'Covid' Ops: Agenda behind the masks

by Steve Harrison 5 months ago in opinion

Just a means to create division?

'Covid' Ops: Agenda behind the masks

From this week UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has ordained that wearing face masks is compulsory when using public transport in England, something which, not being a car owner, I’d find very difficult not to adhere to.

But as I can probably count my excursions out of the house since the beginning of the year on three hands, I suppose I’d probably be able to avoid public transport for a while longer yet.

However, while Johnson determines there’s a need for masks on public services, leaders of the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Ireland assemblies have refrained from such drastic measures, merely recommending their use.

Personally I see little logic in masks myself… and Johnson’s government even advised against them during the first few months of this bogus pandemic.

Living in Wales, my concern is that while First Minister Lady Duckford (oops, sorry, Mark Drakeford) has stopped short of making masks mandatory... that probably won’t prevent public-transport providers and retail outlets starting to bring in their own rules because masks are being “recommended” for use in public places.

But it’s a measure I would be extremely opposed to. Why? Well, it basically comes down to the fact that I consider it to be my choice as to how I deal with the threat to my health from Covid19. If people wish to wear masks good luck to them, but I do not and it is nobody else’s business other than my own!

I would not go out and risk anyone else’s health if I were not free of symptoms and feeling well, and would be happy to wear a mask if in the company of at-risk individuals or a person coming into direct contact with someone in that group.

But on public transport and in general society I would not expect people showing symptoms of illness to be out and about. And, if people are concerned about their health, then they have my complete blessing to wear masks, although I find it rather ironic when over the last few decades there’s been so much concern about people hiding their identities with hoodies and hijabs. But all of a sudden masks are cool?

Also, with a very meagre income to live on at the moment, I see no point in wasting my reserves on a totally pointless piece of attire. So I’d refer our masters to the evidence suggesting there is little benefit in the recommendations.

Last month former US neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock warned in an article published on the Technocracy News and Trends website that face masks were not only ineffective against Covid19, but could also be dangerous in some circumstances.

Blaylock wrote that people who aren't sick should not wear a face mask. He added that since there have not yet been any studies of the effectiveness of masks in slowing or preventing Covid19 transmission, the best thing that could be done was to look at what impact masks have been proven to have against the flu.

He cited a 2012 analysis on this in which 17 of the best studies on the subject had been analysed, concluding that: "None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection."

Blaylock noted that people wearing the most effective masks, N95 respirators, are at risk of negative effects of having their oxygen intake limited for extended periods of time. It is known that the N95 mask, if worn for hours, can reduce blood oxygenation as much as 20 per cent, which can lead to a loss of consciousness, as happened to “a hapless fellow driving around alone in his car wearing an N95 mask, causing him to pass out, and to crash his car and sustain injuries”.

“I am sure that we have several cases of elderly individuals or any person with poor lung function passing out, hitting their head,” Blaylock wrote. “This, of course, can lead to death.”

He also pointed out that lower blood-oxygen levels could impair a person’s immunity, potentially increasing their risk of contracting infections such as Covid19, adding that a person who has a respiratory infection and wears a mask is expelling some of that virus with each breath and re-breathing it in, potentially leading to higher concentrations of the virus in the lungs and nasal passages.

Meanwhile, a Guardian article also published late last month, concluded wearing a cloth face mask in public was becoming more about politics than science.

As well as making it compulsory on public transport, the UK government has recommended the public wear face coverings when in crowded places where it is not always possible to maintain social distancing, a stance also taken by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

But a study by researchers at the University of Edinburgh has looked into the impact of different types of face masks on airflow ejected by a wearer when they breathed or coughed, including standard surgical masks, FFP2 respirators and cloth masks.

The researchers found all face masks without a valve, including cloth masks, reduced the distance exhaled-air travelled in a forward direction by more than 90 per cent, although they added that how they were fitted was important, with surgical, handmade masks, and face shields, generating significant leakage with the potential to disperse virus-laden fluid particles by several metres.

A senior lecturer in evidence-based healthcare at the University of Portsmouth concluded that when it comes to the science there “isn’t that much to argue about”. Dr Simon Kolstoe said the Edinburgh University study backed previous evidence that cloth masks were not as effective as N95 masks in preventing the transmission of viruses, but could direct the breath in different ways.

He added there was limited evidence about how effective cloth masks were, or whether they had a big impact. “My feeling is that this is becoming more of a statement, a statement of solidarity,” Kolstoe said. “By going out and wearing a face mask you show that you are taking action, you show other people you are concerned about this, you are concerned about them, you are concerned about yourself. But perhaps conversely by not wearing a face mask that is also a statement as well.”

One of the arguments put forward for masks is that some Covid19 patients are said to be asymptomatic, although the jury is also out on whether those patients can transmit the virus to others.

In a recent TV report medical contributor Dr Marc Siegel told Fox News presenter Tucker Carlson that the latest reversal from the World Health Organisation had left him wondering: “How can we possibly trust the WHO at all?”

Siegel said that when he’d heard WHO’s head of emerging diseases Maria Van Kerkhove, a top epidemiologist who trained at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, say asymptomatic spread was very rare, he thought: “Finally, a shining star coming out of the WHO I can hang my hat on… I’m going to give her the benefit of the doubt.”

But, Siegel added: “Guess what? Today she walked the whole thing back and... I know I’m left thinking how can we possibly trust the WHO at all?"

Van Kerkhove said there had been “misunderstandings” about comments she’d made the previous day, when she stated coronavirus transmission by asymptomatic individuals was “very rare”.

Nothing I have seen convinces me there is any point in healthy individuals wearing masks and given the limited time I’ve spent outside over the last six months I want to make the most of the experience when I do go out.

I want to be able to take in as much oxygen as possible and allow my body to absorb as much Vitamin D as I can as this is a key component of a healthy immune system, something the scientists really don’t seem bothered about pointing out. Could that be because it goes against the “stay at home” mantra?

But on a final note, I’d like to go back to why hoodies and hijabs have been so frowned upon. They, like masks, have the effect of fostering division, distancing people from each other and preventing discourse, which neatly fits in with social-distancing guidelines. But is this really about protecting people from a virus that has so far been a factor in just 57 people in a million succumbing to it globally?

I think it’s more about stifling interaction, discouraging communication and deterring discussion about the lunacy going on all around us. It also coincides with what many observers argue is another key element of this pandemic scam… to create conflict, to set those who choose not to wear a mask against those who do… all part of the plan to divide us!

opinion
Steve Harrison
Steve Harrison
Read next: New Mexico—It's like a State, like All the Others!
Steve Harrison

Something doesn't add up about the Covid-19 pandemic... are there reasons to be fearful for our futures?

JOIN THE DOTS: http://not.wildaboutit.com

See all posts by Steve Harrison