As noted, the Trends Journal has been reporting for several months on the scientific evidence disputing the political mandates of mask wearing.
A report, “Why Face Masks Don’t Work: A Revealing Review,” by Dr. John Hardie was published by the Oral Health Group in Canada in October 2016. Dr. Hardie has been investigating infectious disease control for over 30 years, and his numerous articles have been featured in Canadian medical journals.
Reviewing seven medical studies, Dr. Hardie concludes:

“With their original purpose being highly questionable it should be no surprise that the ability of face masks to act as respiratory protective devices is now the subject of intense scrutiny.

No matter how well a mask conforms to the shape of a person’s face, it is not designed to create an air tight seal around the face. Masks will always fit fairly loosely with considerable gaps along the cheeks, around the bridge of the nose and along the bottom edge of the mask below the chin. These gaps do not provide adequate protection as they permit the passage of air and aerosols when the wearer inhales.

Traditionally face masks have been recommended to protect the mouth and nose from the ‘droplet’ route of infection, presumably because they will prevent the inhalation of relatively large particles. Their efficacy must be re-examined in light of the fact that aerosols contain particles many times smaller than 5 microns.”

A number of medical professionals have pointed out the lack of hard evidence regarding the efficacy of masks in controlling the spread of infections. Two examples:

  • In 2015, Dr. R. MacIntyre, Professor of Infectious Diseases at the University of New South Wales, writes in the British Medical Journal, “The use of reusable cloth masks is widespread globally, particularly Asia, which is an important region for emerging infections, but there is no clinical research to inform their use and most policies offer no guidance on them. Health economic analyses of facemasks are scarce and the few published cost effectiveness models do not use clinical efficacy data. The lack of research on facemasks and respirators is reflected in varied and sometimes conflicting policies and guidelines.”
  • In 2014, research consultant Lisa Brosseau and industrial hygienist Dr. Rachael Jones published an article appearing on the website of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy in which they wrote, “Medical and infection control professionals have relied for years on a paradigm for aerosol transmission of infectious diseases based on very outmoded research and an overly simplistic interpretation of the data.”

2020: Masks and Politics
On 23 July, Tom Jefferson, honorary research fellow, and Carl Heneghan, Director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM) at the University of Oxford, published an article in which they wrote, “The increasing polarized and politicized views on whether to wear masks in public during the current COVID-19 crisis hides a bitter truth on the state of contemporary research and the value we pose on clinical evidence to guide our decisions.”
Published on the CEBM website, the authors note that after reviewing 12 studies on the effectiveness of wearing masks, only one of them included the inexpensive cloth masks most people are wearing. That study, done in Vietnam, “found ILI (influenza) rates 13 times higher in Vietnamese hospital workers allocated to cloth masks compared to medical/surgical masks.”
The authors cite a June report by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health that states, “Health authorities have given conflicting recommendations regarding the use of facemasks by asymptomatic individuals in the community to reduce the spread of COVID-19.”
The Institute adds, “The undesirable effects of facemasks include the risks of incorrect use, a false sense of security (leading to relaxation of other interventions), and contamination of masks. In addition, some people experience problems breathing, discomfort, and problems with communication.”  The Norwegian Institute report concludes, “There is no reliable evidence of the effectiveness of non-medical facemasks in community settings.”
The CEBM article also notes, “The small number of trials and lateness in the pandemic cycle is unlikely to give us reasonably clear answers… This abandonment of the scientific modus operandi and lack of foresight has left the field wide open for the play of opinions, radical views and political influence.”
The two medical researchers conclude, “It would appear that despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.”
TRENDPOST: These and other reports on the ineffectiveness and dangers of constant mask wearing are absent in mainstream media coverage. And, now, young children are being conditioned not only to wear masks and embrace sanitary hysteria… but to become socially distanced from playmates and older people.

Comments are closed.

Skip to content