| Note: The tyrannical, lying, politically-correct Big Pharma has shut down the study, despite not being able to refute the facts in it. You can still understand the significance of this helpful and truthful study here. And see this analysis of this unscientific censorship from Retraction Watch. Here’s our original SaveCalifornia.com blog: As you know, Big Pharma, Big Government, Big Media, and Big Tech are hiding the truth about mask effectiveness, telling you to just obey and mask up whenever they order you to do so. Yet published on the website of the National Center for Biotechnological Information (NCBI), which is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), is evidence that destroys claims that face masks for the general public are effective at blocking Covid (or other viruses). The study, authored by Dr. Baruch Vainshelboim of Stanford University and published by the medical journal Medical Hypothesis, is carefully documented. For example, it explains what people who smell smoke through masks already know: According to the current knowledge, the virus SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 60 nm to 140 nm [nanometers (billionth of a meter)] [16], [17], while medical and non-medical facemasks’ thread diameter ranges from 55 µm to 440 µm [micrometers (one millionth of a meter), which is more than 1000 times larger [25]. Due to the difference in sizes between SARS-CoV-2 diameter and facemasks thread diameter (the virus is 1000 times smaller), SARS-CoV-2 can easily pass through any facemask [25]. This honest study reports what the establishment won’t — that face masks are both useless and harmful: 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 as 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 facemasks can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize proper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health. The American Institute of Economic Research (AIER) commends this courageous study, writing: The paper appears in the midst of an ongoing effort on the part of Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden, and others to normalize and universalize mask wearing, even as many states are repealing their mask mandates with public support. The evidence that doing so has had any effect on the trajectory of the virus is scant at best. The most commonly cited study from the CDC barely finds a 0.5% difference in transmission rate over 20 days and 1.8% after 100 days. The longer the time the more variables are a concern; a simply and extremely weak correlation between two data points stretches credulity, especially when used to push a radical masking of the population. In addition, many aspects of our emergent mask culture are implausible, such as the idea that you don’t catch or spread Covid while seated and eating and can thereby be unmasked but standing and walking are too risky and therefore require masks. As to wearing them outdoors or even alone on a hike in the woods, does one even need to comment? Given that masking of healthy populations for long periods of time is a new policy, it is astounding that the media and scientific journals decided within a matter of months that the efficacy of the practice could not be questioned or studied, nor its adverse effects discussed. Anyone who thinks that “science” is settled after a year of implementation of a mechanism that ostensibly reduces disease spread does not understand the meaning of the word. Science is a process, by which new information and evidence are incorporated as they are discovered. Anthony Fauci and Andrew Cuomo are exploiting the term “science” to convey to the public that certain beliefs cannot be questioned, and they are being assisted by big tech platforms like YouTube, which obviously seek to control the parameters of the discussion. No matter how many times these people repeat the word “science,” they are promoting precisely the opposite of science: dogma. By contrast, Dr. Baruch Vainshelboim is pushing us to think more broadly and fundamentally, in a way that connects with pre-2020 intuition, and for this he deserves immense credit, as does Medical Hypothesis for having published this paper. Both make a courageous attempt to analyze the costs of adopting universal masking, which is to say advancing real science. ACTION: Please copy and paste this face mask information into emails and flyers and give to as many people as you can (you can’t post this on leading social media platforms without being suspended). |
“It’s time to say enough is enough … I urge everyone in America to throw away their masks, demand their schools be open, and burn your vaccine passport if they try to give it to you.”
Republican U.S. Senator Rand Paul, M.D., of Kentucky
RSS 2.0 Feed