A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW: The Science, and Junk-Science, Regarding Masks

A parallelization analysis based on county-level data showed that in Kansas, counties with mask mandate had significantly higher case fatality rates than counties without mask mandate, with a risk ratio of 1.85 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]… for COVID-19-related deaths…

…The cause of this trend is explained herein using the “Foegen effect” theory; that is, deep re-inhalation of hypercondensed droplets or pure virions caught in facemasks as droplets can worsen prognosis and might be linked to long-term effects of COVID-19 infection…

— From the journal ‘Medicine’, February 18, 2022, Vol 101 #7, p e28924

So it seems that mandating facemasks may have contributed to, rather than prevented, the most serious cases of COVID infection. You can read the entire article (the ‘Kansas’ study) here.

As I’ve written in this forum before, I’m a COVID survivor who is highly skeptical of mask mandates. But whenever I questioned them, the mask jihadists vehemently insist that I’m not “following the science”.

To which I respond, “Which science?”

Take CDC studies on masking, for instance? As reported in The Lancet (one of the most respected medical journals) in May 2022, when the CDC masking studies were subsequently replicated and expanded by “incorporating a larger sample and longer period” there was no “significant relationship between mask mandates and case rates.” Turns out the CDC studies were too narrow and “prone to bias caused by selection and omitted variables”. Oops!

In other words, CDC was skewing their studies to justify mask mandates.

The ‘Kansas’ study, and the one reported in The Lancet, aren’t outliers. Yet another concluded, “Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges.”

Similar studies in Europe also contradict the CDC. COVID-19 morbidity, mortality and mask usage data was compiled from 35 European countries. “The findings indicate that countries with high levels of mask compliance did not perform better than those with low mask usage.” But what’s worse, one study also revealed “universal use of masks may have had harmful unintended consequences.” (Emphasis added)

In 1936, sociologist Robert Merton updated the concept of “unanticipated” consequences. It’s now referred to as the “law of unintended consequences”. The CDC and its high priest Dr. Anthony Fauci, with his acolytes in the media, ignored that “law” to further the masking agenda … and the mask jihadists among the populace blindly followed.

So, according to the study reported in Medicine, masks can worsen the COVID prognosis, and the European study found masks may have had harmful consequences. That begs the question: how many unnecessary deaths, and long-haul COVID sufferers, resulted from government and social pressure to wear masks?

Anyone who hectored others to wear masks needs to think about that.

To those who pressured their fellow citizens to wear masks during COVID crisis, and whose response is that they were “just following the science”… I ask again: “Which science?”

The manipulated results of the CDC junk-science used to dupe the public and justify mask mandates?

Or the science which is now debunking that junk-science?

Gary Beatty

Gary Beatty lives between Florida and Pagosa Springs. He retired after 30 years as a prosecutor for the State of Florida, has a doctorate in law, is Board Certified in Criminal Trial law by the Florida Supreme Court, and is now a law professor.