On Masks:

I decided to address masks separately in this book, although they really are undeserving
technically as there are so many more important elements to this project (CORONA/COVID-19).
However, they are such a hot topic in my area with those demanding we wear masks being at
odds with (and even getting angry and violent) with those that choose not to wear masks. In
thinking about this issue deeply it seems the real question is much more broad and is nested in
one of human rights - the right of the individual vs. the right of the state/collective - to force
someone to do something counter to their will. This issue will come up again in discussing the
vaccine’s - as that is a similar issue (with many of the same concerns & arguments).

Here’s a breakdown of the situation as I can see it after reviewing all of the literature (scientific
papers on masks, advice of the WHO & CDC, advice of local officials including hospitals, etc.):

● Asymptomatic Transmission
● Masks - Do they or don’t they work?
● Studies Questioning Masks Efficacy
● Masks Efficacy & Health Concern Studies
● Masks - are there any drawbacks, health concerns, etc.?
● Health Advice - is it consistent, and does it make logical and consistent sense?
● What is the State allowed to do to my body?
● Are there other larger factors at play? Is this only about masks (in terms of health and
safety)?

 Asymptomatic Transmission

Before we get to masks, it’s important to understand what masks are supposedly protecting us
from, as that is the supposed prerequisite requiring their use - and that is 2 things - supposed
“asymptomatic transmission” - IE, those people that aren’t sick but have this scary virus, and
second those that are sick (IE, showing symptoms).

A healthy, uninfected person obviously is not a risk (and therefore there would be absolutely no
logical reason to wear a mask). Healthy people can’t make other people sick. That’s really all
you need. Even in the case of viruses like EBV, and herpes, etc. - they are virtually ONLY
transmissible during an outbreak (IE visual/physical symptoms). COVID is no different (keep in
my mind the previous complexity and nuanced approach as to what it actually is and the testing
here).

But there is more as COVID is virtually non transmissible asymptomatically (IE, if you’re not sick
- you’re not spreading it) according to studies and the WHO.
According to the study: ​A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers​ scientists
concluded (after analyzing hundreds of positive tests and their impact on others in their family
that):

All the 455 contacts were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 infection and we conclude that the
infectivity of some asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers might be weak.1

455 people, hospital workers, patients, and family members were analyzed and none of the
people they came in contact with got COVID (tested and developed symptoms).

Next, we have to again take a step back to the PCR tests (as that is the linchpin in this in terms
of determining an otherwise normal, healthy person has “COVID”). In a meta analysis of the
PCR tests and actual viral tissue samples against a backdrop of infection rates2 The Centre for
Evidence-Based Medicine (​CEBM​) found that PCR tests were mostly useless in determining
actual infections and that actual infections (IE separate additional culturing of viral samples)
were informative in navigating the question of asymptomatic transmission:

PCR results per se are unlikely to predict viral culture from human samples. Insufficient
attention may have been paid how PCR results relate to disease. The relation with
infectiousness is unclear…. If this is not understood, PCR results may lead to restrictions
for large groups of people who do not present an infection risk. The results indicate that
viral RNA load cut-offs should be used: to understand who is infectious, the extent of any
outbreak and for controlling transmission.

Translated - PCR tests are useless in actually determining whether one has the virus. And even
in cases where one does have the virus, more conventional cut-offs (IE, do you have symptoms,
has it been a few days since you’ve recovered?) should be used to craft guidelines around the
formerly sick participating in society.

And the CEBM isn’t the only one that has said this. In June the WHO also said the same thing:3
“From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually
transmits onward to a secondary individual,”​ ​said​ Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, who leads the
WHO’s diseases and zoonosis unit, during a press briefing in Geneva, where WHO is
headquartered.

Here is the video: ​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvDOc4uPksw

1
"A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 ... - NCBI." 13 May. 2020,
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7219423/​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
2
"Are you infectious if you have a positive PCR test result for ...." 5 Aug. 2020,
https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/infectious-positive-pcr-test-result-covid-19/​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
3
"WHO Says Transmission by Asymptomatic Covid Patients ...." 8 Jun. 2020,
https://news.yahoo.com/says-transmission-asymptomatic-covid-patients-195131902.html​. Accessed 13
Sep. 2020.
The CDC also agrees here, as they’ve recently reduced their guidelines for “assymptomatic”
contact:

People with no symptoms "do not… need a test" even if they were exposed to an
infected person.4

So the question is, why are so many institutions (that try to follow the advice of these authority
figures) still requiring testing? We’ll get to that shortly...

Additionally, on their own guidelines pages, they mention that (if one has tested positive - which
as we’ve seen above is BS) then they can re-enter the world:

If you test positive for COVID-19 or do not get tested, you should self-isolate… 24 hours
after the resolution of any fever (without the use of fever-reducing medications).5

So even the CDC is advocating (based on this advice) that if you have NO symptoms, you are
not contagious! Even, if you previously had symptoms, and even if you tested positive!

The curious case of the Minneapolis Riots:

A final thing I’d like people to direct their attention to in regards to the efficacy of masks (and to
a lesser extent social distancing) are the riots and protests that have been happening.
Regardless of your political views, they are a great test of transmission and death rates - as
lockdowns were in place nationwide from March - end of May - when the initial riots started in
Minneapolis beginning in May 26th, 20206.

Minneapolis is the perfect test bed for this as it’s a pretty small (in population) city, decently
dense at around 16,000 people per square mile, similar to areas of NYC, and Boston.

According to Minneapolis’ own dashboard:

http://www2.minneapolismn.gov/coronavirus/dashboard​ - cases actually slowed down after the

4
"CDC walks back surprise coronavirus asymptomatic testing ...." 27 Aug. 2020,
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/08/27/cdc-walks-back-surprise-coronavirus-asymptomatic-tes
ting-guidelines/5645630002/​. Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
5
"Overview of Testing for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) | CDC." 24 Aug. 2020,
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/testing-overview.html​. Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
6
"A Timeline of the George Floyd Protests - The New York Times." 10 Jul. 2020,
https://www.nytimes.com/article/george-floyd-protests-timeline.html​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
riots, and deaths in this city are only at 228 total.

What’s important to note here as well, these are CUMULATIVE positive tests, which helps to
hide positive data (IE, if you had 1000 people positive day 100, and 1 person positive day 2,
you’d see a cliff on a normal, appropriate graph, leading one to understand the worst was over.
However, on this kind of graph you see virtually no change.

I’ve marked a red line on the chart above to denote the date of the first riots, which continued for
weeks, and the transmission rate actually slowed (according to tests). There has also been a
complete drop off of deaths from COVID, as checking it in July it was at 170 people (so 60
additional deaths in 2 months - nothing for a city).

These exceptions to the lockdowns and mask wearing with subsequent SLOWING of infections
(through tests) and slowing of deaths show that they are completely ill-advised. But let’s move
on to the science...
 Masks - Do they or don’t they work?

The primary first step in understanding masks is to understand their historical context and use.
That is summed up simply by - masks, in a medical clinical environment are solely for protecting
others from your exhaled bacteria, fungi, viruses. They are NOT for reducing the possibility of
inhaled infection of said particulate. Now, in the greater debate in society, this gets tricky - as
some masks are effective enough to filter out viruses and aerosolized sputum, which we’ll circle
back to below.

But, do masks work according to scientific studies?

This is debatable. There are as many studies saying they do as studies that say they don’t - and
to clarify, this is in regards to general viral transmission - not specifically COVID. This might
come as a surprise to many only listening to mainstream stories, but a number of studies
(including very recent ones - conducted just before the outbreak, and published during it) do call
this into question. I’ll be providing links to those below.

In searching back through the archives of scientific journals, and medical information sites I
came across the following article from the American Society of Anesthesiologists ​Is Routine Use
of a Face Mask Necessary in the Operating Room?

Based on the studies cited in the article (and below) the society analyzed the data and came to
this conclusion. Anesthesiologists and Nurse Anesthetists do have a special role in the
operating room - generally sitting off from the patient being operated on - although this is a great
example of a more realistic case - being a few feet from someone, what is the likelihood a viral
particle (or bacteria for that matter), will fly through the air and infect people? Virtually none,
according to this group:

WHEN introduced a century ago, the purpose of the surgical facemask was to provide
protection for the patient from surgical wound infections. But is there evidence that face
masks prevent wound infections? A recent review concluded that it is not clear whether
face masks prevent surgical wound infections7, and the scientific evidence for this
practice is weak and insufficient8. Questioning the efficacy of surgical face masks, an
established routine in operating rooms worldwide, is clearly controversial given the
tradition of the practice. Recognizing the lack of sound scientific evidence, we have
changed facemask routines in several units at the Karolinska University Hospital (see
image by Henrik Jörnvall, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Anesthesia, Surgical Sciences and
Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital Solna, Stockholm, Sweden).

7
"Postoperative wound infections and surgical face ... - PubMed."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1853618/​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
8
"Disposable surgical face masks for preventing surgical wound ...."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11869644/​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
 Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for
surgery is a departure from common practice. ​But the evidence to support this
practice does not exist, and studies to establish differences in infection rates with
or without face masks will likely be difficult to design and implement given the
small potential effect.

These studies and this decision by the ASA is particularly important as it’s a full decade before
any COVID-19 politicization could happen (as I’m even suspect of some news/information that
came out the year prior to all of this - as I’ve clearly demonstrated through the planned
exercises that these events are planned).

Of additional note, surgical rooms - the only places hospital staff were previously required to
wear masks - are very different than the rest of the hospital, or a general environment such as a
business - they have specialized HVAC systems including laminar airflow systems9 (think of the
hood above your oven) that increase airflow (and increase localized volumes of oxygen, c02).
Additionally these operating rooms, are kept sterile through air-pressure management and
sterilization techniques.

In addition there is some additional clarification that needs to be done:

Masks don’t work...

Not true

Masks do work...
Also not true

Both blanket statements are untrue, and anyone who says either lying or hasn’t done the full
research on masks and their efficacy. Mask efficacy is highly dependent upon the type worn.

For example, pulling your shirt up or using cloth (something I hear from the pro-mask camp
when they’re faced with the reality of implementing masks and their negative implications)
doesn’t work.

Surgical Masks

As we’ve seen in the independent analysis of the ASA, and as will be outlined in studies below,
although in theory surgical masks should work, real-world results (IE, actual lowering of infection
rates when worn, and worn properly) is a different story. Real surgical masks, when properly
worn and replaced can reduce droplet projection, however real reductions in transmission is not
supported, and they don’t do anything when it comes to inhaling particulates (so it protects

9
"Laminar airflow and the prevention of surgical site infection ...."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25453272/​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
others from you, but not you from them) - and as we’ve seen when you factor in asymptomatic
cases is also useless. Additionally, this presupposes that people are wearing them correctly,
and NOT reusing but replacing often (which virtually no one does - and causes health issues as
we’ll get into in a moment).

N95 with Respirator

These masks do protect you from inhaling contaminants (by the nature of their design, they can
block particulates as small as virus, however, they are also designed to expell particulate on
exhale - which makes it worse for everyone else as the valve causes everything to spray farther

Full Gas Mask

These would work, but are completely impractical from a wearing and purchasing perspective
and are cost-prohibitive and may cause other concerns (complete inability to identify people
wearing them).

Most importantly, individual effectiveness does not scale up with use, due to multiple factors.
Surgical masks, for instance, reduce droplet transmission, however most people either wear
them incorrectly, reuse them without sterilization, or otherwise constantly adjust them, touching
all over their eyes and nose in doing so. Meaning as a society, the individual benefit of reduced
droplet transmission is nullified by increased self-infection.

The issue comes in being realistic in policy. Can we expect everyone to wear full hazmat all the
time? Can we expect everyone to suddenly become totally professional and safety-conscious
with the way their masks are handled? Either or both are the bar for widespread effective ppe
use here. If we cannot do either or both (we cannot) then there is really not much point in mask
mandates.10

A final point about masks is asking the question - Do doctors and scientists agree? A paper
published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) on 11 June, came
under immediate scrutiny by many scientists who disagreed with the paper’s claims that the
coronavirus’s main route of infection is airborne, and that masks are the single most important
preventative measure against its spread.

However, the paper is being heavily scrutinised following an open letter to PNAS, urging them to
retract the paper due to various false statements and questionable methodology. It was
published on the website of the​ ​Meta-Research Innovation Centre at Stanford.

10
"Scientists are calling for retraction of Covid-19 paper by Nobel ...." 23 Jun. 2020,
https://www.health24.com/Medical/Infectious-diseases/Coronavirus/scientists-are-calling-for-retraction-of-
covid-19-paper-by-nobel-laureate-20200623-4​. Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
The letter11 – signed by leading scientists and experts in epidemiology from Stanford University,
Johns Hopkins University and the University of Colorado – says that it’s erroneous to claim that
policies were exactly the same in New York City and the rest of the US, except for the wearing
of face masks.

Similar to this retraction, we see some European nations like Sweden (which were in the center
of Europe12 - immediately along the path of transmission if the mainstream narrative is to be
believed) that did NOT lock down, implemented no social distancing and mask rules, and yet
have had virtually no infections and deaths. 13

[As an aside using Sweden as a case for the lack of transmissions is a dangerous precedent as
Sweden has implemented fully digital-only transactions, including a fully digital version of the
krona14 (which coincidentally went live just weeks before the world-wide furor over Corona), and
Sweden has been on the most “progressive” countries in the adoption of cashless, digital-only
payment systems15. The implication being simple here from a problem, reaction, solution
perspective - cashless transactions reduce infection and morbidity rates, so we should give up
cash and switch to digital payments… something this author DOES NOT agree with and believe
spells huge dangers for personal freedoms, but that will be saved for another section.]

 Studies Questioning Masks Efficacy:

A May 2020 meta-study on pandemic influenza published by the US CDC found that face
masks had no effect, neither as personal protective equipment nor as a source control.
(​https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article​)

A July 2020 review by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine found that there is no
evidence for the effectiveness of cloth masks against virus infection or transmission.
(​https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/masking-lack-of-evidence-with-politics/​)

11
"Formal request for the retraction of Zhang et al., 2020 | Meta ...."
https://metrics.stanford.edu/PNAS%20retraction%20request%20LoE%20061820​. Accessed 14 Sep.
2020.
12
"Most New York Coronavirus Cases Came From Europe ...." 8 Apr. 2020,
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/science/new-york-coronavirus-cases-europe-genomes.html​.
Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
13
"Sweden, Which Never Had Lockdown, Sees COVID-19 Cases ...." 30 Jul. 2020,
https://www.newsweek.com/sweden-which-never-had-lockdown-sees-covid-19-cases-plummet-rest-europ
e-suffers-spike-1521626​. Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
14
"Sweden is now testing its digital version of cash, the e-krona ...." 20 Feb. 2020,
https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/02/20/906146/sweden-riksbank-ekrona-blockchain/​. Accessed
14 Sep. 2020.
15
"Sweden's Cashless Experiment: Is It Too Much Too Fast? : NPR." 11 Feb. 2019,
https://www.npr.org/2019/02/11/691334123/swedens-cashless-experiment-is-it-too-much-too-fast​.
Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
An April 2020 review by two US professors in respiratory and infectious disease from the
University of Illinois concluded that face masks have no effect in everyday life, neither as
self-protection nor to protect third parties (so-called source control).
(​https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-ba
sed-sound-data​)

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine from May 2020 came to the conclusion that
cloth face masks offer little to no protection in everyday life.
(​https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372​)

An April 2020 Cochrane review (preprint) found that face masks in the general population or
health care workers didn’t reduce influenza-like illness (ILI) cases.
(​https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2​)

An April 2020 review by the Norwich School of Medicine (preprint) found that “the evidence is
not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks”, but supports the use of masks
by “particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.”
(​https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1​)

A July 2020 study by Japanese researchers found that cloth masks “offer zero protection
against coronavirus” due to their large pore size and generally poor fit.
(​http://www.asahi.com/ajw/articles/13523664​)

An April 2020 meta-analysis of all mask studies says: ​“Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on
sound data” ​and​ “cloth masks and face coverings are likely to have limited impact on lowering
COVID-19 transmission, because they have minimal ability to prevent the emission of small
particles, offer limited personal protection with respect to small particle inhalation“
(​https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-ba
sed-sound-data​)

UK admits masks don’t work, while simultaneously demanding masks. “​Emerging evidence
suggests that the risk of transmission m ​ ay​ be reduced by using thicker fabrics or multiple layers
but it should still be breathable”​ and “​do not get a false sense of security about the level of
protection they may offer.”​ In the UK a mask is anything that “covers the face and nose.”
(​https://www.nidirect.gov.uk/articles/coronavirus-covid-19-face-coverings​)

 
Masks Efficacy & Health Concern Studies:

T Jefferson, M Jones, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of

respiratory viruses. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 7.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2
4 L Radonovich M Simberkoff, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza
among health care personnel: a randomized clinic trial. JAMA. 2019 Sep 3. 322(9): 824-833.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214

J Smith, C MacDougall. CMAJ. 2016 May 17. 188(8); 567-574.

https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567

F bin-Reza, V Lopez, et al. The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of
influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. 2012 Jul; 6(4): 257-267.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/

J Jacobs, S Ohde, et al. Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold
among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Infect Control. 2009
Jun; 37(5): 417-419. ​https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/

M Viola, B Peterson, et al. Face coverings, aerosol dispersion and mitigation of virus
transmission risk. ​https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.10720​,
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2005/2005.10720.pdf

9 S Grinshpun, H Haruta, et al. Performance of an N95 filtering facepiece particular respirator

and a surgical mask during human breathing: two pathways for particle penetration. J Occup
Env Hygiene. 2009; 6(10):593-603.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15459620903120086

Jung, J Kim, et al. Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand
masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual
Res. 2013 Jun. 14:991-1002. ​https://aaqr.org/articles/aaqr-13-06-oa-0201.pdf

C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical
masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

N95 masks explained.

https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained

V Offeddu, C Yung, et al. Effectiveness of masks and respirators against infections in

healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Inf Dis. 65(11), 2017 Dec 1;
1934-1942. ​https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/

C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and
non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health
care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x
15 M Walker. Study casts doubt on N95 masks for the public. MedPage Today. 2020 May 20.
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/86601

N Shimasaki, A Okaue, et al. Comparison of the filter efficiency of medical nonwoven fabrics
against three different microbe aerosols. Biocontrol Sci. 2018; 23(2). 61-69.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/23/2/23_61/_pdf/-char/en

T Tunevall. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: A controlled study. World J
Surg. 1991 May; 15: 383-387. ​https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01658736

N Orr. Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre? Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 1981: 63:
390-392. ​https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf

N Mitchell, S Hunt. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms – a costly and unnecessary
ritual? J Hosp Infection. 18(3); 1991 Jul 1. 239-242.
https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/0195-6701(91)90148-2/pdf

C DaZhou, P Sivathondan, et al. Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of
facemasks in surgery. JR Soc Med. 2015 Jun; 108(6): 223-228.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/

L Brosseau, M Sietsema. Commentary: Masks for all for Covid-19 not based on sound data. U
Minn Ctr Inf Dis Res Pol. 2020 Apr 1.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-bas
ed-sound-data

N Leung, D Chu, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks
Nature Research. 2020 Mar 7. 26,676-680 (2020).
https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-16836/v1

S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration

performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles.
Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

S Bae, M Kim, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: A
controlled comparison in 4 patients. Ann Int Med. 2020 Apr 6.
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration

performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles.
Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.
https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

W Kellogg. An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks. Am J Pub Health. 1920.
34-42. ​https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.10.1.34

M Klompas, C Morris, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the Covid-19 era. N Eng J Med.
2020; 382 e63. ​https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

E Person, C Lemercier et al. Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance. Rev Mal
Respir. 2018 Mar; 35(3):264-268. ​https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29395560/

B Chandrasekaran, S Fernandes. Exercise with facemask; are we handling a devil’s sword – a

physiological hypothesis. Med Hypothese. 2020 Jun 22. 144:110002.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32590322/

P Shuang Ye Tong, A Sugam Kale, et al. Respiratory consequences of N95-type mask usage in
pregnant healthcare workers – A controlled clinical study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015
Nov 16; 4:48.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26579222/

T Kao, K Huang, et al. The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis
as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease. J Formos Med Assoc.
2004 Aug; 103(8):624-628.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15340662/

F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from
contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/

F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from
contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/

A Chughtai, S Stelzer-Braid, et al. Contamination by respiratory viruses on our surface of

medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3; 19(1): 491.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31159777/

L Zhiqing, C Yongyun, et al. J Orthop Translat. 2018 Jun 27; 14:57-62.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30035033/

C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical
masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
A Beder, U Buyukkocak, et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation
during major surgery. Neurocirugia. 2008; 19: 121-126.
http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/neuro/v19n2/3.pdf

D Lukashev, B Klebanov, et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha and its
activation-inducible short isoform negatively regulate functions of CD4+ and CD8+ T
lymphocytes. J Immunol. 2006 Oct 15; 177(8) 4962-4965.
https://www.jimmunol.org/content/177/8/4962

A Sant, A McMichael. Revealing the role of CD4+ T-cells in viral immunity. J Exper Med. 2012
Jun 30; 209(8):1391-1395. ​https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/3420330

Additional Resource: ​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wegZJI6NvpU&t=4s

 
Masks - are there any drawbacks, health concerns, etc.?

Like above, many don’t realize that there are serious health consequences to masks. This only
takes common sense, but is backed up by OSHA fit standards, as well as many publications
and experiments conducted with masks. Masks restrict airflow and as such cause exhaled
bacteria and viruses to consolidate on them, and also causes massive increases in C02.
Additionally the vast majority of people are not properly wearing their masks, not carefully
handling their masks, and either not throwing out reusable masks, or reusing (and not properly
sanitizing) multi-use masks.

Although it’s supposedly been “debunked” on the web, and removed from YouTube, a number
of simple experiments were conducted with a simple Carbon Dioxide meter showed a quick rise
in C02 from the normal background amounts of around 150 - 1000ppm to over 10,000 ppm - the
exceeding the at-home devices threshold of 10,000. Even on sites where this has supposedly
been debunked16, they admit that 1000-2000 ppm can cause drowsiness and other health
complaints, with half the measured readout (5000 ppm) causing everything from headaches, to
nausea, to an inability to concentrate. If anything the tests revealed, that things are much worse
than the governing bodies and organizations making these asignine mandates would have you
believe.

The at-home C02 meters max out at 10,000, and the test were conducted in seconds of wearing
the mask. With real use, there’s no telling how high the actual values would be, as during the
course of normal activity, and for longer periods of use the values would surely be much higher.
Additionally the N95 masks (the masks that have the best mechanism/nozzle for actually
expelling gases and particulates) are now being banned in much of the world because of the

16
"Does Wearing Mask Increase Risk Of CO2 Toxicity? Experts ...." 23 Jul. 2020,
https://www.boomlive.in/world/does-wearing-mask-increase-risk-of-co2-toxicity-experts-say-otherwise-900
6​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
above mentioned reasons (can make transmission worse). But, this same “design flaw” when it
comes to virus transmission, is the same mechanism that makes them more wearable for
longer-periods of time.

I for one have tried wearing a mask and within minutes had bad symptoms (light headed, sore
throat, sweating, drowsiness) and this was before COVID (I was using a n95 workout mask to
try to improve exercise performance and to prevent allergies).

There have been decades of precedence for the use of these masks (PPE) mostly regulated by
OSHA. Tammy K. Harrema Clark, 20-year OSHA-approved PPE expert agrees:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIwWp0-aJDs​. OSHA was started, in part, because people
have died from wearing masks (heart attacks and other ailments). In order to wear a mask
(previously) you had to have gone through a fit-test (organized by your employer and OSHA
certified representatives that would test and instruct your staff on proper use). A fit test does not
just refer to “how does the mask fit,” but also, are you fit enough to be able to wear a mask?

OSHA fit tests have been around for a long time and are pretty exhaustive:
https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.134AppA​ according to
Ms. Clark, there are often people that pass out, or cannot complete the standard fit test.

According to the test some of the more relevant sections include:

● The test shall not be conducted if there is any hair growth between the skin and the
facepiece sealing surface, such as stubble beard growth, beard, mustache or sideburns
which cross the respirator sealing surface. Any type of apparel which interferes with a
satisfactory fit shall be altered or removed.
● If a test subject exhibits difficulty in breathing during the tests, she or he shall be referred
to a physician or other licensed health care professional, as appropriate, to determine
whether the test subject can wear a respirator while performing her or his duties.

Obviously there is a massive precedent of an inability to wear a mask, as it’s one of the main
steps OSHA certifiers work through during these tests with their subjects.

In addition OSHA certified professionals work with HVAC companies (for hospital systems) to
test air change rates, air pressurization, and other factors that change the nature of the mask
and fit tests. Hospitals have much higher 02 and airflow in order, in part, to accommodate
masks and their design that reduces oxygen.

Prior to COVID, many employers would be fined tremendously for mandating employees (and to
a lesser extent occupants/customers) to wear masks - as no fit tests are being done - by OSHA.
But since COVID, the organization has done a complete about face, and is now cracking down
on organizations that do NOT mandate masks (throwing out decades of research and real-world
experience and now requiring no testing).
In doing a google search for videos I know are there (like the one mentioned above) and others
I had previously saved, I noticed there are no results coming up that are conflicting with the
main narrative. Remember YouTube, back in April agreed to ban (and has subsequently done
so) all videos counter to the WHO’s position on COVID (including treatments, cures, and news)
17
. This is obviously rather strange as the WHO is a supranational organization that is a part of
the UN, two organizations the United States has distanced itself recently from (and for good
reason).

● British Medical Journal opinion: Masks can increase risks of COVID in various ways for
both healthy & infected people:
● https://mobile.twitter.com/99freemind/status/1279528041782358016/photo/1
● https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1435/rr-40

 Health Advice - is it consistent, and does it make logical and consistent sense?

With medical intervention being the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States, the
question really is - do we trust our professionals? And the answer, because of that single
statistic has to be a resounding NO. Having experienced the healthcare system directly, it can
be a great tool for specific and simple emergencies, but downright murderous in many more
complex or chronic cases.

Another perspective is how little we hear about practical nutritional and health advice (which
comes as no surprise for someone who understands how and why this system is setup the way
it is). What we have is a deathcare system, that, from birth to death, from soil to mouth, is
designed to make us sick. It was recently revealed the vitamin d levels are positively correlated
with COVID outcomes:

Results revealed that 13 out of 26 patients (50%) in the control group were admitted to
ICU, and two died in the end. In the calcifediol group, only one out of 50 (2%) required
ICU admission, and none died.18

As an aside I find it fascinating they used calcifediol and not Vitamin D3. D3 is generally
produced on the skin by the sun and interaction with cholesterol and other substances, and then
converted to calcifediol in the liver. The Liver Foundation estimates that “​100 million americans”

17
"YouTube CEO suggests platform will ban videos contradicting ...." 23 Apr. 2020,
https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-will-ban-anything-against-who-guidance-2020-4​. Accessed 14
Sep. 2020.
18
"The First Clinical Trial to Support Vitamin D Therapy ... - Medium." 4 Sep. 2020,
https://medium.com/microbial-instincts/the-first-clinical-trial-to-support-vitamin-d-therapy-for-covid-19-906
a9d907468​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
19
suffer from NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disorder) - with even more afflicted by FLD, and
other liver issues like hepatitis. Basically we’re sick for a number of reasons (primarily our food
supply), and we have trouble making, synthesizing and getting the nutrients and hormones we
need - which continue to play a role in making “flu season” ever larger, and ever more
dangerous.

In addition, we’ve seen that there are a host of effective cures that have come out of the holistic
and homeopathic communities (besides the positive findings of hydroxychloroquine, zinc and
erythromycin treatment - which a number of doctors have come forward personally to attest to
its effectiveness). Why are these not thoroughly mentioned on the news, and instead are shut
down by the FBI, FDA, and FTC? There was some hope with the use of intravenous vitamin C,
but that too doesn’t get air time.

Even Fauci did quietly admit that he “supports” his immune system through supplementation of
both Vitamin C and Vitamin D. 20

In addition to NOT concentrating on any practical, helpful health information, the advice of the
CDC, and WHO (which have been the two major bodies that local health departments at the
state and county levels look to for navigating this issue) are both nonsensical and have very
troubled histories. We’ve already gone over much of this in previous sections so here is a short
list of their troubled pasts:

WHO

● The WHO is riddled with fraud and headed by a literal terrorist:

● https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yD3o6_QGJI&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR2rNJu
BXTmKmhaw_CDhBIPVMBZeD5rOcmVMcCtK90CtiGiqxW6W-zX5Ch4
● Faked Pandemic’s in the Past -
https://www.forbes.com/2010/02/05/world-health-organization-swine-flu-pandemic-opinio
ns-contributors-michael-fumento.html
● Terrorist Background of Tedros:
https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/dr-cover-up-tedros-adhanoms-controversial-journ
ey-to-the-who-65493/
● https://www.bitchute.com/video/9uWriZEC8BQ/
● https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/burundi-expels-who-officials​ - President of
Burundi, Pierre Nkurunziza kicks out WHO in May… less than 1 month later, he’s dead
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/06/burundi-pierre-nkurunziza-death-marks

19
"Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease — American Liver Foundation."
https://liverfoundation.org/for-patients/about-the-liver/diseases-of-the-liver/non-alcoholic-fatty-liver-disease
/​. Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
20
"Fauci says he takes vitamin D and C supplements, which ...." 11 Sep. 2020,
https://www.insider.com/fauci-takes-recommends-vitamin-d-and-c-supplements-immunity-boost-2020-9​.
Accessed 13 Sep. 2020.
 -the-end-of-an-era/​.
https://www.ft.com/content/a232c62b-ded1-4dd4-8ca7-a5bb5214987f​ - implication being
they’re now going after his cabinet members.

CDC

● Fraudulent Numbers: ​https://www.bitchute.com/video/pfSIJFkQ74Eg/

● The CDC, with fauci in particular has been riddled with drama and problems related to
virus research for decades.
https://truepundit.com/payback-dr-judy-mikovits-comes-out-swinging-drops-new-bombs-
on-dr-fauci-cdc-during-vicious-interview/
● Why did Dr. Fauci Back the Wuhan Lab (where this is purported to have been
developed/leaked)?
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-
risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
● CDC Works with the Gates Foundation:
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/20
14/09/OPP1120660
● https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=26&v=wyXuPwsLGWI
● https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/top-news/cdcs-own-expert-vaccine-court-wit
ness-confirmed-vaccines-can-cause-autism-so-they-fired-him-immediately/
● https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/daily-wrap-up/missing-cdc-researcher-found-
dead-town-bans-guns-child-allergy-epidemic-exposed-gov-pushes-meds/
● https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/daily-wrap-up/dismantling-superficial-china-d
id-narrative-origin-unknown-cdc-suspends-flu-reporting/
● Here's Dr. Carol Baker (https://acvr.nfid.org/speaker/carol-j-baker-md/) - appointed chair
of national CDC advisory committee on immunization practices calling for white genocide
because whites are smart enough to question vaccine's and read the research.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=26&v=wyXuPwsLGWI​ - that's just a
weird position for a somewhat public health official to have isn't it?
● Proof of CDC's Fraudulent Numbers: ​https://www.bitchute.com/video/pfSIJFkQ74Eg/|
● The CDC, with fauci in particular, has been riddled with problems related to virus
research for decades. ​https://truepundit.com/payback-dr-judy-mikovits-comes.../
● Why did Dr. Fauci Back the Wuhan Lab (where this is purported to have been
developed/leaked)?
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-
risky-coronavirus-research-1500741
● Severe Flu Season:
○ https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2002387?fbclid=IwAR3psHRYCZL1
uIMKU2cJuSrpcc7SCs7kAIjjfDCmXqG_bOjcWd2Li-xXZHs
○ https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/fauci-offers-more-conservative
-death-rate-academic-article-public-virus
 ○ “[T]he case fatality rate may be considerably less than 1%,” Fauci wrote in an
article published in the New England Journal of Medicine on March 26. “This
suggests that the overall clinical consequences of COVID-19 may ultimately be
more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate
of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and
1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case
fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”
● CDC has worked closely with the Gates Foundation for years, including hiring many of
the same people - and bill gates has a massive monetary stake in vaccines and in policy:
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/20
14/09/OPP1120660​ &
https://www.gavi.org/operating-model/gavis-partnership-model/bill-melinda-gates-foundat
ion​ - I don't want to get too off topic with this one, but Gates' crimes are starting to come
to light and VERY well documented at this point.
● If you can't see at least a little bit of a conflict here (shapes health policy, has companies
that derive income from those policies), you're not thinking.
● Some more antics by the CDC:
● Fauci’s Predictions:
https://vaxxter.com/dr-fauci-is-no-nostradamus-how-covid-19-ran-amok-under-his-watch/
?fbclid=IwAR0pmtWQp-hOGi7aXH3ITlkLwIuWXegJYHLdbsG87LZ2QHlMEskQ__LSuL
Q
● The original plan to slow things down was ONLY to reduce the burden on the healthcare
system - not to stop the spread. This was proven a lie immediately by thousands of
people filming their local hospitals. Many hospitals have fired employees, nurses,
because they were so slow. Then the narrative shifted to flattening the curve. Then the
narrative shifted to only resuming normal life when there is some kind of vaccine (a
process that normally takes a decade).
● AVERAGE FLU SEASON KILLS 650,000 WORDLWIDE:
https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2017/flu/en/​ - in 6 months we’ve only
had 500,000 deaths (even with the numbers being manipulated…) - this is LESS than a
normal flu season.
● Proof Some hospitals are creating fake media/PR pieces to pump up numbers and the
idea of a perceived demand for testing:
https://www.projectveritas.com/news/cbs-news-this-morning-aired-faked-covid-19-drive-t
hrough-testing-site-line

Again I think it’s important to understand that they (health bodies, CDC, and WHO) advised
STRONGLY against masks until June/July. In my own area masks weren’t mandated until end
of July (when cases had virtually disappeared).

Finally, in line with the original point of this section, I think it’s worth it to take a giant step back
and look at rates of cancer, childhood cancer, disease, autism, mental health, suicide rates. In
the west where these numbers are most prevalent all of these markers of health are
plummeting. Cancer is sky-rocketing. Autism, which used to be extremely rare, is now up to 1 in
28 boys21 (and climbing).

 
What is the State allowed to do to my body?

One of the core questions that comes into play is what role does the state (or the collective)
have to play in my personal decisions? I’ve heard analogies that it’s like wearing pants, or
wearing a seatbelt, but I don’t see it that way at all.

Covering the face (as we’ll get to) is more than simply covering a limb. Seatbelts were also
implemented for many reasons - but the largest of which was completely clear efficacy rates
with belts improving fatality rates, reducing front passenger deaths from 20% to 55%, as was
the range of major injury, from 25% to 60%.22

Personally, I disagree with seatbelt laws, but there is another more important reason this
analogy is nonsensical - the argument over the encroaching authoritarian laws and lockdowns is
from the opposite perspective - they are not focused on protecting one’s personal safety and
sovereignty, but instead are weaponizing the collective against the individual - purporting to
protect the populace from the mysterious “other” that could spread this mysterious poison

21
"Autism Rate Jumps to 1 in 36 Children, 1 in 28 Boys | Ask Dr ...." 7 Dec. 2017,
https://www.askdrsears.com/topics/autism/autism-rate-jumps-1-36-children-1-28-boys​. Accessed 14 Sep.
2020.
22
"© Final Regulatory Impact Analysis - CrashStats - NHTSA - DOT." 11 Jul. 1984,
https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/806572​. Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
(virus). Put another way, the measures are protecting us from each other, as opposed to simply
protecting us. As we’ve already seen in both the mask literature, the asymptotic analyses that
have been done and presented above, as well as results from other countries that did not
implement such measures - by all accounts, this argument makes no sense when looking at that
data from a practical results-oriented perspective.

But Pandora's box has been opened, and unfortunately it appears many have been convinced
that the individual should be restricted (with the state and local police and other bodies) as the
tool to do the bludgeoning. Somehow, it seems, the very people that decried the war on terror,
have, been convinced through magick and theater, that their neighbors are now the threat. In a
flash the war on Terror has disappeared, and the war on disease is knocking on their door.

It is my position that liberty, freedom, and personal sovereignty are hard fought positions and
that the mechanisms, and powers in place will always try to chip at (and have been since the
founding of the nation and in fact the beginning of time) and reduce our freedoms. There is no
better quote than the following when summarizing the whole of my position:

Those who would give up essential liberty, to

purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither
liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)

 Are there other larger factors at play? Is this only about masks (in terms of health and
safety)?

As we’ve seen in the above sections on:

● mask efficacy (in controlled environments)

● mask efficacy when it comes to practical and real-world use (very little to support their
use, and many scientists protesting the mainstream position)
● strange, often conflicting advice by our authority figures
● history of subterfuge including other manufactured “pandemics”
● lack of quality, real health advice when it comes to improving one’s chance against any
pathogen or illness

It’s clear this has little to do with protecting us from the mysterious illness.

So what is this about? Having studied geopolitical events for over a decade, with an ability to
see through at least a couple layers of the deception that is mainstream news and politics (that
has quickly shifted down a layer to alternative sources) - it’s clear there are larger agendas at
play with the mask mandates, here are a few I see:
Masks​ - don’t allow you to see any expression on people’s faces and as such are completely
dehumanizing. Since I was a child I’ve been amazing at reading people, and when this first
started I really thought I’d be able to read more of people than I’ve come to find (through their
eyes and body language). Covering of the mouth seems to be covering the single most
important physical communication tool. It is virtually impossible to see someone’s tone/emotions
from behind a mask.

Dehumanizing​ - Walking through

the grocery store and seeing
everyone wearing masks is
completely dehumanizing. It’s a
helpful tool in helping to divide
neighbor from neighbor. More
generally family has refused hugs
and normal affections because of the
fear of this virus.

Children ​- This is implanting alien

and very dangerous precedents on
the pysche’s of children.

Ritual ​- The wearing of the masks

are definitely ritualistic in nature
there is a lot of precedence for this
with the practices of Jain Monks and
other gnostics: ​https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jain_monasticism​ with the same forces that brought
and controlled these eastern religious groups to the west, similarly in charge of many of the
factions in power during this operation.23

To Conclude:

Asymptomatic Transmission is virtually non-existent and is being marketed to scare

friend-from-friend, neighbor-from-neighbor and family-member-from-family-member. Current
studies, and the guidelines by the CDC support my claim that asymptomatic transmission is
virtually non-existent.

Masks, in a perfect world may assist in reducing transmission of pathogens - but in the best and
most controlled circumstances, the effects are minimal.

23
"We're all monks now | America Magazine." 22 Apr. 2020,
https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2020/04/22/were-all-monks-now​. Accessed 14 Sep. 2020.
Fortunately, we don’t live in a sterilized, high-airflow and high-02 optimized hospital building and
operating room. Because of this, and the real world use of masks, they present a harmful and
dangerous social precedent on the physical health and psyche of our population. These
dangers extend to the legal and judicial including the dangerous precedent of the non-sensical
totalitarian march of supranational governmental bodies (like the UN, and WHO), Federal, State,
and Local municipalities who have mandated masks without considering all of this information
(indeed in many cases, not looking at a single study and merely naively following the dictates of
these self-appointed private authorities that have agendas, money to be made, and more).

We must live, love, and be social - not doing so, and acquiescing to the machinations of the
powers orchestrating this operation is destroying the very thing that makes us human, that
makes life worth living. What good is living your life, it is to be only in fear, alone, and at the
whims of medical and governmental tyrants? It is not a life worth living. It has only been when
generations before us, faced with the same dilemma, stood up and said no - that things
changed for the better.