The Truth About Covid: Part 2
Draconian Mitigation Measures: "Slow the Spread", "It's For Your Health!"
Quote from A Bug’s Life everyone needs to familiarize themselves with:
You let one ant stand up to us, then they all might stand up...And if they ever figure that out, there goes our way of life...it’s about keeping those ants in line.
This presentation’s purpose is to highlight important scientific developments that suggest public officials are providing factually inaccurate information and don’t have citizens best interests at mind. I have compiled some of the most compelling studies that I have come across and the data provided will justify my statements. I want to shed light on the truth and help better educate individuals on what is truly going on in the world. This mini-series will consist of 5 parts spanning various topics pertaining to Covid.
Introduction:
In part 2 of this series, I will highlight the disastrous, unscientific, and draconian mitigation measures imposed on the global population. The topic of mask wearing and social distancing is arguably one of the most polarizing topics surrounding the entire Covid charade. First, I want to point out that there has yet to be a public health official nor “expert” that has presented a shred of scientific evidence that masks and social distancing slowed or prevented the spread of the virus. The default response from local, state, and national officials has been “the data shows” or “the experts say” due to the lack of data to justify the measures. The blatant hypocrisy and pseudoscience officials promote regarding these topics can be proven to be inaccurate due to multitudes of published scientific research proving such inaccuracies. Did masks, lockdowns and social distancing help “slow the spread?” The data proves these mitigation measures were a colossal disaster that caused more harm than good.
Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. - Benjamin Franklin
I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery. - Thomas Jefferson
Masks End All Be All or Hoax?
Before I dive into the data, I want to present these pictures of the disclaimer on boxes of masks to provide some perspective.
Masks vs. Viral Aerosal Particles:
Surgical N95 masks were initially designed to prevent bacterial infections through limited exposure to fluids and open wounds during a surgical procedure. N95 masks have a particle filtration capacity of 0.1-0.3 microns in size. The filtration efficiency reaches 99.5% when the particle size is around of 0.75 microns. The size of SARS-CoV-2 particles range from 0.07-0.09 microns in size. This metric alone defeats the entire argument of wearing a N95 mask to reduce transmission of Covid-19. N95 masks were considered the “gold standard” in regards to masks but many individuals resorted to using a cloth mask to cover their face due to availability. If the '“gold standard” of masks cannot prevent spread due to particle and filtration size limitations, then what purpose does a cloth mask serve? Virtue signal? SARS-CoV-2 particles are an aerosol (all viruses are) thus if anyone Covid positive walks into a building with a central heating and air unit, will expose everyone in the building to the virus. Viral aerosol particles have the ability to travel 10-30 yards before settling on a surface. These points alone are enough to render mask wearing and social distancing vehemently useless.
An investigational study of indoor aerosol dispersion and accumulation was conducted in the context of Covid-19, with emphasis on mask effectiveness in respect of indoor settings and aerosol particles. The results from this study suggest that the effectiveness of various masks have been significantly overstated. This study concludes that N95 and cloth masks provide less than 20% efficiency when aiming to slow viral aerosol particle spread.
Experimental Investigation of Indoor Aerosol Dispersion and Accumulation in the Context of COVID-19: Effects of Masks and Ventilation
Nevertheless, high-efficiency masks, such as the KN95, still offer substantially higher apparent filtration efficiencies (60% and 46% for R95 and KN95 masks, respectively) than the more commonly used cloth (10%) and surgical masks (12%), and therefore are still the recommended choice in mitigating airborne disease transmission indoors.
It is important to note that, while masks decrease the forward momentum of the respiratory jet, a significant fraction of aerosol escapes the masks, particularly at the bridge of the nose. Further, aerosols can also be seen in front of the surgical mask due to the lower material filtration efficiency.
The results show that a standard surgical and three-ply cloth masks, which see current widespread use, filter at apparent efficiencies of only 12.4% and 9.8%, respectively. Apparent efficiencies of 46.3% and 60.2% are found for KN95 and R95 masks, respectively, which are still notably lower than the verified 95% rated ideal efficiencies.
Based off the size of aerosol particles and mask filtration capabilities, it’s safe to assume that mask usage to inhibit transmission of viral aerosol particles is not supported by science. The analogy “wearing a mask to stop aerosol particles is comparable to using a chain link fence to keep mosquitos out” is surprisingly accurate according to available data. This information challenges the entire premise of the “mask up, save lives” narrative and further proves that wearing a mask to prevent transmission of Covid was never on the basis of sound science.
Negative Long Term Health Consequences of Prolonged Mask Wearing:
A comprehensive study from the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health looked at the undesirable side effects of every day mask wearing. The study found 15 different topics of concern and negative consequences ranging from pathophysiological side effects to epidemiological consequences. This study analyzed 44 experimental studies for quantitative evaluation and 65 publications for substantive evaluation. Results from this study highlight an array of negative health consequences that can arise from long term mask wearing, conveniently the “experts” fail to acknowledge this information.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: Is a mask that covers the mouth and nose free from undesirable side effects in everyday use and free of potential hazards?
Up until now, there has been no comprehensive investigation as to the adverse health effects masks can cause. The aim was to find, test, evaluate and compile scientifically proven related side effects of wearing masks. For a quantitative evaluation, 44 mostly experimental studies were referenced, and for a substantive evaluation, 65 publications were found. The literature revealed relevant adverse effects of masks in numerous disciplines.
The mask-induced adverse changes are relatively minor at first glance, but repeated exposure over longer periods in accordance with the above-mentioned pathogenetic principle is relevant. Long-term disease-relevant consequences of masks are to be expected.
The potential drastic and undesirable effects found in multidisciplinary areas illustrate the general scope of global decisions on masks in general public in the light of combating the pandemic. According to the literature found, there are clear, scientifically recorded adverse effects for the mask wearer, both on a psychological and on a social and physical level.
An article published on Nature-Scientific Reports studied the effects of hypercapnia and its relation to immune responses. Hypercapnia occurs when CO2 retention causes blood CO2 levels to rise, which occurs through the inspiration of expelled CO2 while wearing a mask. The results of the study concluded hypercapnia has an adverse effect on innate immunity which can result in increased risks of mortality.
Scientific Reports: Hypercapnia Alters Expression of Immune Response, Nucleosome Assembly and Lipid Metabolism Genes in Differentiated Human Bronchial Epithelial Cells
Hypercapnia, the elevation of carbon dioxide (CO2) in blood and tissues, commonly occurs in severe acute and chronic respiratory diseases, and is associated with increased risk of mortality. Recent studies have shown that hypercapnia adversely affects innate immunity, host defense, lung edema clearance and cell proliferation.
Airway epithelial dysfunction is a feature of advanced lung disease….These changes in gene expression indicate the potential for hypercapnia to impact bronchial epithelial cell function in ways that may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with severe acute or advanced chronic lung diseases.
We can conclude that long term mask wearing can lead to a multitude of long term negative health consequences. Numerous studies have stated similar side effects from prolonged mask usage and ironically, the majority of which were published prior to the Covid-19 outbreak. Why have public officials and “experts” failed to mention the potential risks of prolonged mask wearing? Why haven’t these officials provided scientific data as justification of mask usage? It’s easy, data to justify mask wearing doesn’t exist.
Data Suggests Mask Wearing is Useless:
I have covered the scientific implausibility of mask effectiveness in regards to aerosol particles, as well as the long terms health consequences from mask wearing. Now, let’s see if masks actually “slowed the spread.” Comparisons of locations with no mandates and locations with mandates, point in the direction of masks actually playing a contributing role with increasing cases counts.
In Sweden, the government decided to let the citizens decide what was best for them regarding Covid versus issuing draconian mandates. Sweden is the largest case study on the planet when trying to determine the mitigation measure effectiveness. Considering Sweden’s generally low case, hospitalization, and death rate, one can make the inference that not locking down and allowing citizens to make the best decision for themselves, was and is the best course of action.
Sweden’s death rate did see a few spikes but for the majority of the alleged pandemic, maintained a lower death rate when compared to various states in the United States. Let’s compare the case rates between Israel and Sweden coinciding with mask mandate timelines.
As shown in the graph, Sweden maintained a significantly lower case rate than Israel with no mandates in place. Public officials and “experts” have turned mask usage into a perceived “life or death” scenario but the data has shown quite the opposite. Mask mandates have actually shown a direct correlation with increased case numbers. Sweden also has a population of 10,172,065 versus Israel’s 8,808,050 so the natural assumption would be that Sweden would have more cases, but that is simply not the case.
In Japan, mandates have gone back and forth but since the most recent mask mandate was instituted, Japan has seen massive spikes in cases. In one of the most densely populated countries on the planet, how effective have mask mandates been with “slowing the spread?”
Even at 97% mask compliance, Japan is experiencing massive surges in cases. As shown in Sweden versus Israel and now Japan, it’s rather apparent that mask mandates have had no quantifiable difference in “slowing the spread.” The “experts” have claimed that once we got enough compliance with mask mandates, cases would slow down. Relevant data from numerous other countries and various states suggest masking to “slow the spread” is nothing more than a fallacy.
Let’s look at how Florida and New York compare regarding case numbers and mandates. Florida dropped all restrictions on September 25th, 2020 and New York is virtually still an open air prison. New York had some of the strictest restrictions but yet, outpaced Florida in daily cases.
According to mainstream media pundits, the removal of all restrictions is reckless and neanderthal thinking. The data shows otherwise. With restrictions, New York saw statistically higher rates of new daily cases than the free state of Florida. See how these mitigation measures imposed actually made things worse and thus played no role in “slowing the spread?” Mainstream media have been echoing this lie so frequently that even after seeing data like this, people still seem to believe these mitigation measures were beneficial. Propagandized indoctrination at its finest.
Chart and Graph sources:
The Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota conducted a study on the science associated with mask usage. The study provides an overview of 62 scientific studies strictly talking about the effectiveness of mask wearing in various scenarios. The scenarios consisted of different viral, bacterial studies and increased chances of respiratory infection by N95 masks and respirators in a clinical setting.
Commentary: Masks-for-All for COVID-19 Not Based on Sound Data
We do not recommend requiring the general public who do not have symptoms of COVID-19-like illness to routinely wear cloth or surgical masks because:
There is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission.
Their use may result in those wearing the masks to relax other distancing efforts because they have a sense of protection.
We need to preserve the supply of surgical masks for at-risk healthcare workers.
Kellogg, seeking a reason for the failure of cloth masks required for the public in stopping the 1918 influenza pandemic, found that the number of cloth layers needed to achieve acceptable efficiency made them difficult to breathe through and caused leakage around the mask. We found no well-designed studies of cloth masks as source control in household or healthcare settings.
Clinical trials in the surgery theater have found no difference in wound infection rates with and without surgical masks. Despite these findings, it has been difficult for surgeons to give up a long-standing practice.
Published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, a Danish randomized controlled trial of 6,000 participants; found no statistically significant effect of high-quality medical face masks against SARS-CoV-2 infection in a community setting. This study was published in November of 2020, which at the time, was a landmark study on whether face masks slowed the spread. The study had 3,030 participants randomly assigned to wear masks, and 2,994 were assigned to the control group that did not wear masks.
Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers:
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).
The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.
One of the main drivers for lockdowns, masks and social distancing was the presumption that asymptomatic transmission was the primary issue causing case rates to increase. The presumption never made sense to begin with, it would be like saying you have no symptoms of cancer but insist on beginning chemotherapy as a precaution. One cannot transmit something they do not have. A study compiled by 19 scientists focused on the residents of Wuhan, in effort to determine if asymptomatic spread was prevalent for Covid-19. The study had 9,899,828 participants and the results were rather cut and dry. Asymptomatic transmission was virtually obsolete thus the inclination to institute these mitigation measures, was never based on science. This study defeats the entire premise of asymptomatic spread, which was the basis of forcing citizens to partake in draconian mitigations measures.
Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Screening in Nearly 10 Million Residents of Wuhan, China:
The screening of the 9,865,404 participants without a history of COVID-19 found no newly confirmed COVID-19 cases, and identified 300 asymptomatic positive cases with a detection rate of 0.303 (95% CI 0.270–0.339)/10,000.
The detection rate of asymptomatic positive cases was very low, and there was no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic positive persons to traced close contacts. There were no asymptomatic positive cases in 96.4% of the residential communities.
The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan was therefore very low five to eight weeks after the end of lockdown.
The “mask up” narrative was based off the assumption that asymptomatic spread of Covid was prevalent. This massive Wuhan study concludes that asymptomatic spread is virtually non-existent and proves the draconian mitigation measures were never for our health. The delusion that masks helped “slow the spread” can easily be refuted by the charts from countries that indicate high mask compliance resulted in no direct effect on lowered case counts. A multitude of data and information sufficiently indicates mask wearing is utterly useless and by doing so, could result in long term negative health consequences that immensely outweigh the “benefits.”
Deadly Bacterial Pathogens Growing on Masks?
An issue with masks that has not been addressed is the increased prevalence of bacteria and increased risk of bacterial infections from continued mask usage. The bacteria build up occurs when individuals repeatedly wear the same mask without washing or disposing of the mask. Bacterial build up can lead to increased health issues due to the inhalation of these airborne pathogens, some of which can lead to bacterial pneumonia. In Florida, a group of parents were eager to determine how safe it was for their children to repeatedly wear a mask, so they sent the masks to a lab to be analyzed. The masks that were sent to be analyzed had been washed and cleaned prior to being sent to the lab. Results from the lab uncovered eleven different bacterial pathogens, fungi and parasites present on the masks.
Study: Masks are Exposing Children to a Horrifying Array of Deadly Pathogens:
“Six total face masks were made subject to a lab analysis, revealing that five of them contained bacteria, parasites, and fungi, including three with dangerous pathogenic and pneumonia-causing bacteria. Interestingly, not a single virus was detected on any of the masks.”
The analysis uncovered the following 11 dangerous pathogens on the masks: Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumonia)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis (tuberculosis)
Neisseria meningitidis (meningitis, sepsis)
Acanthamoeba polyphaga (keratitis and granulomatous amebia encephalitis)
Acinetobacter baumanni (pneumonia, blood stream infections, meningitis, UTIs – resistant to antibiotics)
Escherichia coli (food poisoning)
Borrelia burgdorferi (causes Lyme disease)
Corynebacterium diphtheriae (diphtheria)
Legionella pneumophila (Legionnaires’ disease)
Staphylococcus pyogenes serotype M3 (severe infections – high morbidity rates)
Staphylococcus aureus (meningitis, sepsis)
Would you want to wear a mask knowing bacterial pathogens like these are growing on the inside of it? Would you want your child wearing a mask knowing this information? If your answer is no, stop expecting others to do so and stop telling others to wear a mask.
The Harms of Social Distancing & Lockdowns:
Negative effects of lockdowns will impact society for years to come and some these effects are far too extreme to statistically quantify. One of the main concerns, is the socioeconomic issues resulting from treating the global economy as if it’s a light switch. Shutting down the economy has caused thousands of small businesses to close down forever. Forcing people to isolate and avoid social contact with others, has led to massive increases in mental health issues. Suicides and drug overdoses hit all time highs. Child development has been stunted from the year that was stolen from them, forced into isolation then forced to homeschool rather than in person schooling. The effects children have endured will last their entire lifetime. The harms that have resulted from the lockdowns forced on the global population are difficult to comprehend. But, the ramifications from lockdowns will be dealt with for generations to come.
Dr. Scott Atlas discussed the true cost of lockdowns in an interview. Atlas highlights lockdowns having a direct effect on deaths not in relation to Covid. The mere thought of someone being turned away from a vital life saving treatment due to hospitals not accepting “elective procedures” or simply out of fear from going to the hospital is sickening. Hospitals were never overrun nor will they ever be. People died because bureaucratic sociopaths put their own interests above the people’s interests.
The True Cost of Implementing Lockdowns: Dr. Scott Atlas
The harms of the lockdowns are deaths. It's not an economic harm. It's a death harm. Harms of the lockdowns means absent medical care. Almost half of the 650,000 people in the US skipped their chemotherapy. 40% of people with an acute stroke were too afraid to call an ambulance. They didn't want to be in a medical setting. 30%-50% of heart attack patients were not coming in. 85% of live organ transplants did not get done during the lockdown. 300,000+ cases of child abuse were not noticed because they were not going to school and schools are the number one agency where child abuse is noticed. Opioid deaths, spousal abuse, suicides, these things were skyrocketing. These are deaths.
People that try to justify or rationalize the concept of lockdowns, tend to neglect the secondary and tertiary effects that arise from doing something so extreme. I have never understood the argument of “I’m doing this for your health” or “it’s to protect others” because it directly neglects a larger portion of the population’s wellbeing. When did people suddenly start caring about another individual’s health?
A preprint study from the United Kingdom compared morbidity statistics from the UK’s National Child Morbidity Database with data from Public Health England that spanned from March 2020-February 2021. The study compared the child suicide rate and the fatality rate of Covid in children. The results are infuriating when you realize more children are committing suicide than dying from Covid. Is it still “for your health?”
Deaths in Children and Young People in England Following SARS-CoV-2 Infection During the First Pandemic Year: A National Study Using Linked Mandatory Child Death Reporting Data
Twenty-five “children and young people” — defined as people under eighteen years of age — died of COVID-19 during the period; the morbidity rate for COVID-19 was therefore two per every million.
Meanwhile, 124 children died of suicide during the same period — five times the number of children who had died of COVID-19.
Five times the amount of children died from suicide in England than due to Covid. Five times. Think about that for a second, increasing rates in child suicides are a direct result from lockdowns. But it’s for your “health and safety” right?
Here are some statistics on increased suicide rate in adolescents aged 12-17 according to the CDC:
During 2020, the proportion of mental health-related emergency department (ED) visits among adolescents aged 12–17 years increased 31% compared with that during 2019.
In May 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, ED visits for suspected suicide attempts began to increase among adolescents aged 12–17 years, especially girls. During February 21–March 20, 2021, suspected suicide attempt ED visits were 50.6% higher among girls aged 12–17 years than during the same period in 2019; among boys aged 12–17 years, suspected suicide attempt ED visits increased 3.7%.
How can anyone in their right mind be okay with something as serious as suicide, having an increasing prevalence in children and adolescents? Suicide is personal to me and if these statistics don’t bother you, I hope you enjoy your first class ticket to hell.
In Australia this year, they have seen a drastic rise in suicides especially in comparison to the virtually obsolete Covid deaths. In the first 5 months of 2021, Victoria experienced 276 suicides compared to 0 Covid related deaths. In the first half of 2021, New South Wales experienced 444 suicides compared to 0 Covid related deaths. The data available suggests the negative consequences from lockdowns immensely outweigh the alleged benefits.
A study from the Journal of the American Medical Association analyzed the changes in body mass index among children and adolescents during the duration of the pandemic. The study shows dramatic increases in BMI and obesity rates in children. From the study, one can draw the conclusion that there is a direct correlation between lockdowns and increases in obesity. The largest changes seen in BMI and obesity totals were observed in children 5-11 years old. Keep in mind, obesity is one of the determining factors in Covid hospitalization and death in the United States (I will cover this in part 3). Seeing such dramatic increases in obesity should draw major concern.
Journal of the American Medical Association: Changes in Body Mass Index Among Children & Adolescents During the Covid-19 Pandemic
To evaluate pandemic-related changes in weight in school-aged youths, we compared the body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of youths aged 5 to 17 years during the pandemic in 2020 to the same period before the pandemic in 2019.
Over- weight or obesity increased among 5- through 11-year-olds from 36.2% to 45.7% during the pandemic, an absolute increase of 8.7% and relative increase of 23.8% compared with the reference period (Table). The absolute increase in overweight or obesity was 5.2% among 12- through 15-year- olds (relative increase, 13.4%) and 3.1% (relative increase, 8.3%) among 16- through 17-year-olds. Most of the increase among youths aged 5 through 11 years and 12 through 15 years was due to an increase in obesity.
Significant weight gain occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic among youths in KPSC, especially among the youngest children.
An article from the Foundation for Economic Education highlighted four life threatening, unintended consequences of lockdowns. The four consequences consist of; spikes in suicide rates and mental health crisis, uptick in drug overdoses, economic devastation leading to poverty, and surges in domestic violence. The consequences felt from lockdowns span over various topics of concern. Officials that supported lockdowns and have continued to support such devastating measures, never missed a paycheck. But regular people did, never forget that.
Foundation for Economic Education: Four Life Threatening Unintended Consequences of Lockdowns
The Centers for Disease Control found that one in four young people have had suicidal thoughts during the pandemic to date. (For comparison, less than six percent of young people harbored similar thoughts in 2008-2009 according to older CDC data).
NPR reports that overdoses nationally have spiked by about 18 percent. For comparison, in 2018, more than 67,300 Americans died from drug overdoses. An 18 percent increase undoubtedly means thousands of additional tragic overdose deaths.
As of late last month, about 12.1% of adults lived in households that didn’t have enough to eat at some point in the previous week, up from 9.8% in early May, Census figures show. And almost 20% of Americans with kids at home couldn’t afford to give their children enough food, up from almost 17% in early June.
A separate study analyzing data from police precincts in several major US cities also showed increases in domestic violence during the lockdown period, with the increases ranging from 10 percent to 27 percent.
This information helps shed light on a fraction of the negative consequences deriving from the imposition of lockdowns on the global population. I’m not sure we will ever truly understand the magnitude of consequences from lockdowns. This information should alarm people and these issues should no longer be ignored. Citizens across the world have been collectively forced to go through hell and back, meanwhile politicians and globalists got richer. If “slowing the spread” is truly about our health, why haven’t these issues been talked about on a global scale?
Final Points:
The data presented suggests, draconian mitigation measures imposed on the global population were an unprecedented disaster, that was never supported by science. One can make the assertion that masks, lockdowns and social distancing, resulted in no quantifiable effect on “slowing the spread.” We can also draw the conclusion that long term mask wearing is detrimental for your health and has no scientific benefit to slowing transmission of Covid. The evidence over lockdowns, help paint a clear picture of the detrimental effects that have resulted from the imposed lockdowns. The lasting effects of lockdowns are beyond comprehension and will be felt by society for generations to come. These mitigation measures were a cataclysmic disaster that had no scientific justification nor evidence to support the measures in the first place.
Everyone deserves the RIGHT to make an educated and well informed decision in regards to one’s personal health but sadly that is not the reality we are living in. I’m in no way trying to tell anyone what choice to make regarding personal health but please do your own research. Just because the tv tells you one thing does not mean it is accurate. The bureaucratic sociopaths dictating everyone’s lives do not care about the individuals they aspire to control. We are truly living through the most unprecedented time in history. We The People have the power to change this downward spiraling trajectory the world is headed down. Demand from public officials to know why information like I presented, has been shielded from the public and make your voice heard. I decided to embark on this mini-series to help inform and educate the public about what’s really going on. I hope this article provided some clarity and insight into how the unscientific mitigation measures proved to be a colossal disaster.
In part 3 of this mini-series, I will provide insight on how much of a threat Covid is to the general population and how data suggests natural immunity and alternative treatments yield more promising results than the vaccines.
If you want to see what’s in store for the United States in the coming weeks and months, check out my article: Freedom vs. Dystopian Hell.
If you missed The Truth About Covid: Part 1, I suggest reading those in order to stay informed over various topics pertaining to Covid.
If you like the articles I am putting together, please share with everyone you know! I sincerely appreciate those that take the time to read through these lengthy write up