Masks are Child Abuse
Don't Comply
On planes and trains and on children
Robert W. Malone, MD MS
By now, we probably have all heard about the Silver Spring Maryland elementary school that has put N95 masks back on children attending the school, and the same school district says that this same protocol that requires masking for an unknown threshold of cases will be put in place for other schools in the district. It was a total of 3 nine year old children that tested positive. Now, we all know about the Cochrane meta analysis study that shows that even N95 masks have limited value and that N95 masks cause significant CO2 toxicity.
Putting N95s (or nay mask) on children fits the definition of child abuse.
A recent paper published, titled “Possible toxicity of chronic carbon dioxide exposure associated with face mask use, particularly in pregnancy women, children and adolescents - A scoping review (Heliyon 2023 Apr;9(4):Epub 2023 Mar 3) had this this to say about toxicities associated with mask use for children and pregnant women:
Conclusions:
A significant rise in carbon dioxide occurring while wearing a mask is scientifically proven in many studies, especially for N95-masks due to their higher dead space and breathing resistance.
Fresh air has around 0.04% CO2 while masks bear a possible chronic exposure to low level carbon dioxide of 1.41–3.2% CO2 of the inhaled air in reliable human experiments.
Animal experimental data shows deleterious proven effects of elevated CO2 of inhaled air in the long term with threshold values of above 0.3%, 0.5% and 0.8% (Neuron destruction, impaired memory and learning, increased anxiety, destruction of cells in testes, stillbirth, and birth defects). The risk for children's mental development starts at levels of above 0.3%, to adolescent male sexual development at levels of above 0.5% , as well as to unborn life at levels of above 0.8% resulting in reduced cognitive performance, reduced fertility and stillbirths.
There is circumstantial evidence that popular mask use may be related to current observations of a significant rise of 28% to 33% in stillbirths worldwide and a reduced verbal, motor, and overall cognitive performance of two full standard deviations in scores in children born during the pandemic.
Let’s be very clear, there is documented evidence that verbal motor and overall cognitive performance in children born during the pandemic and also in school aged children subjected to pandemic “public health” policies is much lower. How much of this could be from eight or more hours of mask use? Federal funded school programs have required mask used on all children, except babies, right up until Sept 2022. It is clear that these will return if the CDC deems that COVID-19 positivity tests reach a certain threshold.
I hope that every parent in that Silver Spring school puts a “stay at home order” on their kids until this mandate is rescinded. That every parent who is confronted with another mask mandate does not allow their children to return to that school until the mandate is lifted. It is only through resistance from ordinary folk that we can change this.
Furthermore, as the CDC again requires more testing in hospitals, schools and works, cases counts will rise. Once that happens, we can expect more mask mandates on airplanes, trains and public spaces. These are hard to resist - we have to travel for work. We have vacations planned. We have places to go and we need to go into public buildings. How do we fight this?
"We tried mask mandates once in this country. They failed to control the spread of respiratory viruses, violated basic bodily freedom, and set our fellow citizens against one another,"
-Senator JD Vance
Senator JD Vance is introducing legislation to prevent federal officials from enforcing masks mandates in schools and on airplanes. Please contact your Senator and let him or her know that you support Senator Vance’s “The Freedom to Breathe Act” to protect us from mask mandates. This is particularly important to contact both your democratic and republican senators - we need this bill to be passed, and in today’s Senate environment that will require bipartisan support.
EXCLUSIVE: Ohio Republican Sen. JD Vance will introduce legislation Tuesday to crackdown on the ability by the federal government or commercial airlines to force Americans into wearing face masks amid a string of new coronavirus variants.
Titled the Freedom to Breathe Act, the legislation, if passed and signed into law, would prevent President Biden and federal agencies from implementing face mask requirements for public transit passengers or students in schools until Dec. 31, 2024.
Additionally, Vance's office said the measure would prevent federal spending from being used to propose face mask requirements or force Americans to wear face coverings.
Vance's office said the bill would:
- Prohibit any federal official, including the President, from issuing an order requiring individuals to wear a mask or other face covering on any passenger flight in the U.S. national airspace system, on public transit, or in school (primary, secondary, and colleges);
- Block Commercial Air Carriers, public transit authorities, and all educational institutions from refusing service to anyone who declines to wear a mask or other face covering;
- Prevent the Secretary of Health and Human Services from requiring plane or train passengers and students to wear a mask or face covering in response to a public health emergency;
- Restrict federal spending to propose, establish, implement, or enforce a mask requirement on airline and public transit passengers and students;
- Require all agencies issue new and revised guidance within 90 days of enactment to implement the law and preempt all other laws or guidance contrary to the Act.
Mask Madness – Here We Go Again
Informed resistance is making a difference.
TSA and border patrol whistleblowers are reporting that mask mandates and other COVID-related restrictions will soon be reinstated. They say that the first step will be mask mandates for all who work at airports, scheduled for September; followed by mask requirements for passengers in October.
Kaiser Permanente Reinstates Mask Mandates
It’s de ja vu all over again at Kaiser Permanente’s Santa Rosa, California, facilities, which have reinstituted mask mandates and COVID vaccination recommendations for their staff, patients and visitors.
The reasoning is that they’re detecting an uptick in patients testing positive for COVID-19. There’s been no increase in hospitalizations or intensive care admissions to back up the “need” for such strong measures, plus 99% of the cases KP is seeing are mild; they’re just “helping protect the health and safety of our patients, our workforce and our community,” according to a company statement.
This, even though in early 2023 a meta-analysis found that masking, even with N95s, did not protect against the virus any more than not wearing one.
Mercola
Employers Walk Back Mask Mandates Amid Employee, Public Backlash
Kaiser Permanente, the largest healthcare provider in California, and Lionsgate Studios, also based in California, reversed mask mandate policies last week, just a few days after imposing them.
Kaiser Permanente and Lionsgate Studios in California reversed mask mandate policies last week, just a few days after imposing them….
Reversals come amid pushback and more evidence of mask failures
The mask policy reversals come amid pushback from critics after a growing number of businesses and hospitals in recent weeks reinstituted mask mandates and social distancing requirements, and a new report warned that broader mandates may be coming this fall.
Many doctors have also called for mask mandates to return to healthcare settings.
Meanwhile, documents recently released from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) revealed that public health officials privately questioned the effectiveness of masks and the guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) promoting their use.
And an NIH study suggested surgical N95 masks, held up as the gold standard for COVID-19 protection, may expose users to dangerous levels of toxic chemicals, the Daily Mail reported.
The study found the chemicals released by these masks had 8 times the recommended safety limit of toxic volatile organic compounds, which can cause symptoms ranging from headaches and nausea to organ damage and cancer, with prolonged use.
Since the original mandates ended, several studies concluded the mandate policies failed to achieve their promised results.
The Remarkable Uselessness of Masks
Pamela A. Popper, President Wellness Forum Health
For over three years, I have been speaking out and writing about the uselessness of masks for preventing the spread of COVID-19 and other viruses. Study after study shows that they do not prevent infection or spread. Even hard-core COVIDIANs like Michael Osterholm, who supported lockdowns [i] and cried with joy when he received a COVID vaccine [ii] have stated that the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and other organizations have overstated the benefits of wearing masks and misrepresented the scientific data in order claim that masks were effective. [iii]
Osterholm is not the only one calling out the CDC for spreading misinformation. A review of articles published in the CDC’s journal, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), concluded that the publication routinely reported false conclusions about research concerning masks. [iv]
The bad news about masks never ends. Vinay Prasad and his colleagues recently posted a review of an influential study on masking that was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2022. This study concluded that there were an additional 44.9 COVID-19 cases per 1000 students and staff in schools in the greater Boston area during the 15 weeks after the statewide mask mandate was lifted. According to the authors, this resulted in about 12,000 additional cases and accounted for 29% of all cases in these school districts. [v]
Prasad and his group concluded that this study was plagued with serious flaws. The first was that observational studies do not identify cause and effect relationships. Yet the authors of the NEJM article concluded - from observational data - that masks prevented COVID-19 and used this to justify policy decisions. They wrote, "Our results support universal masking as an important strategy for reducing Covid-19 incidence in schools and loss of in-person school days." They advised that their study should be the basis for developing mitigation plans for the 2022-2023 school year. [vi]
Using better methodology, which included comparison to a control group, Prasad et al arrived at a totally different conclusion after reviewing the same data. They concluded that schools that dropped mask mandates experienced a 22% drop in COVID-19 cases as compared to a 12% decrease in schools in which masks continued to be mandated. After comparing the two school districts that kept mask mandates in place (Boston and Chelsea) to 289 school districts throughout Massachusetts and accounting for confounding variables, infection rates were highest in the school systems that required masks, while the districts that dropped masks first had the most significant decrease in cases. Most of this variation was attributed to natural immunity. [vii]
Other issues with the original study included the short duration of the study: only 15 weeks. The Prasad analysis expanded the period to account for the entire school year before, during, and after the mandate. A confounding factor that the original authors did not account for was the fact that Boston and Chelsea were initially hit the hardest by COVID-19 and would expect to have lower rates after that initial hit due to natural immunity that resulted from infection.
The conclusion: "We failed to identify evidence of a causal relationship, or even consistent association, between mask mandates and district SARS-CoV-2 infection rates," and the NEJM study "should not be used as evidence mask mandates prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in educational settings." [viii]
In spite of all of this, TSA and border patrol whistleblowers are reporting that mask mandates and other COVID-related restrictions will soon be reinstated. They say that the first step will be mask mandates for all who work at airports, scheduled for September; followed by mask requirements for passengers in October. The whistleblowers were told that COVID cases are increasing, and that the rollout will mirror increases in the new variant, which the WHO stated last week reported was a "variant under monitoring." [ix]
It is obvious to thinking people that government and health officials do not base their decisions on reliable scientific information.
________________________________________
[i] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/11/biden-covid-advisor-says-us-lockdown-of-...
[ii] https://twitter.com/mtosterholm?lang=en
[iii] Megan Redshaw JD. Secret Letter to CDC: Top Epidemiologist Suggests Agency Misrepresented Scientific Data to Support Mask Narrative. Epoch Times August 21 2023
[iv] Hoeg TB, Haslam A, Prasad V. "An analysis of studies pertaining to masks in Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report: Characteristics and quality of all studies from 1978-2023." medRxiv preprint https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.07.07.23292338v1.full
[v] Cowger TL, Murray EJ, Clarke J et al. "Lifting Universal Masking in Schools – COVID-19 Incidence Among Students and Staff." NEJM 2022 Nov;387:1935-1946
[vi] IBID
[vii] Hoeg TB, Chandra A, Duriseti R, Ladhani S, Prasad V. "Mask mandates and COVID-19: A Re-analysis of the Boston school mask study." https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.11974
[viii] IBID
[ix] https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/just-time-election-biden-regime...
More comprehensive Mask Study Analysis
Mask Studies
+STUDY: “Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%.” (LINK)
+ REVIEW: We objectified evaluation evidenced changes in respiratory physiology of mask wearers with significant correlation of O2 drop and fatigue (p < 0.05), a clustered co-occurrence of respiratory impairment and O2 drop (67%), N95 mask and CO2 rise (82%), N95 mask and O2 drop (72%), N95 mask and headache (60%), respiratory impairment and temperature rise (88%), but also temperature rise and moisture (100%) under the masks. Extended mask-wearing by the general population could lead to relevant effects and consequences in many medical fields. (LINK)
+RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIALS: we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (LINK)
+STUDY: Carbon dioxide of inhaled air of children wearing cloth and surgical masks was (on average) anywhere from 7.6-34 times higher than of normal ambient air (LINK)
+STUDY: “It has never been shown that wearing surgical face masks decreases postoperative
wound infections. On the contrary, a 50% decrease has been reported after omitting face masks(LINK)
+STUDY: “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-size aerosols containing pathogens to which these health care workers are potentially exposed.” (LINK)
+OSHA: “Cloth masks: Will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.
Surgical Masks: Will not protect the wearer against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal or inadequate filtration.” (LINK)
+Dr Anthony Fauci:, “In early March, Dr. Anthony Fauci, a leading voice on the White House Coronavirus Task Force, told “60 Minutes” face masks were not necessary for the general population amid the novel coronavirus outbreak, noting that while masks might make people “feel a little bit
better,” they don’t provide the protection folks believe they do and might create “unintended consequences.” (LINK)
+Surgeon General Jerome Adams (Feb29,2020): “Seriously, people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!” (LINK)
+STUDY: “If protection against airborne organisms is required, an N95 respirator or better should be used, as currently recommended by the CDC and WHO guidelines for SARS prevention.” (Not surgical/ cloth masks) (LINK)
+WHO: (for those without respiratory symptoms): a medical mask is not required, as no evidence is available on its usefulness to protect non-sick persons. (LINK)
3M Corp (Mask manufacturer) “surgical/procedure masks cannot provide certified respiratory protection unless they are also designed, tested, and government-certified as a respirator. If a wearer wants to reduce inhalation of smaller, inhalable particles (those smaller than 100 microns), they need to obtain and properly use a government-certified respirator, such as a NIOSH-approved N95 filtering facepiece particulate respirator.” (LINK)
+STUDY: Coronavirus particles are under 4 microns in size (LINK)
+STUDY: Masks lower oxygen levels: “Considering our findings, pulse rates of the surgeon's increase and SpO2 (oxygen saturation) 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 (arterial oxygen), our findings may have a clinical value for the health workers and the surgeons.” (LINK)
+STUDY: Masks don’t work if worn incorrectly: “the value of masks to protect other members of the public is diminished if they are incorrectly worn. As anesthetists we have seen other health professionals in our hospital wear masks in a variety of ways—below the nose, on the chin—because of the discomfort they cause.3 Why should we expect the public to exhibit greater care in their mask
wearing to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks?” (LINK)
+British Medical Journal: Harmful Effects of Masks: “Before implementing clinical and public health interventions, one must actively hypothesize and describe potential side effects and only then decide whether they are worth being quantified on not.
Most scientific articles and guidelines in the context of the covid-19 pandemic highlight two potential side effects of wearing surgical face masks in the public, but we believe that there are other ones that are worth considering before any global public health policy is implemented involving billions of people.
The two potential side effects that have already been acknowledged are:
- 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.[3]
- 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.[3,4]
Other potential side effects that we must consider are:
- 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.
- 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.
- Face masks make breathing more difficult. For people with COPD, face masks are in fact intolerable to wear as they worsen their breathlessness.
Moreover, a fraction of carbon dioxide previously exhaled is inhaled at each respiratory cycle. Those two phenomena increase breathing frequency and deepness, and hence they increase the amount of inhaled and exhaled air. This 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.
(5B) The effects described at point 5 are amplified if face masks are heavily contaminated (see point 2)
- While impeding person-to-person transmission is key to limiting the outbreak, so far little importance has been given to the events taking place after a transmission has happened, when innate immunity plays a crucial role. The main purpose of the innate immune response is to immediately prevent the spread and movement of foreign pathogens throughout the body.[6] The innate immunity’s efficacy is highly dependent on the viral load. If face masks determine a humid habitat where the SARS- CoV-2 can remain active due to the water vapour continuously provided by breathing and captured by the mask fabric, they determine an increase in viral load and therefore they can cause a defeat of the innate immunity and an increase in infections. This phenomenon may also interact with and enhance previous points.
In conclusion, as opposed to Greenhalgh et al., we believe that the context of the current covid-19 pandemic is very different from that of the “parachutes for jumping out of aeroplanes”,[7] in which the dynamics of harm and prevention are easy to define and even to quantify without the need of research studies. It is necessary to quantify the complex interactions that may well be operating between positive and negative effects of wearing surgical masks at population level. It is not time to act without evidence. (LINK)
+STUDY: Conclusion: We conclude that the protection provided by surgical masks may be insufficient in environments containing potentially hazardous submicrometer-sized aerosols. (LINK)
+STUDY: Conclusion: The N95 filtering face piece respirators may not provide the expected protection level against small virions. Some surgical masks may let a significant fraction of airborne viruses penetrate through their filters, providing very low protection against aerosolized infectious agents in the size range of 10 to 80 nm. It should be noted that the surgical masks are primarily designed to protect the environment from the wearer, whereas the respirators are supposed to protect the wearer from the environment.
MISCELLANEOUS
Freedom of Information Act (Email from CDC)
“CDC is not aware of randomized control trials that show that masks or double masks or cloth face coverings, are effective against COVID.”
