Posted by Masks are supposed to protect against COVID 19 infection. Both ways: the wearer against infection from other persons and other persons against infection from the mask wearer. There are basically nine types of face masks. They were tested by the CDC and here are the summarized and commented results:
Bandanas out of cloth: They provide modest protection against cough or sneeze droplets, reducing their reach from approx. 8 to approx. 4 feet. Comment: They do not really catch or sequester bacteria or viruses, since the pores of these devices are too large. Yet, bacteria and viruses can linger in the cloth, which constitutes a moist biotope and as such a perfect breeding ground for both.
Home-made cloth masks: They are not substantially different from bandana masks, but if used in multiple layers, they can reduce droplet trajectories to 2.5 feet. Comment: They also constitute a moist biotope and as such a breeding ground for bacteria and viruses.
T-shirt masks: Made from an old T-shirt. Essentially the equivalent of a home-made cloth mask.
Store-bought cloth masks: They offer 20-50% droplet reduction. Other than that, they are not different from the above.
Cloth masks with filter: Slightly more effective than a simple cloth mask. Cloth masks with filter are marginally more effective. Caution: if the mask has an “exhalation valve” this allows unfiltered air to escape, increasing the vector risk.
Disposable surgical masks: The blue paper masks you see contaminating the environment everywhere. These are single-use masks and should be discarded after one use. They can filter out small particles but not “very small” particles. Caution: these masks are almost all imported from China, from where we also imported the virus. We know nothing about the hygienic standards in the Chinese factories that produce these masks.
N95 and N99 respirators: The CDC says that these masks filter out 95% resp. 99% of “very small particles”. Comment: They provide no information about what they consider “very small particles”. Also, these masks have been designed to be worn by medical personnel to prevent patients from being infected by physicians or nurses. They are not designed to protect the wearer.
Corona viruses have diameters of between 0.06 µm (micron or micrometer), and 0.14 µm. A micron (µm) is one millionth of a meter. Hence, one micron is 1 thousandth of a millimeter. If we estimate the size of the average corona virus at 0.1 micron, i.e. 1 ten-thousandth of a millimeter, a mask would need to have pores smaller than 1/10000 mm in order to catch and retain an average corona virus. None of the masks currently available in the market, including N-95 and N-99 masks, filter out anything smaller than 0.3 microns. The average corona virus is only one third of the pore size of these masks and will therefore not be effectively filtered out. The obvious reason why the pores are not made smaller is that the wearer of such a mask would not be able to breathe through it.
Even if a mask retains droplets, it does not also effectively retain viruses. Whatever a mask retains (filters out) remains in the mask. All masks also retain humidity from human breath. This makes the mask an increasingly moist biotope, which is an ideal breeding ground for germs of all kinds. Continuing to breathe through such a germ-infested moist biotope is extremely unhealthy and amounts to a risk of self-infection.
Note that the CDC information is based on purely observational data, not random double-blind studies. There are three scientific (random/blind) non-observational studies of mask effectiveness that have been performed so far: one in Bangladesh, one in Denmark, and one by the Stanford University School of Medicine in Palo Alto, CA. The Bangladesh study produced no clear results for or against the effectiveness of masks. Neither did the Danish study. The differences were statistically insignificant. The Stanford study came to the following conclusions:
“The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemasks 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. Long-term consequences of wearing a facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers, and health organizations should utilize a proper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.”
(https://wsau.com/2021/04/20/stanford-study-results-facemasks-are-ineffective-in-blocking-transmission-of-covid-and-actually-can-cause-health-deterioration-and-premature-death/)
Shortly after its publication, the study, which obviously contradicts government wisdom and policy, was withdrawn by the University without any explanation. One wonders why.
Masks cover only your nose and your mouth. However, ears and eyes constitute also entry ports for bacteria and viruses into the human head and respiratory system. To cover these openings, as well, one would have to wear some sort of HAZMAT helmet. This would make a normal life pretty much impossible. Especially for children, who are least endangered by SARS CoV 2.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), which advocated for masking children, found that only 460 children died of COVID across 45 States, New York City, Guam, and Puerto Rico. This is 0.08 % of all COVID deaths in these states – provided we can believe the COVID death numbers. An Italian study found that only 0.3 % out of approx. 2 million COVID deaths were children and young persons under 20. In most of these child deaths, some comorbidity was present that existed before the SARS CoV 2 infection. In other words: healthy children and young people under 20 are not – I repeat NOT – in grave danger to be infected with or die from COVID 19.
Well over 90% of all COVID deaths are people over 60 with serious preexisting comorbidities like obesity, diabetes, heart problems, liver problems, kidney problems, upper respiratory problems etc. These are the people, if any, who should wear masks. And even for them the mask is a double-edged sword, because it exposes them to other risks like bacterial infection or serious respiratory problems.
SARS CoV 2 is not an airborne virus. It is carried by droplets of human spittle or mucus that can travel 8-10 feet in air through coughing or sneezing. But it does not fly around in the air like dust particles. It can also be transmitted by touching surfaces that have very recently been sneezed or coughed upon by a carrier of the virus – but only for a very short time and masks do not protect against this tactile infection.
I get a kick out of watching people wearing a mask driving alone in their car – who are they fearing will infect them? The only person available is themselves.
Young children are not only the group of people least endangered by the SARS CoV 2 virus, they are also the group most endangered by mask wearing. In 2004, long before the government incited COVID hysteria, a pediatric hospital published the following:
“Imagine the impact of a hospital filled with “faceless” people on a young child. Who is smiling? Who is frowning? How do I recognize my doctor? How does my nurse recognize me? Why is everyone so scared of my germs? When wearing masks, goggles, or face shields, non-verbal communication is impaired. Subtle face cues are absent or can be misread and lip reading is impossible.” (The Epoch Times, Sep. 22-28, 2021, p. A3)
Stanford Professor Dr. Jay Bhartacharya argues that masking children is both medically unnecessary and “developmentally inappropriate”. He said: “Children develop by watching other people.” Even the AAP used to have a website emphasizing the developmental importance of “face time” between parents and babies and young children. It was removed recently. Your government at work.
The worst of all ideas is to make young children or teens wear masks even during physical exercise. This is entirely contrary to aerobics, which are founded of the concept of intensive breathing, requiring the free flow of air through the entire respiratory system. Sports and other physically demanding exercises require that the body, the muscles, and the heart, be supplied with more oxygen. The added oxygen comes from intensive breezing. Breezing intensively while wearing a mask can have only one effect, namely that any infectants or contaminants retained in the mask (is if is indeed effective) are transported to the lungs more effectively. This increases the risk of over-exertion and bacterial infection of the respiratory apparatus. It also reduces physical performance.
Last but not least, it is entirely unacceptable for the citizens of a free nation that its government mandates (forces them) to wear masks or to get vaccinated by ill-tested “vaccinations” that are not truly vaccinations but nano-particle based manipulations of the human immune system – even if the effectiveness of both measures were not highly questionable.
The COVID 19 “pandemic” is mainly a scare crow. It is not more dangerous or deadly than the normal seasonal flue. According to official CDC statistics from December 2020, only 58,144 people more died in 2020, a full COVID year, than died in 2019, the onset year for COVID. And heart diseases, diabetes, suicide, and Fentanyl related deaths are all up. Where does this leave the great COVID pandemic and the millions of additional deaths it allegedly caused?
This makes me suspect that our control-happy collectivist government is only using the COVID 19 “pandemic” (along with AGW) to make us forfeit our constitutional liberties and freedom and scare us into submission. Parents and teachers who insist that their children and students wear masks, project their own fears on these young people and likely cause significantly more damage to their souls and minds than COVID to their lungs and sinuses. Unfortunately, the extent of this damage will only become evident after the COVID nonsense has long disappeared in the fog of history.