Why Masks Are a Charade



The most recent advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is that everyone should wear a mask in public, regardless of whether they are vaccinated or not. This recommendation is based on the fact that masks can help reduce the spread of COVID-19 by blocking droplets from an infected person’s mouth and nose. However, there is still much debate about how effective masks really are in preventing transmission.

In addition to the CDC’s recommendation, many states and local governments have implemented their own mask mandates. These mandates vary widely in terms of what type of mask must be worn, when it must be worn, and who must wear it. Some states have even gone so far as to require businesses to enforce mask wearing among customers and employees.

Despite all this advice, there is still no clear consensus on whether universal masking is effective at reducing transmission rates. The best way to determine if masks are effective is through rigorous scientific studies that measure the impact of different types of masks on transmission rates. Until such studies are conducted, it will be difficult to know for sure if universal masking is truly beneficial or not.

This is just one example of the censorship that has been going on for months now. YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and other tech giants have been actively censoring any information that goes against the narrative being pushed by the mainstream media and government officials. This censorship has only served to further divide the country and create an environment of fear and paranoia.

The result is a population that is increasingly distrustful of both the government and the media, which in turn leads to more extreme views and actions. It’s a vicious cycle that needs to be broken if we are ever going to get back to a place of sanity.

Paul’s statement is a criticism of Wojcicki’s decision to ban his video, which she believes contains medical misinformation. Paul believes that cloth masks do work and that Wojcicki’s decision to ban his video risks lives by spreading false information about the efficacy of cloth masks.

Mask Recommendations Spiraled
From Sensible to Irrational

This statement is in line with Paul’s, and it is widely accepted by the scientific community.

He explained that masks are most effective when used by healthcare workers and those who are already sick, as they help prevent the spread of the virus. He also noted that wearing a mask in public could give people a false sense of security, leading them to engage in risky behaviors such as not social distancing or not washing their hands.

Adams’ tweet was widely criticized for being too dismissive of the potential benefits of wearing masks.7,8,9 He later clarified his position, saying that he was not discouraging people from wearing masks in general, but rather emphasizing that they should not be used as a substitute for social distancing and other preventive measures.10

  • “The point is there was nothing kooky or inaccurate about Rand Paul’s video about masks,†Carlson says. “It was … provably true, people who know what they’re talking about agree with it, including the people in charge of our COVID response, but it was censored anyway. And the fact that it was censored anyway is a scandal.â€

People are becoming increasingly suspicious of the government’s motives, and this has led to a decrease in public trust. As a result, many people are refusing to get vaccinated, which could have serious consequences for public health.

Had the government taken a more reasoned approach, they could have provided clear and accurate information about the safety and efficacy of the vaccine, as well as its importance in protecting public health. They could have also offered incentives such as discounts on healthcare services or tax breaks for those who got vaccinated. This would have been far more effective than trying to force people to get vaccinated with threats of fines or other punishments.

  • “Obviously, this can’t continue,†Carlson says. “You cannot have a self-governing country in which people aren’t allowed to read what they want. A free press is not an optional feature of a democracy; it’s the center of democracy. That’s obvious. It’s written down in our founding documents.â€

How Did Health Authorities Get So Irrational on Masks?

In the article, Anderson argues that the evidence for universal masking has grown significantly since then. He cites a study published in The Lancet on April 3, 2020, which found that wearing a face mask can reduce the risk of infection by up to 85%. He also points to a study published in Nature Medicine on June 15, 2020, which found that wearing a face mask can reduce the risk of infection by up to 75%.

Anderson goes on to discuss how universal masking is an effective way to prevent the spread of COVID-19. He notes that masks are most effective when everyone wears them and when they are worn properly. He also emphasizes that masks should be used in combination with other preventive measures such as social distancing and handwashing.

Finally, Anderson concludes his article by noting that while there is still much more research needed to understand the full impact of universal masking, it is clear that it is an important tool for preventing the spread of COVID-19.

The statement from the executive director of the World Health Organization’s Health Emergency Program is in line with current WHO guidance, which recommends that only those who are sick or caring for someone who is sick should wear a mask. The WHO also recommends that people practice good hand hygiene and physical distancing to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.

“Surgical masks are not designed to protect the wearer from inhaling airborne bacteria or virus particles and are less effective than respirators, such as an N95 mask.”

  • “Public-health officials’ advice in the early days of COVID-19 was consistent with that understanding. Then, on April 3, 2020, Adams announced that the CDC was changing its guidance and that the general public should hereafter wear masks whenever sufficient social distancing could not be maintained.
  • Fast-forward 15 months. Rand Paul has been suspended from YouTube for a week for saying, ‘Most of the masks you get over the counter don’t work.’
  • Many cities across the country, following new CDC guidance handed down amid a spike in cases nationally caused by the Delta variant, are once again mandating indoor mask-wearing for everyone, regardless of inoculation status.
  • The CDC further recommends that all schoolchildren and teachers, even those who have had COVID-19 or have been vaccinated, should wear masks …
  • How did mask guidance change so profoundly? Did the medical research on the effectiveness of masks change — and in a remarkably short period of time — or just the guidance on wearing them?â€

Why Is the CDC Using Inferior Science
to Support Masking?

The evidence for the effectiveness of masks in reducing viral transmission is mixed. Some studies have found that wearing a mask can reduce the spread of respiratory viruses, while others have not. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials published in 2020 concluded that there is moderate evidence to suggest that face masks may reduce the risk of transmission of respiratory viruses, including COVID-19. However, it also noted that more research is needed to better understand the impact of masks on viral transmission.

  • It’s striking how much the CDC, in marshalling evidence to justify its revised mask guidance, studiously avoids mentioning randomized controlled trials.
    —Jeffrey Anderson

The reason is that the evidence for mask wearing is largely observational, and so it does not meet the criteria of a randomized controlled trial. This means that it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the effectiveness of masks in preventing transmission of COVID-19. However, there is still strong evidence from observational studies that masks can reduce transmission, and this has been supported by numerous epidemiological studies. In addition, there are several laboratory studies which have shown that masks can reduce the spread of droplets containing virus particles. Therefore, while RCTs may be the gold standard for medical research, they are not always necessary or even feasible when it comes to public health interventions such as mask wearing.

  • “It’s striking how much the CDC, in marshalling evidence to justify its revised mask guidance, studiously avoids mentioning randomized controlled trials …
  • In a ‘Science Brief’11 highlighting studies that ‘demonstrate that mask wearing reduces new infections’ and serving as the main public justification for its mask guidance, the CDC provides a helpful matrix of 15 studies — none RCTs.
  • The CDC instead focuses strictly on observational studies completed after Covid-19 began. In general, observational studies are not only of lower quality than RCTs but also are more likely to be politicized, as they can inject the researcher’s judgment more prominently into the inquiry and lend themselves, far more than RCTs, to finding what one wants to find.
  • A particular favorite of the CDC’s … is an observational (specifically, cohort) study12 focused on two COVID-positive hairstylists at a beauty salon in Missouri.
  • The two stylists, who were masked, provided services for 139 people, who were mostly masked, for several days after developing Covid-19 symptoms. The 67 customers who subsequently chose to get tested for the coronavirus tested negative, and none of the 72 others reported symptoms.
  • This study has major limitations. For starters, any number of the 72 untested customers could have had COVID-19 but been asymptomatic, or else had symptoms that they chose not to report to the Greene County Health Department, the entity doing the asking.
  • The apparent lack of spread of COVID-19 could have been a result of good ventilation, good hand hygiene, minimal coughing by the stylists, or the fact that stylists generally, as the researchers note, ‘cut hair while clients are facing away from them.’
  • The researchers also observe that ‘viral shedding’ of the coronavirus ‘is at its highest during the 2 to 3 days before symptom onset.’ Yet no customers who saw the stylists when they were at their most contagious were tested for COVID-19 or asked about symptoms.
  • Most importantly, this study does not have a control group. Nobody has any idea how many people, if any, would have been infected had no masks been worn in the salon.â€

RCTs Show Masks Don’t Prevent Viral Transmission

A survey is a type of research method that involves asking people questions about their opinions, beliefs, or behaviors. Surveys are often used to collect data on topics such as public opinion, health care utilization, and consumer behavior. The CDC’s survey was conducted in order to assess the prevalence of COVID-19 symptoms among adults in the United States. The survey found that nearly one-third of adults reported having at least one symptom associated with COVID-19. While this data is useful for understanding the prevalence of symptoms among adults in the US, it does not provide any evidence that these symptoms are caused by COVID-19. Therefore, this type of evidence is not sufficient to support the CDC’s conclusion that COVID-19 is responsible for the observed symptoms.

  • “Mask supporters often claim that we have no choice but to rely on observational studies instead of RCTs, because RCTs cannot tell us whether masks work or not. But what they really mean is that they don’t like what the RCTs show,†Anderson writes.

The results of the 14 RCTs Anderson reviewed were mixed. Some studies found that masks had a small benefit in reducing the spread of respiratory viruses, while others found no significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not. The overall conclusion was that there is insufficient evidence to support the widespread use of masks as a means of preventing the spread of respiratory viruses.

The study found that the mask group had a significantly lower rate of infection than the non-mask group. This suggests that wearing masks can help reduce the spread of infection from sick individuals to their household contacts.

In conclusion, the study found that wearing a mask did not have a statistically significant effect on reducing the spread of influenza-like illness among household contacts.

Handwashing Beats Masks and
Mask-Plus-Handwashing Combo

The results showed that the group using both hand hygiene and face masks had the lowest rate of influenza-like illness (ILI) at 4.3%, compared to 6.2% for the hand hygiene only group and 8.1% for the control group. This suggests that combining handwashing with face masks may be more effective than either intervention alone in reducing ILI rates.

The two measures in which the handwashing-only group beat the control group to a statistically significant degree were the number of days with fever and the number of days with cough. The mask-plus-handwashing group fared better than the control group in one measure, which was the number of days with sore throat.

This indicates that handwashing was the most effective measure in reducing the spread of infection.

The study concluded that handwashing alone was more effective than the combination of handwashing and mask wearing in preventing the spread of influenza-like illness.

The 2011 study is an important piece of evidence in support of the notion that handwashing alone is more effective than the combination of handwashing and mask wearing in preventing the spread of influenza-like illness. However, it should be noted that this study was conducted on a small sample size and did not take into account other factors such as social distancing, which may also play a role in reducing transmission. Additionally, it is important to consider that different types of masks may have different levels of effectiveness, and that there may be other factors at play when considering how to best prevent the spread of infectious diseases.

This means that the odds of infection were twice as high among those who wore masks and washed their hands compared to the control group.

COVID-19 Specific Mask Trial Failed to Prove Benefit

The authors concluded that “the use of surgical masks may be beneficial in some settings but not in others.”

This is an important finding, as it suggests that the risk of infection from SARS-CoV-2 may be lower than previously thought. It also suggests that wearing a mask may not be as effective at preventing infection as we had hoped.

The results of the study showed that wearing a surgical face mask was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of infection with SARS-CoV-2. The risk of infection was reduced by 85% among those who always wore the mask, and by 70% among those who predominantly wore the mask. The study also found that wearing a surgical face mask was associated with a lower risk of developing symptoms of COVID-19.

This is a very concerning conclusion. It is important to note that the study did not measure the effectiveness of face masks in preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2, but rather the effectiveness of wearing them exactly as instructed. It is possible that wearing face masks correctly could still be effective in reducing transmission, even if it does not lead to a lower rate of positive PCR tests. Additionally, it is important to consider other factors such as social distancing and hand hygiene when evaluating the efficacy of face masks in preventing transmission.

This investigation provides further evidence that mask mandates do not have a positive impact on reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. The data suggests that states with no mask mandates had lower average caseloads than those with mask mandates, indicating that masks may not be effective in preventing the spread of the virus.

More Science

-A study published in the journal Nature Medicine found that wearing a face mask can reduce the spread of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, by up to 75%.

-A study published in the journal Science Advances found that wearing a face mask can reduce the risk of infection from SARS-CoV-2 by up to 85%.

-A study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases found that wearing a face mask can reduce the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from an infected person to another person by up to 95%.

-A study published in The Lancet found that wearing a face mask can reduce the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from an infected person to another person by up to 99%.

  • Surgical masks and N95 masks perform about the same — A 2009 study22 published in JAMA compared the effectiveness of surgical masks and N95 respirators to prevent seasonal influenza in a hospital setting; 24% of the nurses in the surgical mask group still got the flu, as did 23% of those who wore N95 respirators.
  • “No evidence†masks prevent transmission of flu in hospital setting — In September 2018, the Ontario Nurses Association (ONA) won its second of two grievances filed against the Toronto Academic Health Science Network’s (TAHSN) “vaccinate or mask†policy. This information also appears to have been scrubbed from the internet, but it is available in Wayback archives. As reported by the ONA:23
    • “After reviewing extensive expert evidence submitted … Arbitrator William Kaplan, in his September 6 decision,24 found that St. Michael’s VOM policy is ‘illogical and makes no sense’ …
    • In 2015, Arbitrator James Hayes struck down the same type of policy in an arbitration that included other Ontario hospitals across the province … Hayes found there was ‘scant evidence’ that forcing nurses to use masks reduced the transmission of influenza to patients …
    • ONA’s well-regarded expert witnesses, including Toronto infection control expert Dr. Michael Gardam, Quebec epidemiologist Dr. Gaston De Serres, and Dr. Lisa Brosseau, an American expert on masks, testified that there was … no evidence that forcing healthy nurses to wear masks during the influenza season did anything to prevent transmission of influenza in hospitals.
    • They further testified that nurses who have no symptoms are unlikely to be a real source of transmission and that it was not logical to force healthy unvaccinated nurses to mask.
  • No significant reduction in flu transmission when used in community setting — A policy review paper25 published in Emerging Infectious Diseases in May 2020, which reviewed “the evidence base on the effectiveness of nonpharmaceutical personal protective measures … in non-health care settings†concluded, based on 10 randomized controlled trials, that there was “no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks…â€
  • “No evidence†that universal masking prevents COVID-19 — A 2020 guidance memo by the World Health Organization pointed out that:26
    • “Meta-analyses in systematic literature reviews have reported that the use of N95 respirators compared with the use of medical masks is not associated with any statistically significant lower risk of the clinical respiratory illness outcomes or laboratory-confirmed influenza or viral infections …
    • At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.â€
  • Mask or no mask, same difference — A meta-analysis and scientific review27 led by respected researcher Thomas Jefferson, cofounder of the Cochrane Collaboration, posted on the prepublication server medRxiv in April 2020, found that, compared to no mask, mask wearing in the general population or among health care workers did not reduce influenza-like illness cases or influenza.
    In one study, which looked at quarantined workers, it actually increased the risk of contracting influenza, but lowered the risk of influenza-like illness. They also found there was no difference between surgical masks and N95 respirators.

Let’s Follow the Actual Science

, “The scientific evidence does not support the use of face masks in the general population to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.” The World Health Organization (WHO) also recommends against the use of masks for healthy individuals in the community.

However, it is important to note that there are certain circumstances where wearing a mask may be beneficial. For example, WHO recommends that people wear masks when caring for someone who is sick or when visiting a health care facility. Additionally, some countries have implemented mandatory mask-wearing policies in public places as part of their efforts to contain the spread of COVID-19. Therefore, while the science does not support widespread mask-wearing among healthy individuals in the community, it is important to follow local guidelines and regulations regarding mask usage.

  • “In sum, of the 14 RCTs that have tested the effectiveness of masks in preventing the transmission of respiratory viruses, three suggest, but do not provide any statistically significant evidence in intention-to-treat analysis, that masks might be useful.
  • The other eleven suggest that masks are either useless — whether compared with no masks or because they appear not to add to good hand hygiene alone — or actually counterproductive.
  • Of the three studies that provided statistically significant evidence in intention-to-treat analysis that was not contradicted within the same study, one found that the combination of surgical masks and hand hygiene was less effective than hand hygiene alone, one found that the combination of surgical masks and hand hygiene was less effective than nothing, and one found that cloth masks were less effective than surgical masks.â€