"Shut up and wear the oxgyen deprivation device!" ~ Fraudchi and Co.
Posted on 04/20/2021 4:22:13 AM PDT by xzins
A recent Stanford study released by the NCBI, which is under the National Institutes of Health, showed that masks do absolutely nothing to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 and their use is even harmful. NIH published a medical hypothesis by Dr. Baruch Vainshelboim (Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States).
NOQ Report uncovered the study:
Did you hear about the peer-reviewed study done by Stanford University that demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that face masks have absolutely zero chance of preventing the spread of Covid-19? No? It was posted on the the National Center for Biotechnological Information government website. The NCBI is a branch of the National Institute for Health, so one would think such a study would be widely reported by mainstream media and embraced by the “science-loving” folks in Big Tech.
TRENDING: Stanford Study Results: Facemasks are Ineffective to Block Transmission of COVID-19 and Actually Can Cause Health Deterioration and Premature Death
Instead, a DuckDuckGo search reveals it was picked up by ZERO mainstream media outlets and Big Tech tyrants will suspend people who post it, as political strategist Steve Cortes learned the hard way when he posted a Tweet that went against the face mask narrative. The Tweet itself featured a quote and a link that prompted Twitter to suspend his account, potentially indefinitely.
The NCBI study begins with the following abstract:
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.
The study concludes (emphasis added):
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.
Here is the table for physiological and psychological effects of wearing a facemask:
Absolutely.
They shut down their own citizens and let interlopers run rampant.
How sane is that?
Phony Tony,
Death Angel.
OBEY!!!
Hoft is irrelevant because he cannot write an accurate headline or summary. So why not just post the original source?
The orginal studies of studies by someone who cannot even understand how a mask works is worthless. Adding Hoft the the mix makes it not only worthless but idiotic as well.
it’s blatant hypocrisy...
our feral government’s actions prove that this so called “virus” is a ploy...
there’s a lot of people out there that are too busy arguing and fighting one another to see it...
I’ve read stories how medical science is conncting things like alzheimers and respiratory illnesses to bad dental hygiene.
Not a doctor, but I can believe that.
8/20
“Dentists say ‘mask mouth’ can cause serious health complications, including strokes”
8/20
“‘Mask Mouth’- a novel threat to oral health in the COVID era – Dr Pooja Muley”
https://in.dental-tribune.com/news/mask-mouth-a-novel-threat-to-oral-health-in-the-covid-era/
3/30/21
“Face Masks Reduce Retinal Vessel Density”
https://www.reviewofoptometry.com/news/article/face-masks-reduce-retinal-vessel-density
10/9/20
“Masks, false safety and real dangers, Part 2”
https://pdmj.org/papers/masks_false_safety_and_real_dangers_part2/
"Shut up and wear the oxgyen deprivation device!" ~ Fraudchi and Co.
I’ve followed Hoft for years. I think he has done an exceptionally good job in the face of heavy opposition.
As far as being a writer, I imagine he does a lot of it. It’s hard to churn out thousands of words a day AND run an organization with deadlines.
I’m impressed with what he does.
So, masks aren’t effective against dry wall dust???
Or smoke, either. I can tell you that from personal experience.
Ping
‘The orginal studies of studies by someone who cannot even understand how a mask works is worthless’
rather than calling people idiots, why don’t you just tell us how the masks work...?
"When the facts are against you, attack the messenger".
~ Bagster
“This isn’t even a study. It’s straight up BS”
AGREED
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306987720333028
In the third paragraph with heading “Hypothesis”, the author Baruch Vainshelboim – credentials below indicating a connection with Stanford-
Address: VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Cardiology 111C, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94304, United States.
baruch.v1981@gmail.com
Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States
… says this -
“Given the fact that asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times higher than the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate is considerably less than 1% [5]. This was confirmed by the head of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases from US stating, “”the overall clinical consequences of COVID-19 are similar to those of severe seasonal influenza”” [5], having a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1% [5], [6], [7], [8].”
The amazing thing about the link to reference number 5 is that that article was co-written by Anthony Fauci. It would be amazing if Fauci said the fatality rate for Covid was .1%, given that .4% of New York City died of Covid. In Europe and the US about .2% of the entire population has already died of Covid. So even assuming everyone in the US, Italy, France, UK Spain, Poland, etc. has already had Covid – which is obviously absurd – THE CASE FATALITY RATE MUST BE AT LEAST .2%, NOT .1% A more reasonable assumption, for example that 1/3 of Americans have “had Covid”, gives a fatality rate of .6%, or SIX TIMES THAT OF SEVERE FLU. In fact less than 10% of Americans have actually been diagnosed with Covid, and the fatality rate for those diagnosed is about 2% -TWENTY TIMES THAT OF SEVERE FLU, although it is now going down because all the old people have been vaccinated. Yet “scientists” at Stanford are still pedaling the .1% figure, although they surely know it isn’t based in reality. It is simply a lie, and we must wonder why they are telling it. Who is helped by spreading this garbage from Stanford?
And on top of that the actual quote from reference number 5 is this –
“This suggests that the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%) or a pandemic influenza (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) rather than a disease similar to SARS or MERS, which have had case fatality rates of 9 to 10% and 36%, respectively.”
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=10&hl=en&as_sdt=0,7&cluster=4190197419714426109
Notice the difference between saying the “clinical consequences are similar to those of severe seasonal flu” and saying “This suggests [but obviously doesn’t prove] that … Covid 19 may ultimately prove to be more akin to [ i.e. closer to] …a severe seasonal influenza.. [with .1% case fatality rate] rather than to a disease similar to SARS or MERS which have had case fatality rates of 9% to 10% and 36%, respectively.”
All he (Fauci) is saying is that even a 1% fatality rate is closer to a .1% fatality rate than it is to a 10% fatality rate. And yes 1% is closer to .1% than it is to 10%. But its still 10 times worse than .1%, Covid is 10 times more fatal than the seasonal flu.
Also, thankfully others crushed the author
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/apr/16/diamond-and-silk/medical-hypotheses-journal-article-lacks-evidence-/
The medical establishment needs to give it to us straight... the good the bad and the ugly.
Remember all of those arguments about how ineffective and potentially harmful constant mask wearing can be with those who “know” that wearing a mask is “settled science” for covid protection?
And they still Karen US into compliance with their fears and intimidation based on their “settled science” of misinformation.
Check the thread it has already been covered,
Case Fatality has some utility in the middle of a pandemic but one cannot use midpandemic or earlier CFR data to make a sweeping generalization about a disease’s overall mortality. Once the pandemic is over, you can do that but not until then. There are way too many variables built into midpandemic and earlier CFRs. It only serves as a snapshot in time but it frequently gets misused to make a statement like Covid has a .1% fatality rate”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.