated with bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria. Although the test is capable of detecting viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, only one virus was found on one mask (alcelaphine herpesvirus 1) …. Half of the masks were contaminated with one or more strains of pneumonia-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with one or more strains of meningitis-causing bacteria. One-third were contaminated with dangerous, antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens. In addition, less dangerous pathogens were identified, including pathogens that can cause fever, ulcers, acne, yeast infections, strep throat, periodontal disease, Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, and more.”
“The duration of wearing masks showed a significant impact on the prevalence of symptoms (p < 0.001). Type IV hypersensitivity was significantly more likely in participants with symptoms compared to those without symptoms (p = 0.001), whereas no increase in symptoms was observed in participants with atopic diathesis. HCWs used facial skin care products significantly more often than non-HCWs (p = 0.001).”
“Detected carbon dioxide concentrations ranged from 2150 ± 192 to 2875 ± 323 ppm. The concentrations of carbon dioxide while not wearing a face mask varied from 500–900 ppm. Doing office work and standing still on the treadmill each resulted in carbon dioxide concentrations of around 2200 ppm. A small increase could be observed when walking at a speed of 3 km h–1 (leisurely walking pace) … concentrations in the detected range can cause undesirable symptoms, such as fatigue, headache, and loss of concentration.”
“The source of bacterial contamination in SMs was the body surface of the surgeons rather than the OR environment. Moreover, we recommend that surgeons should change the mask after each operation, especially those beyond 2 hours.”
“When we surround children with mask-wearers for a year at a time, are we impairing their face barcode recognition during a period of hot neural development, thus putting full development of the FFA at risk? Does the demand for separation from others, reducing social interaction, add to the potential consequences as it might in autism? When can we be sure that we won’t interfere with visual input to the face recognition visual neurology so we don’t interfere with brain development? How much time with stimulus interference can we allow without consequences? Those are all questions currently without answers; we don’t know. Unfortunately, the science implies that if we mess up brain development for faces, we may not currently have therapies to undo everything we’ve done.”
“Wearing masks can create a sense of anonymity for an aggressor, while also dehumanizing the victim. This prevents empathy, empowering violence, and murder.” Masking helps remove empathy and compassion, allowing others to commit unspeakable acts on the masked person.”
“In his email, Farquharson called the campaign to legislate mask wearing a “shameful farce, a charade, an act of political theatre” that’s more about enforcing “obedience and compliance” than it is about public health. He also likened children wearing masks to “involuntary self-torture,” calling it “an egregious and unforgivable form of child abuse and physical assault.”
“Surgical personnel are trained to never touch any part of a mask, except the loops and the nose bridge. Otherwise, the mask is considered useless and is to be replaced. Surgical personnel are strictly trained not to touch their masks otherwise. However, the general public may be seen touching various parts of their masks. Even the masks just removed from manufacturer packaging have been shown in the above photos to contain particulate and fiber that would not be optimal to inhale …. Further concerns of macrophage response and other immune and inflammatory and fibroblast response to such inhaled particles specifically from facemasks should be the subject of more research. 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.”
“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 health care 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.”
