Face Masks Useless: Overwhelming Number of Studies Proof That Masks Are Harmful And Can Make You Sick
- Mask fraud disenchanted as most reputable scientific journals publish studies
- No scientific evidence is yet proven, that face masks can protect form COVID19 viruses
- Face masks can cause headaches and be harmful to health
- Article features over 50 studies and research papers and includes links to sources.
Why are you wearing a facemask?
Probably because you believe it will protect yourself and others. Or because it’s the law or a public order in your country. What you most likely don’t know is that the scientific world has found overwhelming evidence that wearing masks is not just ineffective, it is even counterproductive.
Since the end of the first world war in which grotesque chemical and biological weapons were utilised, we as a society have been indoctrinated to the point where when we heard words like virus and bacteria we automatically conjured up images of hazmat suits, gas masks and things like knee high gumboots. Now we are told a flimsy cloth mask is more than enough to keep out one of the most contagious of viruses. One of the last of these curious studies that was promoted by mainstream media (German Tagesschau) was the study by the University of Mainz (Mitze 2020) on the Thuringian city of Jena, which was the first German city to foresee a mask requirement in public.
The following sutdies will show you that the masks not only do not protect, but also do damage. Any government that forces it’s citizens to wear masks, should be immediately called out for it’s incompetence and be replaced.
A Study by the University of Mainz (Mitze 2020)
A Study by the University of Mainz (Mitze 2020) on the Thuringian city of Jena. A miracle – just 3-4 days after the regulation came into force, any nasty increase in the number of cases in Jena ceased. The Robert Koch Institute (RKI)itself assumes, “However, an effect of the respective measures can only be recognized with a delay of 2 – 3 weeks, among other things because of the up to 14-day incubation period of SARS-CoV-2 and additionally because it is between illness and Received the reports at the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) there is a time delay. ” (RKI 2020). So whatever the cause of the striking curve in Jena one thing is certain: the mask wearing from 06.04. it definitely cannot be.
Cochrane researcher Tom Jefferson
In view of the current discussion about the trend towards partial obfuscation, a meta-analysis by a team led by the British Cochrane researcher Tom Jefferson is just right – published on March 30th, 2020 it says:
“There was no reduction of influenza-like illness (ILI) cases (Risk Ratio 0.93, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.05) or laboratory-confirmed influenza (Risk Ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.61-1.17) for masks compared to no masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers (Risk Ratio 0.37, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.50). There was no difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators: for ILI Risk Ratio 0.83 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.08), for laboratory-confirmed influenza risk ratio 1.02 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.43). “
There was no reduction in flu infections or laboratory-confirmed influenza cases compared to masks / no masks – neither in the general population nor among healthcare workers. There was no difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators [roughly comparable to German FFP2 or FFP3 masks] – neither for flu infections nor for laboratory-confirmed influenza].
Team Xiao CDC (US Disease Control) masks have no use
When Jefferson’s meta-analysis referred to the wearing of masks by medical personnel, this – not even officially released – American CDC’s meta-analysis examined and refuted the effectiveness of wearing masks in public as protection against influenza: “We did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility. “
Another study examined the protective effect of various mask types, especially in SARS-CoV-2: SARS-CoV-2 infected patients simply coughed up the virus through both surgical and cotton mask.
Note: I would not use the word viruses, because to this day there is no scientific evidence for the SARS-CoV-2 that adheres to Koch’s postulates. Let’s call it what it is: RNA snippets. Additionally in the physician sheet
In a doctoral thesis from the Technical University of Munich in 2005, the effects of wearing, among other things, examined by simple protective masks. The conclusion is terrifying.
Immediately after putting on a normal thin surgical mask, you breathe in much more exhaled CO2. The effects are so strong that the doctoral student was only allowed to test the subjects over a period of 30 minutes so as not to damage them. This leads to tiredness, faster breathing, irregular heartbeat, poor concentration, poorer fine motor skills.
Regardless of the already relatively low lethality on Covid19 in the general population, there is still no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of masks in healthy and asymptomatic people in everyday life.
University of East Angila
A cross-country study by the University of East Anglia came to the conclusion that a mask requirement was of no use and could even increase the risk of infection.
Masks-for-all for COVID19 not based on sound data
Two US professors and experts in respiratory and infection protection from the University of Illinois explain in an essay that respiratory masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control). The widespread masks would not have prevented the outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan.
New England Journal of Medicine
An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 also comes to the conclusion that respiratory masks offer little or no protection in everyday life. The call for a mask requirement is an “irrational fear reflex”.
U.S. Department of Health
A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza released by the U.S. Department of Health also found that respirators had no effect.
Canadian Researcher finds masks are useless for influenza
An extensive literature review by a Canadian researcher showed that respirators do not offer any proven protection against colds and influenza.
German Minsitry of Health: Protective effect of textile masks not evident
The authorities also emphasize that the “community masks” offer no protection.
There are considerable questions about the medical necessity of the obligation to wear a mask. The Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, which belongs to the Federal Ministry of Health, declares that the health benefits of fabric masks state that a protective effect “is generally not proven”. The masks could, however, “support the awareness of ‘social distancing’ as well as health-related careful handling of oneself and others”. The authority emphasizes:
“Carriers of the described ‘community masks’ cannot rely on them to protect them or others from transmission of SARS-CoV-2, since no corresponding protective effect has been demonstrated for these masks.”
That means: The masking hardly helps, but it keeps the fear level high. Virologist Christian Drosten put it this week:
“Masks are a complement to the measures and a reminder for everyone of the seriousness of the situation!”
The Clinic for Infectious Diseases / Hospital Hygiene questions the mask requirement.
Do masks help reduce air transfer?
The question now is whether masks can prevent airborne transmission. And above all whether this possible effect is also relevant. Here we initially based on the epidemiological analysis of the WHO [WHO report, 28.2.20, page 8]. According to this, the epidemiologists found that the corona virus is mainly transmitted through contact and droplets. The contribution of aerosols to transmission is negligible. In connection with COVID-19, this hypothesis is confirmed in two papers [Ong et al 3.3.20 and Ng et al, 16.3.20].
Dr. Chalid Ashry – Masks are harmful
Dr. Chalid Ashry “(owns 3 pharmacies and is a health professional for gyms) says that the masks have no use but are harmful, and he also calls for sports facilities to be opened.
The American Medical Association: Face masks should not be worn by healthy people
The American Medical Association has just released a position paper on masks:
“Face masks should not be worn by healthy people to protect themselves from respiratory infections because there is no evidence that face masks worn by healthy people can effectively protect against disease. Face masks should be reserved for those who need them, because masks can become scarce during times of widespread respiratory infections. N95 masks require special fit tests, they are not recommended for general public use. “
Review of 17 of the best studies, concluded that “none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between the use of masks / respirators and protection against influenza infection.”
“A recent careful review of the literature, which analyzed 17 of the best studies, concluded that” none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between the use of masks / respirators and protection against influenza infection. “
Source: bin-Reza F et al. The use of mask and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: A systematic review of the scientific evidence. Resp Viruses 2012; 6 (4): 257-67.
Singapore study on N-95 masks
In a study from Singapore, which showed in your tests which sizes (particles) an N-95 mask can stop: “It has been shown that N-95 masks 95% of the airborne particles with an average diameter> 0.3 block μm2, whereas standard face masks, depending on the mask, can block 50-70% of the particles “The additional text” Only wear them in a medical environment “is important!
Note: the study admits that this pilot study has some limitations.
1. The number of study participants was far too small
2. The times that the participants had their masks / signs on were far too short
An interesting fact is the following: The> 0.3 μm are 300 nanometers, but the alleged viruses have sizes in the range of 120 nanometers. For this reason alone, these could not be stopped by the N-95 masks (in Germany that would be the FFP2 and FFP3 masks). Then the sentence: “With my garden fence I keep the mosquitos away” makes sense.
Face masks can cause headaches
Wearing a face mask can cause headaches and reduce oxygen levels – A recent study with 159 healthcare workers aged 21-35 years showed that 81% developed headaches by wearing a face mask … that is, a reduction in Oxygenation in the blood (hypoxia) or an increase in the CO2 content in the blood (hypercapnia). It is known that the N95 mask, when worn for hours, can reduce blood oxygenation by up to 20%. And proper blood oxygenation is vital for energy, mental clarity, focus, and emotional well-being.
Source: Ong JJY et al. Headaches associated with personal protective equipment- A cross sectional study among frontline healthcare workers during COVID-19. Headache 2020; 60 (5): 864-877.
Nature Scientific Reports
“Wearing a face mask causes the carbon dioxide (CO2) that the lungs are trying to expel to be inhaled again. This in turn reduces the immune response, has a negative effect on the function of the epithelial cells (cells in the lungs and blood vessels) and lowers them the amount of oxygen exchange across the alveolar membranes. “
This can clearly have a negative impact on a disease like COVID-19.
Source: Nature Scientific Reports
Wearing a face mask can increase your risk of infection.
“Wearing a face mask can increase your risk of infection. The last point was a drop in oxygen levels after wearing a mask. A drop in oxygen levels (hypoxia) is associated with compromised immunity. Studies have shown that hypoxia inhibits the type of major immune cells CD4 + T lymphocytes, which are used to fight viral infections, because hypoxia increases the level of a compound called hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1), which inhibits T-lymphocytes and is strong T-regs, an immune-inhibiting cell that creates the conditions for catching an infection, including COVID-19, and making the consequences of that infection much more serious. Basically, your mask can expose you to an increased risk of infection and, if this is the case, it will lead to a much worse result reduced oxygenation accelerate cancer growth. “
1. Shehade H et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1 negatively regulates Th1 function. J Immunol 2015;195:1372-1376.
2. Westendorf AM et al. Hypoxia enhances immunosuppression by inhibiting CD4+ effector T cell function and promoting Treg activity. Cell Physiol Biochem 2017;41:1271-84.
3. ceneay J et al. Hypoxia-driven immunosuppression contributes to the premetastatic niche. Oncoimmunology 2013;2:1 e22355.
Is fear a factor related to the immunosuppressive effects of face masks
“Wearing face masks is a constant reminder that we should be afraid of this invisible enemy or” monster “, as some politicians have called it. There is no doubt that wearing a mask increases the concern and fear of COVID- 19. It leaves a feeling of fear.
This is another factor related to the immunosuppressive effects of face masks. “
Source: Book from 2007 entitled Cytokines: Stress and Immunity – Second Edition 2007. (Chapter 2)
What do government agencies say?
“Wearing a medical mask has a ‘very little protection advantage’ over not wearing anything in a community environment. The risk of getting a virus infection is reduced by 6%.”
“Overall, ordinary tissue masks are not considered to protect against respiratory viruses and their use should not be encouraged.”
Source: Ventura County
Summary of governments:
“In total, the document presented 18 arguments and studies against the effectiveness and use of masks and 10 that showed limited benefits. After carefully examining the advantages and disadvantages, I am clearly against the use of masks if they are not used by medical personnel in a clinical setting, or when a person in close proximity to an infected person is at risk of being coughed or sneezed directly, such as when caring for or visiting a sick person. “
Masks are definitely spinning germs!
We had a microbiological laboratory (which wants to remain anonymous!) To examine masks that crystallized as true biotopes.
We examined a total of 32 masks from different people who wore their masks for different lengths of time. It was frightening, however, that even masks that were never worn had a considerable spectrum of germs, since they were not packed sterile.
The masks were dabbed onto various culture media and then incubated. We have the following germs in the cultures of the different masks
Lactobacilli producing lactic acid (A, B, C, Da, Db, E)
Streptococcus mutans (A, B, C, Da, Db, E)
Streptococcus aureus (Da)
MRSA (Staphylococcus aureus resistant a la meticilina) (Da)
Staphylococcus epidermis (B, C, Da)
• Neumonía por estafilococos (pneumococci) (A, B, Da, Db, E)
Enterococci (E. coli and others) (A, B, Da, Db, E)
Haemophillus influenza (B, Da)
• Pseudomonas (B, Da, Db)
• Neisseria menigitidis (3x Da, 1x Db)
Prolonged wearing can have a negative impact on health
Prolonged wearing can have a negative impact on health due to a massive germ load. Even the Robert Koch Institute raises concerns here.
It states: “The cover has to be worn tightly over the mouth and nose throughout and changed when it is moist;
Note: would increasingly stimulate the germination.
As if all that wasn’t proof enough (list does not reflect completeness) is the monkey circus around the change of opinion.
Masks do not help and within the so-called panic-makers “experts” masks actually help a certificate of poverty and a concession to those who repeatedly tried to demonstrate with factually justifiable arguments that masks simply cannot offer reliable protection.
Let’s just have a look at what it means and get an idea of it for yourself.
Virologist Christian Drosten Berliner Charité (masks have no use)
Even if I really do not want to call Christian Drosten because this man has made so many wrong decisions and spread falsehoods (2009 swine flu scandal), I would like to show that even the adviser to our federal government testifies that there is no use for the masks.
(Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten – The mask cannot be stopped with a mask)
01/30/2020: Spahn in Bild Online against masks: “Spahn:” A mouthguard is not necessary because the virus is not transmitted through the breath at all. “Means: A mask does not offer any additional protection. Then he said the truth.
Note: With what he was right, it is not transferable via aerosols.
Montgomery (president of the doctor) believes that masking is wrong
In Germany, a mask requirement was introduced in local public transport and in retail stores. The president of the World Medical Association, Frank Montgomery, criticized this as “wrong” and the intended use of scarves and scarves as “ridiculous”
Merkel: Masks can become virus throwers
This is not surprising. Chancellor Merkel previously warned that a possible mask constraint could lead to excessive carelessness in keeping people apart.
“This is still the most important thing,” she said at a cabinet breakfast with the heads of the Union (via switch). Everyone knew that a mask was so moist after half an hour that it itself became a virus thrower. “
The World Health Organization (WHO) does not see a major benefit in the fight against the spread of the coronavirus in the general wearing of a face mask. There is no evidence that anything will be gained, said WHO Emergency Director Michael Ryan in March. Rather, there are additional risks if people remove the masks incorrectly and thereby become infected. “Our advice: we do not recommend wearing a face mask if you are not sick yourself.” (04/21/2020)
Now: WHO recommends wearing face masks (09.06.2020)
WHO changes its mind: protective masks can increase the risk of corona infection
The process of sterilizing the mask by heating it with a microwave or oven, as claimed by the government at the beginning, should have struck everyone as strange, but at least the government has withdrawn this absurdity. Unfortunately, this is hardly noticeable again with citizens.
However, sterilization by heating is not as useful as assumed, as the ZDF format Frontal21 reported. In a paper from the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), which is exclusively available from Frontal21, the reprocessing process previously advocated by the federal government using dry heat at 70 degrees is classified as unsuitable. Frontal21 quotes from the work that the procedure is not sufficient to achieve a complete inactivation of infectious virus particles on the incubated masks. It goes on to say: “This means that this process can no longer be recommended for the decontamination of masks.” The BfArM therefore calls for the current processing procedure to be ended immediately.