I have contacted OSHA (see: Has OSHA Even Tested to Determine If Mask Wearing is Safe?), various government officials and WalMart corporate, none of whom have been able to point me to any scientific study showing that there are no side effects from wearing masks for extended periods of time.
Further, none have been able to explain to me the science upon which they provide an exemption to those with certain medical conditions, which implies that masks somehow impede normal breathing.
In short, it appears that the draconian mask-wearing orders are not based on any science but poorly thought out orders that rip individual choice away from us all.
I note that doctors, dentists and construction workers are among the occupations with the highest suicide rates but no studies have been made to determine if it is the mask-wearers in these groups that have, or do not have, abnormally high suicide rates.
And I state once again that the body expels waste in three forms, liquid, solid and gas. Masks block the gas waste from properly leaving the body and results in mask-wearers breathing back in the waste. On a very common observation level, this does not appear healthy.
Thus, it comes as no surprise about a report from the CBS-Dallas Fort Worth television station.
J.D. Miles reports for the station that "some people who are forced to wear face masks all day in the workplace complain of headaches, shortness of breath and anxiety."
The report continues:
Nearly three months of wearing a face mask everyday has taken a toll on the women who work at Southern Sisters Salon in McKinney.Even though key questions about the safety of masks are unanswered, the mask authoritarians continue to march and harass.
Like a lot of workplaces in North Texas, masks are mandatory, but for some of those forced to wear them, they are miserable.
The salon employees say keeping candy and mints in their mouths helps and they take as many outdoor breaks as possible.
The women who work there say they know masks are necessary for the business to stay open and for now are willing to put up with the discomfort.
“When I have long days, if it’s a 12 hour day, I’m sick when I get home,” said Courtney Warnell. “Sick to my stomach. As soon as the I get in the car I’m pulling it off and I don’t want to do anything else. I just want to go home and be mask-free.
People working not only in salons but also, retailers, restaurants, factories and offices are struggling with mask fatigue, but there’s no end in sight regarding the order to keep them on.
The latest victim, Michael Carnevale, is a gym owner in Plantation, Florida.
He was arrested by local police and his gym was closed by them for allowing his members to choose whether or not they should wear a face mask during workouts.
“If this whole thing is really about health, this is where we are getting into some murky waters here because I don’t see how I can make my patrons wear a mask while on a treadmill, or while they are exercising,” Carnevale said.
Putting aside for a moment whether masks cause health problems, the blunt instrument central planning mask-wearing order by various governments flies in the face of the real world living where some people have higher risk-tolerance profiles than others and may desire to forego masks even if mask-wearing does add a safe layer of protection. I discuss the nature of risk profiles in the second half of my podcast Dread Risk Fear And Its Role in the Current COVID-19 Fear.
Finally, the question must be asked: If we do not wear masks are "we killing others?"
The simple answer is that if someone is concerned about being infected by COVID-19 then they should wear a mask and not worry about the rest of us who are not buying into the government promoted propaganda that COVID-19 is a serious virus. It is not serious for anyone under 70, this is the science. Indeed, it is likely not a serious virus for those over 70 who do not have major health issues.
The idea that those not wearing masks are irresponsible is a Cass Sunstein con.
Here is the master manipulator pointing out why the scam should be employed:
From the paper's abstract (my bold)Important paper on what motivates people to get vaccinated; has general implications (eg for mask-wearing and social distancing). @CorneliaBetsch https://t.co/LxpwGIMhSe— Cass Sunstein (@CassSunstein) June 4, 2020
Results: When a message emphasized individual benefit, vaccination intentions decreased (free-riding). Communication of social benefit reduced free-riding and increased vaccination intentions when costs to vaccinate were low. Conclusions: Communicating the social benefit of vaccination may prevent free-riding and should thus be explicitly communicated if individual decisions are meant to consider public health benefits.And don't for a minute think Sunstein is just some academic in a far corner that isn't behind the manipulation curtain as a major player.
Here is WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus 's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 that occurred this past Thursday:
In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, countries are using a range of tools to influence behaviour: information campaigns are one tool, but so are laws, regulations, guidelines and even fines.I consider Sunstein a much more dangerous character than even Anthony Fauci.
We are learning what works, and what doesn’t.
That’s why behavioural science is so important – it helps us to understand how people make decisions, so we can support them to make the best decisions for their health.
Today I’m proud to announce that WHO has created a Technical Advisory Group on Behavioural Insights and Sciences for Health...
The technical advisory group consists of 22 outside experts from 16 countries, with expertise in areas including psychology, anthropology, health promotion, neuroscience, behavioural economics, social marketing and more.
This new group will advise WHO on how to increase and improve the use of behavioral and social sciences in a range of health areas, including COVID-19....
oday I’m delighted to be joined by the chair of the technical advisory group, Professor Cass Sunstein.
Professor Sunstein is the Robert Walmsley Professor at Harvard University, and the founder and director of the Program on Behavioral Economics and Public Policy at Harvard Law School.
Professor Sunstein, welcome. You have the floor. Thank you for your commitment, and thank your for joining, and thank you for this pathfinding work that will help WHO.
If years from now, it is determined that extended mask-wearing has resulted in health issues by those "nudged" to wear masks, Sunstein should be put on trial for crimes against humanity right next to Fauci.
-RW
I'm still trying to reconcile two matters. First, the virus is small enough to move through (at least) surgical and cloth masks, so the mask is likely ineffective in stopping aerosol transmission (but it may stop transmission in cough or sneeze droplets, which are bigger). Second, oxygen and carbon-dioxide molecules are smaller than the virus, so if the virus can get through, then so too can oxygen and carbon dioxide, meaning that there shouldn't be breathing issues. I'm wondering if the answer is that the barrier means that the body has to work harder to exhale carbon dioxide and inhale oxygen, because mass breathing slows down movement when there is a barrier, even if porous.
ReplyDeleteI have been puzzling over this as well. Masks do impede airflow. Even window screens impede airflow (I looked at firefighter websites that say anywhere from 50 to 80 percent airflow impediment)Although you have no reason to trust me, I did an experiment using a clear glass, a BBQ lighter, and a surgical mask which proves that the mask can block airflow enough to cause the lighter flame to extinguish. How this works with forcing the air in and out by inhalation/exhalation adds another factor. It seems likely that even with exhalation the CO@ concentration would be higher than without the mask, although I do not know if it would accumulate (logarithmically?) in the same way it would without the force of exhalation/inhalation.This would indicate that the mask could also block virus particles. The problem with this latter idea is that the issue of virus transmission involves particles remain suspended in air over long periods of time. Since the mask, even if worn perfectly, would not completely block viruses, eventually the concentration in the air would still be high enough to infect people with a high probability. The other problem is that if masks can block virus particles, they can also block other particles such as bacteria, pollen, etc., which can cause health problems. Whatever the mask can block or impede must have an increased likelihood of being re-inhaled.
DeleteI think that bacteria are many times larger than viruses, so a mask could conceivably work on the former but not the latter.
DeleteThe main point of my little experiment was to prove that CO2 could accumulate on one side of a mask barrier enough to extinguish combustion because the oxygen supply is depleted. Even if the particles themselves are smaller than the mask can block, it still can impede flow. But that flow will have to go somewhere, namely out through the gaps at the edge of the mask, so the viruses will still escape or, if not, be re-inhaled. I do not see where else they could go (or where the CO2 can go).. The people that advocate using masks seem to think that the masks fit exactly on some unlikely point between competing forces. They think or believe that the mask impedes just enough to prevent viruses from escaping too much but does not impede exhaled air enough to harm healthy people BUT can cause enough harm to unhealthy people. That seems crazy to me and reeks of special pleading.
DeleteThis article titled 'The Science is Conclusive: Masks and Respirators do NOT Prevent Transmission of Viruses' at https://bit.ly/33sD4SB says:
DeleteIt would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective-dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.
I've spent the last 6 months in FLA and NEVER wore a mask (didn't own one).
ReplyDeleteNow in New York EVERYONE wears one! And yes, I confess, I wear one when I HAVE to to the store up here (hey, I can't even buy BEER without one!).
Anyhow, rushed out the other day to shop. Put the thing on AFTER being lectured in the store, and realized, I had neglected to brush my teeth. Yuch! Now tell me I'm not suckin' waste with that thing on.
And yeah, I flossed and brushed as soon as I got home. Even before that first beer!
I haven't heard or thought of this monster since his fellow Marxist was President. He absolutely is more dangerous than the little dictator wannabe Fauci if that is possible. Unmitigated evil. For those of you who are trying to work logic and critical thinking into mask wearing, you are completely off base. Just stop it. The media zombiefied masses will not listen and you are wasting your breath. This is not about a virus and never has been. I do feel there are hundreds of thousands of the diaper wearers that will not submit to a Gates vaccine. It gives me a glimmer of hope.
ReplyDelete