The CDC touted the 80% compliance needed for masks since day one of the Coronavirus pandemic. If only 80% of Americans wear masks, the CDC says, could be controlled.
Most estimates put overall American mask compliance at 90%, and this figure is across the board. More Americans are wearing masks than the CDC had hoped, but the US is allegedly experiencing a “surge” in cases.
National Geographic estimated in that mask compliance nationwide was 92%, yet “cases” continue to skyrocket. Are masks working to prevent the spread of COVID-19, or are they useless against virus spread?
A study published today by echoes what anti-maskers already knew; masks have no significant effect on COVID-19 spread.
The Danish study concluded, “A total of 3030 participants were randomly assigned to the recommendation to wear masks, and 2994 were assigned to control; 4862 completed the study. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 occurred in 42 participants recommended masks (1.8%) and 53 control participants (2.1%). The between-group difference was −0.3 percentage point (95% CI, −1.2 to 0.4 percentage point; P = 0.38) (odds ratio, 0.82 [CI, 0.54 to 1.23]; P = 0.33). Multiple imputation accounting for loss to follow-up yielded similar results.”
The people who wore masks did not find any significant decrease in transmission rates of COVID-19, which falls in line with the CDC’s own studies showing that most people who got sick wore masks. The masks do nothing.
Pro-mask advocates tout the effectiveness of surgical masks in a surgical setting as proof that masks stop viruses from spreading. Per Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: a controlled :
“It has never been shown that wearing surgical face masks decreases postoperative wound infections. On the contrary, a 50% decrease has been reported after omitting face masks.”
Even in a surgical setting, the effectiveness of face masks is debated and potentially incorrect. Per “Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms—a costly and unnecessary ritual,” the study concluded that masks aren’t necessary and may foster :
“The wearing of face masks by non-scrubbed staff working in an operating room with forced ventilation seems to be unnecessary.”
Per an older Annals of Internal Medicine study “Are masks necessary in the operating theatre?” The study also :
“No masks were worn in one operating theatre for 6 months. There was no increase in the incidence of wound infection.”
Additionally, a 2003 nursing study “The effectiveness of surgical face masks: what the literature shows :
“Currently there is little evidence that wearing a surgical mask provides sufficient protection from all the hazards encountered in an acute health care setting.”
In 2010, an ASA Publication studied “Is Routine Use of a Face Mask Necessary in the Operating Room?” The study ,
“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.”
A confirmed that masks do nothing to prevent bacterial spread during surgery. Furthermore, the study found that masks may foster bacterial growth, doing the opposite of what Fauci and the CDC now advise.
In a study on cloth masks, concluded that cloth masks are entirely useless against any virus spread. Furthermore, Westerners tout the success of mask mandates in Asian counties, but they didn’t actually Japan has seen a surge of flu cases this year despite almost everyone wearing masks in Japan.
In fact, the CDC admits that cloth masks do absolutely nothing to prevent COVID-19.
Take OFF your masks. No really, take them off. They are making you sick.
On the , in a study “Community and Close Contact Exposures Associated with COVID-19 Among Symptomatic Adults ≥18 Years in 11 Outpatient Health Care Facilities — United States, July 2020,” the CDC forgot to hide the portion of the study wherein they examined how many people who contracted “the virus” wore masks in the 14 days leading up to a positive test.
For those who tested positive for COVID-19, only 3.9% reported never wearing masks, with the same percentage reported rarely wearing masks. Respondents who sometimes wore a mask accounted for 7.2% of positive diagnoses, and 14% usually wore masks leading up to their diagnoses.
A whopping 70.6% of the positive cases reported “always wearing masks.” The mask wearers got sick! The non mask wearers stayed relatively healthy.
The study adds substance to prior studies that claimed that most people who got sick during the 1918 pandemic fell ill to bacterial pneumonia, from .
Since we know that most people with symptoms “of the virus” who present to healthcare facilities are labeled as COVID cases, we can ascertain that many of them have bacterial pneumonia and associated illnesses caused by masks. In fact, the mingling of pneumonia, flu, and “the virus” has been a lingering misstep. Too bad the PCR tests show positives for anything in the “corona family,” which is anything.
So what does the CDC and government do when they have a bacterial pneumonia problem caused by masks? They label it “” which is reminiscent of “Coronavirus cocaine overdose” or “Coronavirus suicide.” Between October and December of 2020, the CDC realized that they could expand Coronavirus pneumonia into an even more general term, in order to increase case counts.
CDC has created “PIC,” short for pneumonia, influenza, or COVID-related illness. It doesn’t really matter if someone has pneumonia or flu anymore; it’s all COVID-19, and the CDC, per their is expecting a large “surge” of PIC this season.
It doesn’t matter if 100% of Americans wear masks; the goal posts are moved by the CDC and Fauci weekly, and masks have not worked yet. While the vaccine seems to have taken center stage in COVID-19 politics as of late, masks are the real pandemic, bought by the millions from China, displayed and worn as a symbol of obedience, and discarded in oceans and open spaces.
