There’s an excellent piece on the Swiss Policy Research blog, aka the Swiss Doctor, trying to puzzle out why the world fell for the face mask folly. It comes up with 10 reasons. Here are the first four.
1) The droplet model
Many ‘health authorities’ have relied on the obsolete ‘droplet model’ of virus transmission. If this model were correct, face masks would indeed work. But in reality, respiratory droplets – which by definition cannot be inhaled – play almost no role in virus transmission. Instead, respiratory viruses are transmitted via much smaller aerosols, as well as, possibly, some object surfaces. Face masks don’t work against either of these transmission routes.
2) The Asian paradox
During the first year of the pandemic, several East Asian countries had a very low coronavirus infection rate, and many ‘health experts’ falsely assumed that this was due to face masks. In reality, it was due to very rapid border controls in some countries neighbouring China as well as a combination of metabolic and immunologic factors that reduced transmission rates. Nevertheless, many East Asian countries eventually got overwhelmed by the coronavirus, too (see charts below).
3) The Czech mirage
In the spring of 2020, the Czech Republic was one of the first European countries that introduced face masks. Because the Czech infection rate initially stayed low, many ‘health experts’ falsely concluded that this was due to the masks. In reality, most of Eastern Europe simply missed the first wave of the epidemic. A few months later, the Czech Republic had the highest infection rate in the world, but by then, much of the world had already introduced face mask mandates.
4) Fake science
For decades, studies have shown that face masks don’t work against respiratory virus epidemics. But with the onset of the coronavirus pandemic and increasing political pressure (see below), suddenly studies appeared claiming the opposite. In reality, these studies were a mixture of confounded observational data, unrealistic modelling and lab results, and outright fraud. The most influential fraudulent study was a WHO-mandated meta-study published in The Lancet.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Scroll down here for a list of 30 studies that show face masks are useless.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The frightened, gullible public might have “fallen for” the idea that masks were useful, but public health authorities and governments in the UK and doubtless elsewhere knew very well they were not.
Just another piece of political theatre – nothing remarkable or surprising.
Those comments could well apply (at least to some extent) to the vaccines.
If it’s not political theatre or incompetence then it must be all about control and getting us used to ding what we’re told as preperation for who knows what, perhaps a social credit scheme, climate lockdowns or the great reset.
I think they know now the vaccines don’t work all that well and that vaxx passports are a nonsense. My guess it that, to start with at least, they thought the vaccines were proper vaccines that would save us/them. Some of them, anyway. But they’re not stupid, they are now lying to us.
They have been lying to us from the word go. Digital identity passes are their end game. Covid 19 is simply a smokescreen.
And Digital (centrally controlled) money. Imagine wiping out money of a political enemy.
These gullible and virtue signalling people are well on their way to wipe themselves out – our bodies need proper levels of oxygen to be healthy and prevent illnesses such as cancers that thrive in oxygen depleted environments
It they work keeping all moisture borne viruses in then why do your glasses steam up?
They are for coughing. Have you noticed that nobody coughs anymore. People keep it in until they are out of the supermarket for fear of being stoned to death.
Happy to stay at home on the rare occasions that I’m ill, but being forced to wear a mask all day at work for health and safety is wearing thin.
They are used as a political sign of conformity. You only have to look at the different States in the US to see that in action.
Should be compulsorily tattooed on the foreheads of dipshits like Arnold “screw your freedom” Schwarzenegger. Screw his freedom.
Due to his ‘insane’ views he was recently dropped by one of his sponsors, a muscle supplement company, can’t remember the name
Was it not the behavioural communist scientists who demanded them to induce further irrational fear and conformity, oh and the Gove gimp wanted them too, certainly no virus science involved
Yes, Susan ‘masks forever’ Michie. How the Government takes advice from a card carrying member of the Communist Party is simply beyond belief.
It is all about control and to perpetuate the fear, nothing else
Funny how some people can see through the shite even at a young age, and so many others just follow the crowd.
https://twitter.com/CharlieEmmaUK/status/1429392356206383104
I wish my niece (26) had his common sense. On Wednesday she had her 2nd Pfizer. She immediately developed a migraine so they decided to monitor her for an extra 20 minutes and measured her blood pressure. Usually her bp is 125/70, this time it was 99/80. She was sent on her way and told to phone 111 if the migraine persisted for 24 hrs. It did and so she phoned 111 and was told it was nothing to worry about. On Friday she went to work where they were so worried about her that they sent her to A&E. Various tests later she was diagnosed with a small brain bleed. She was sent home and told that if she starts vomiting and the migraine gets worse, then go back to A&E, if not, then the migraine should go in 5-7 days.
The hospital said that her condition was definitely not linked to jab!!!! Even my double-jabbed parents scoffed at that.
Let’s hope she recovers and suffers no long term effects.
“The hospital said that her condition was definitely not linked to jab!!!! Even my double-jabbed parents scoffed at that.“
So are they going to report it on the Yellow Card system?
Indeed. Bang a report in.
Good grief.
“The migraine should go in 5-7 days”??? I’d be thinking seriously about sleeping pills and alcohol by day 3.
A week of migraine?
That is horrible, whatever the cause. To ignore it, and provide no relief, is callous in the extreme.
Definitely clotting as a result of the vaccine, long term damage. A d-dimer test indicates blood clots, these tests can be bought online
So sorry to hear this.
You can submit a yellow card report, doesn’t have to be a medical bod. If no-one from family has done so, please submit one.
I wish your niece well.
A friend has had this also- two doses of Pfizer, followed by a lengthy migraine. A couple of weeks of extreme breathlessness later, she’s just been diagnosed with a pulmonary embolism. Thankfully caught early and treated, but she’s just 26.
Yellow card report?
I think she probably will.
They tried to say it was long covid to begin with, but she hasn’t had covid.
Long vaccine will never be a thing
Mask mandates were never more than a cynical instrument to raise the perceived threat level and act as a badge of compliance. In Cyprus for example the the government admitted that the mandate to wear masks outdoors was a political rather than scientific initiative.
Indeed. My view was that it was a ‘copy cat’ job compared with common practice elsewhere, such as the Tokyo metro – which is often ‘crush loaded’ at rush hour. Might be a cultural convention there, but whether it works physically or not is another question. Crap psychology at it’s best, more than likely.
How can people still be so thick as to think wearing a mask from the door to the table in a pub is doing anything at all. I thought that nonsense had stopped, but saw it again in numbers today.
They are beyond hope. I know some who I previously considered to be relatively intelligent. After working them hard with facts they now finally concede that face masks don’t prevent spread. But they will not concede that they shouldn’t be worn by all – their justification is “because it gives people confidence”. Fucking retards.
That’s the opposite to the real reason, to irrationally raise the level of threat is the correct reason.
Not science but now superstition.
They are the new version of “touch wood”
Masks were always political – not only a method for instilling fear in the public but also a symbol of unquestioning compliance – a political prop if ever there was one – pure theatre for the public and they fell for it hook line and sinker.
Reel them in.
Video: Surgeon on masks.
T
They know masks don’t work. We know they know masks don’t work. They know we know they know masks don’t work. It’s why any man or his dog could self-declare exemption.
Tell that to the teaching unions. Children’s mental health will be sacrificed by enforcing mask wearing.
Which I did, quite early on, having studied it a bit. There was a useful British Standards paper on the subject ( https://www.bsigroup.com/globalassets/localfiles/en-gb/product-certification/personal-safety/bsi-guide-for-personal-safety-equipment-0520.pdf 😉 , which more or less let the cat out of the bag for general public use of face protection gadgets. Note the bumf about how things are labelled to avoid being done under trading standards – most of them are not ‘official’ masks, just face coverings, for that reason – read the tiny labels on the back etc.
I have come to the conclusion that humans are predisposed to believe that ‘something is in the air’ — hence using smells to ward off evil spirits, the ‘miasma’, malaria (literally ‘bad air’), etc.
The authorities took advantage of this in their mask mandates — they knew it was pointless, but they also knew that it was a visible sign of conforming with authority, and thus dissenters could be readily identified (unlike hand washing, say).
Not a predisposition, but a reversion to false ideas fostered by centuries of ignorance?
In the US masks are used to signal whether you are Democrat or Republican.
Yes, and if Trump had started wearing a mask at the beginning of the pandemic and mandating that everybody stay home, “the science” worldwide may be very different right now.
Trump is recommending the vaccines (to loud booing at the Alabama rally). Is he applying reverse psychology? I wish!
Or, perhaps, he has shares in mask-makers!
It’s simple – he’s never known whether it was shit, shave or breakfast time. That’s Trump.
Seems Westminster seems to have a similar political divide. Staggering virtue signalling a a but in this case it is not virtuous but dangerous!
Faces are sooooooo right-wing.
Masks work.
As Gessler’s hats, like the Hitler salute was one.
Medically, the biggest folly and error here was and is to project narrow clinical observations and experiences upon the community.
Or, in plain English: in (heavily manipulated) theory/some studies and in some (unrelated) professional settings they can dometimes demonstrate a positive difference, but in practice and with the masses, let alone with viruses, just that assumption is totally absurd.
As anyone who isn’t completely blind could and can witness every single day.
I don’t think Britons and people here realize how fortunate we were, are and, likely thanks to common law, will remain here compared to other countries.
I have never worn a mask here and never had a problem, to the contrary, everyone, staff and costomers often behaved extra polite.
Society might be divided here too, but in most other countries masks in particular sowed not just division but outright hatred and aggression.
Many parents in Germany would kill for the self-exemption facility for their children that exists here.
They already went to court etc. to no avail.
You alsonneed medical certificates there and in all of Europe/USA for an exemption.
But the doctors who issue them are threatened and prosecuted by their chambers and courts and threatened with losing their license.
Businesses often do not accept the certificates anyway, even supermarkets like Edeka, or pharmacies, although this is plain illegal, not to speak of it being antisocial and discriminatory as wdll, of course.
But the police doesn’t care then, nor do the prosecutors or the courts.
If it gets accepted, like in Aldi or Rewe, you are often, illegally again, harrassed by Stasi like acting fellow customers, most often retirees.
There are rape victims who have an exemption but won’t use it anymore out of fear of harassment by these other customers.
Needless to say, they are then soon depressed wrecks, some have even committed suicide because of this (see Epoch Times Psychiatrist interview, link at multipolar).
And in most places, you also (in theory understandable but in practice ridiculously) have to wear FFP2/N95 masks, not medical or cloth ones, since months.
And that often for hours, even in schools, although the workspace safety laws have restricted their use for about an hour max. since a long time.
So, let’s be grateful for an instant, but also warned and on the edge in that regard.
I agree. We’ve had a very British lockdown and set of restrictions. I have friends in many European countries, the US, and my brother lives in Vietnam. I’d say we’ve by far had it the easiest out of the who had used lockdowns as a tool.
You’re probably right, horrible as it has been.
Buried somewhere in the rotten heart of government is a small but potent sceptic warm. It can’t (alas) shape policy, but it works to provide real human beings with ways to continue being human beings.
I wish us all much joy of the worm.
That said, I think the UK has been subjected to more psyops than other countries, so while the law has not been particularly strict, people were scared shitless and restricted themselves.
We also seem to have far more trust in authority than I thought, so people would listen to some minister rather than what the actual legislation says. A great example was “only one hour exercise a day outside”. That was ministers saying that, the law said no such thing. Whenever I told people you can go out as much as you want to, they always said “well that’s not what the government say”. I’d send them the legislation and they never read it.
That is true, was quite a surprise for me and is the biggest disappointment in all this.
Free born Englishman my a*se.
As I said, half the people on the continent and 90% of pupils would have ditched the mask if they had had the self-exemption option.
“We” – the people aware of the scam have definitely had a comparatively easy time with muzzles. Unfortunately, the 95% sheeple majority have needlessly suffered as badly as anywhere else. The ~50% who are brain-damaged beyond repair are are suffering with their self-imposed restrictions.
‘Fortunate’ – NO! Simply slightly less b*88ered than some countries. Fortunate is Sweden!
My 3yo daughter asked me the other day when she will be old enough to get a mask.
I’m so glad my kids are young enough that they will probably not remember all this madness
We can beat covid and save the planet!
One way trip to the Green-Gulag for her!
Look at that ELASTIC band.
It breaks my heart to see the three young people in my household dilligently masking up when they go to work or shopping. They may in part be rebelling against me but they aren’t daft; all have a levels and 2 are pursuing degree courses. Humour doesn’t work (a virus could drive a bus through the gaps in that).
Everyone has their own path to realisation.
I have noticed a large number of muzzled teenagers in the supermarket accompanied by their maskless parents. You are clearly not alone in this!
Its about peddling fear…has anyone actually studied the general public for a few minutes…it really is “Monkey see, Monkey Do” And that may be insulting to monkeys…?
Many ‘health authorities’ have relied on the obsolete ‘droplet model’ of virus transmission. If this model were correct, face masks would indeed work. But in reality, respiratory droplets – which by definition cannot be inhaled – play almost no role in virus transmission.
Can someone point me to the evidence that the droplet model is obsolete (the link provided by the Swiss Doctor says nothing of the sort)? Everything I have read suggests that both methods are important and it is not known in what proportion under what circumstances.
There also seems to be evidence that masks suppress aerosol transmission. Maybe someone can’t point me to evidence that they don’t?
Thanks
‘Cloth masks are ineffective as source control and PPE, surgical masks have some role to play in preventing emissions from infected patients, and respirators are the best choice for protecting healthcare and other frontline workers, but not recommended for source control. These recommendations apply to pandemic and non-pandemic situations.
Leaving aside the fact that they are ineffective, telling the public to wear cloth or surgical masks could be interpreted by some to mean that people are safe to stop isolating at home. It’s too late now for anything but stopping as much person-to-person interaction as possible.
Masks may confuse that message and give people a false sense of security. If masks had been the solution in Asia, shouldn’t they have stopped the pandemic before it spread elsewhere?’
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data
Thanks for the link which is rather confusing with the authors’ July 16th addition. My main impression is the general lack of evidence around mask wearing and, from what evidence is available, the difference between different types of mask.
I note that they do support the wearing of masks. They just think their impact is uncertain and maybe small and so they are no substitute for other measures such as physical distancing.
Despite the current limited scientific data detailing their effectiveness, we support the wearing of face coverings by the public when mandated and when in close contact with people whose infection status they don’t know. However, we also encourage everyone to continue to limit their time spent indoors near potentially infectious people and to not count on or expect a cloth mask or face covering to protect them or the people around them. The pandemic is not over and will not likely be over for some time. As states and local jurisdictions reopen, we encourage people to continue to assess and limit their risks. Cloth masks and face coverings likely do not offer the same degree of protection as physical distancing, isolation, or limiting personal contact time.
They only support the wearing of correct masks when mandated and only when in close contact with people whose health status is uncertain and they seem to be referring to health professionals when making that comment – their concluding section clarifies their views unequivocally:
‘Cloth masks are ineffective as source control and PPE, surgical masks have some role to play in preventing emissions from infected patients, and respirators are the best choice for protecting healthcare and other frontline workers, but not recommended for source control….Leaving aside the fact that they are ineffective, telling the public to wear cloth or surgical masks could be interpreted by some to mean that people are safe to stop isolating at home.’
One of my problems with the paper is that the authors’ statement seems to contradict the original paper or come very close to it.
So in the original paper we have (as you point out):
Cloth masks are ineffective as source control
But in the (later) statement we have:
Despite the current limited scientific data detailing their effectiveness, we support the wearing of face coverings by the public when mandated and when in close contact with people whose infection status they don’t know.
If there is limited scientific data how can they know they are ineffective?
And what would be the reason for wearing them when in close contact with people whose infection status you don’t know.
Anyhow they certainly link to some interesting papers – so it gets added to my “masks” collection of material.
“Maybe someone can’t point me to evidence that they don’t?”
This is the problem with experiments. What you have there is a head in a box. Not a person in a room for an extended period of time.
Masks leak around the side. They become saturated. They are reused. They are taken off and put back on again.
Given that infections are threshold based, the environment becomes infectious in any case. 75% reduction isn’t enough to get below the infection threshold.
There has been no random control trial in the real world that shows any deflection in the rate of infection from mask wearing. None. All of them are observational and suffer from bias – in both directions.
What you have here is the same issue as Hydroxychloroquine. Laboratory experiments seem to suggest that there should be an effect, but when taken out into the real world and given to real people, the effect disappeared.
The vaccines suppress symptoms, but are not sterilising so they don’t suppress transmission or infection. Masks are the same – they don’t suppress transmission or infection. It’s far more dangerous to society to have a belief that they do. In particular the prevalent belief that wearing a cloth mask protects the individual – for which there is absolutely no evidence at all.
Amusingly the systemic effects of people operating their masks in the real world override any small viral effects the filters may have. Every single infected person in a room has to wear their masks absolutely perfectly all the time or even the small viral effects are negated.
Or alternatively you can wear a viral filtering inbound mask, in which case what other people do is irrelevant.
Which is the more sensible system from an individual’s health point of view? One that requires everybody else in the world to be perfect all the time and follow rules unwaveringly at all time, or one that you can control absolutely yourself?
Which side you sit on that view is political, not scientific.
The term ‘disappearing up your own arse’ comes to mind.
The simple facts are :
(a) It is accepted by the sane that to use a medication or NPI, effectiveness needs to be shown, and harms discounted by evidence. Both are judged in terms of probabilities.
(b) There is no evidence to support general mask wearing in those terms.
It’s that simple – and the line charts in the article show this graphically in observational terms.
Trip to the Whitechapel Gallery ruined yesterday by being ‘greeted’ with a muffled request to be muzzled by a woman with a big black thing over her face, being shown a box of masks as I didn’t have one and ultimately being given a sticker to wear so that I wouldn’t be bothered by the mask police further inside.
Got round the gallery hurriedly, aware of little but 100% near-silent muzzle-compliance all about me and advise anyone interested not to go to the wretched place.
Supermarkets are welcoming compared to the Whitechapel Art Gallery.
What did you expect visiting a load of grant funded grauniad types?
Do you think Scott Adams is a sceptic?
The first para,”The droplet model” says masks don’t work. The link in the para to “object surfaces”, however, has “The risk of fomite transmission can be reduced by wearing masks consistently and correctly”. Why the contradiction?
“third, some politicians used mask mandates to enforce compliance and pressure the population into accepting mass vaccination.”
This is a point too many did and still do overlook.
Masks were the initial and most visible and impacting blanket assault on the principle and right of bodily autonomy.
Testing and lockdowns were too, but more conditional and individual, not everyone was impacted by them and always.
Once they got away with masking, the sky became the limit in those regards.
Though, as Neville Hodgkinson observes here, the booster drive has finally opened many people’s eyes. Sad enough that child vaccinations didn’t.
“According to a Twitter post by a US medical equipment representative who interacts widely with health managers, the Biden administration has made a ‘spectacular’ misjudgement on boostershots. If it persists, it will face a national health crisis with both vaccinated and unvaccinated workers ‘leaving in droves’.
‘Most hospital systems and surgery centres in New Jersey have mandated the vaccine by mid-September or October,’ he wrote. ‘Before this week, the vaccinated were loudly vocal in their condemnation of their peers who were refusing the vaccine. With this week’s announcement pushing boosters, MANY of the vaccinated see that these mandates will soon threaten their jobs if they refuse one, two, or 15 boosters. This has caused a seismic shift in thinking and attitude in just a few days.’”
That the French vaxx passport already lists space for 8 shots probably woke up a few people there too.
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/is-science-finally-coming-to-its-senses-about-vaccine/
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/more-masks-fail-more-we-need-them
A good article on masks failure to have any positive impact and the twisted mindset behind their renewed or continued mandating.
It seems all the evidence for mask wearing are based on observation.
Japan low rate of covid, it must be because everyone wears masks.
Many years ago it was observed that children who didn’t wear shoes in countries where malaria is common were more likely to catch malaria and die. This doesn’t mean if children wore shoes they would be less likely to catch malaria and die, it means the children who could afford shoes could also afford mozzi nets, repellents and meds. Likewise because in Japan people wear masks it doesn’t follow that’s why covid is low.