From Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection:

Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis


Many countries across the globe utilized medical and non-medical facemasks as non-pharmaceutical intervention for reducing the transmission and infectivity of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Although, scientific evidence supporting facemasks’ efficacy is lacking, adverse physiological, psychological and health effects are established. Is has been hypothesized that facemasks have compromised safety and efficacy profile and should be avoided from use. The current article comprehensively summarizes scientific evidences with respect to wearing facemasks in the COVID-19 era, providing prosper information for public health and decisions making.

Efficacy of facemasks:

The physical properties of medical and non-medical facemasks suggest that facemasks are ineffective to block viral particles due to their difference in scales. According to the current knowledge, the virus SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 60 nm to 140 nm [nanometers (billionth of a meter)], while medical and non-medical facemasks’ thread diameter ranges from 55 µm to 440 µm [micrometers (one millionth of a meter), which is more than 1000 times larger. Due to the difference in sizes between SARS-CoV-2 diameter and facemasks thread diameter (the virus is 1000 times smaller), SARS-CoV-2 can easily pass through any facemask. In addition, the efficiency filtration rate of facemasks is poor, ranging from 0.7% in non-surgical, cotton-gauze woven mask to 26% in cotton sweeter material. With respect to surgical and N95 medical facemasks, the efficiency filtration rate falls to 15% and 58%, respectively when even small gap between the mask and the face exists.

Clinical scientific evidence challenges further the efficacy of facemasks to block human-to-human transmission or infectivity. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 246 participants [123 (50%) symptomatic)] who were allocated to either wearing or not wearing surgical facemask, assessing viruses transmission including coronavirus. The results of this study showed that among symptomatic individuals (those with fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose ect…) there was no difference between wearing and not wearing facemask for coronavirus droplets transmission of particles of >5 µm. Among asymptomatic individuals, there was no droplets or aerosols coronavirus detected from any participant with or without the mask, suggesting that asymptomatic individuals do not transmit or infect other people. This was further supported by a study on infectivity where 445 asymptomatic individuals were exposed to asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carrier (been positive for SARS-CoV-2) using close contact (shared quarantine space) for a median of 4 to 5 days. The study found that none of the 445 individuals was infected with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by real-time reverse transcription polymerase.

Psychological effects of wearing facemasks:

Psychologically, wearing facemask fundamentally has negative effects on the wearer and the nearby person. Basic human-to-human connectivity through face expression is compromised and self-identity is somewhat eliminated. These dehumanizing movements partially delete the uniqueness and individuality of person who wearing the facemask as well as the connected person. Social connections and relationships are basic human needs, which innately inherited in all people, whereas reduced human-to-human connections are associated with poor mental and physical health.  Despite escalation in technology and globalization that would presumably foster social connections, scientific findings show that people are becoming increasingly more socially isolated, and the prevalence of loneliness is increasing in last few decades. Poor social connections are closely related to isolation and loneliness, considered significant health related risk factors.


The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.

So what did we learn?

Out in public, masks, especially cloth masks are utterly useless are preventing transmission of COIVD.  Asymptomatic people don’t transmit the disease.  Constant mask-wearing makes us miserable, depressed, and anxious people.

Just about anyone with half a brain could have told you that after the first couple of weeks of mask wearing.

Now, let’s add to this some more science.

Israel Covid vaccine data shows extremely low rate of infection

Israel’s health ministry released its first official results last week, showing that only 317 out of 715,425, or 0.04%, of people became infected a week after becoming fully vaccinated against the disease – the time when increased immunity is expected to kick in. Of the vaccinated people who were infected, 16 had to be treated in hospital, or 0.002% of the total.

So vaccination is highly effective at both reducing transmission and reducing hospitalization among those who do get the virus, and masking is not.

That’s what the data says.

So explain this:

And this:

And this:

And this:

As mask mandates end, Oregon OSHA proposes permanent rule

As states around the country lift COVID-19 restrictions, Oregon is poised to go the opposite direction — and many residents are fuming about it.

A top health official is considering indefinitely extending rules requiring masks and social distancing in all businesses in the state.

The proposal would keep the rules in place until they are “no longer necessary to address the effects of the pandemic in the workplace.”

Michael Wood, administrator of the state’s Department of Occupational Safety and Health, said the move is necessary to address a technicality in state law that requires a “permanent” rule to keep current restrictions from expiring.

If Antifa doesn’t destroy Oregon, permanent masking will.

The purpose of ongoing masking isn’t the virus.

The purpose is to bifurcate society into two easily identifiable groups: those who will obey and comply with every ridiculous government order and those who will not.

They are the American version of Chairman Mao badges, Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il badges, Soviet Communist Party badges, and Swastika armbands.

They are overt displays of obedience and fielty to a political party that rules by fear.

An utterly useless piece of cloth that says “I believe every lie that Fauci has told me and I will do everything that he asks me to do unquestioningly, even though it makes no sense.”

I am reminded of this quote by Theodore Dalrymple:

“Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

Proudly masking after vaccination is a wearable humiliation with no basis in reality, demonstrating who has been emasculated and easy to control.


Spread the love

By J. Kb

4 thoughts on “The (social) science of masking”
  1. I’ve been beating that drum since the “mask up” insanity started. The science of air filtration never supported a mask as protection from an airborne virus. Faucci fascists never had “the science” on their side, but lied to try and make us follow their version of non-“science” in order to get and maintain control of the U.S. In a sane world Faucci would be on trial not only for malpractice, but possibly treason.

  2. “The purpose is to bifurcate society into two easily identifiable groups: those who will obey and comply with every ridiculous government order and those who will not.”

    Pretty sure you hit the nail on the head there.

    This has been quite the social experiment to watch. I’m in a couple Facebook groups for my gym (chain/franchise HIIT type gym) and a discussion about masks came up because some places are just now opening back up and require masks. The OP commented that it was awful and the hardest thing they’d done. Several replies just left me dumbstruck. One person went on a monologue about how, even though they’ve had both shots for over two months at this point, they can’t go anywhere near people who don’t wear masks or their anxiety goes through the roof. Several others all chimed in, “It’s all mental, get over it.” I just set the telescreen down and walked away.

    People have been damaged in the last year in ways that will take decades to heal. And, at this point, I believe it’s all by design.

  3. Reminder, the left wants your first and most important relationship to be with the State, not other humans. Removing your face from the equation helps in that.

  4. Oregon is getting creative about it, too.

    The mask mandate was enacted via executive order, direct from the Governor’s office. She mandated it under her emergency/disaster response authority (the State Constitution has clauses for both, but both are time-limited — 45 days with ONE re-up — so she flips back and forth), but with COVID on the down-slope and vaccination campaigns proceeding on schedule, she can’t credibly keep calling it an emergency/disaster; she’s about to lose the authority to keep mandating masks.

    So the Oregon Health Authority has formed a sub-unit on occupational and public health and safety, and staffed it with career bureaucrats. The new sub-unit will be vested with the power to, among other things, mandate masks as conditions warrant. (As you might imagine, conditions which warrant masking in public can mean anything.)

    The Governor can’t keep the authority herself because the emergency/disaster is coming to an end, so instead an executive agency will permanently assume that authority.

    An executive agency under the direction of the Governor, naturally.

    I’m reminded of the old saw about how everything Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did — every. single. thing. — was firmly rooted in law and 100% legal. Not brand new law, either; they passed the laws, sat on it for a few years, waited for opposition to quiet down and support to grow and precedents to be set, and only then acted. They planned ahead and played a long game.

    That’s what it feels like here. The bureaucrats are playing a long game, and we’ll never be free of mask mandates.

Login or register to comment.