I have been studying developments in the COVID-19 pandemic since the day it started to gain attention.
I am hopeful that a significant number of people will eventually become aware of obscured facts about what has been widely represented as a major pandemic due to an alleged novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, causing the disease known as COVID-19.
When this happens, the official policies put forth as measures to protect public health will increasingly come under greater scrutiny, as more people seek out evidence that justifies lock downs, social distancing, social isolation, and, particularly mandatory face masks for all members of society.
Over most of 2019, I researched face masks in depth, and so I can say, with great confidence, that mandatory mask mandates attack the very foundation of rationality, as they tragically reduce the bare human face to a fearful apparition of disease.
Why Face Masks in the First Place?
There is one and only one main reason why governments have been trying to force everybody to wear a face mask for COVID-19 -- claimed to be caused by the alleged novel coronaviraus, SARS-CoV-2. The reason is this: Many leaders have come to believe that healthy people with zero symptoms of any illness are primary carriers of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and these non-sick sick infect other people with the disease. Let me repeat that: Healthy people without disease symptoms cause disease. This is the fundamental reason why governments have forced masks onto entire populations.
The idea of people without disease symptoms causing disease seems absurd, given that we have always viewed the process of getting sick as moving from a sick person to a not sick person. But this is the rationale behind forcing everybody in society to wear a face mask,
- regardless of any evidence of disease in individuals,
- regardless of any consideration of individual differences in immunity,
- regardless of any consideration of individual differences in getting infected or infecting others,
- regardless of any consideration of individual health, individual health habits, individual lifestyle choices, individual lifestyle patterns of behavior,
- regardless of anything other than a standard, deeply ingrained belief that every single individual, no matter what, is a disease vector driving the pandemic.
It is utterly ridiculous how and why we, as a civilization, have arrived at this bizarre, distorted frame of mind. It is utterly unbelievable how so many people have adopted this frame of mind without question. Even though common sense would seem to deter such a frame of mind from operating in the leaders of a rational society, there is ample evidence to support what common sense tells us.
People with zero symptoms do not drive a pandemic, and, therefore, face masks are a needless consideration, for this reason alone.
Dr. Anthony Fauci Made This Crystal Clear
On Tuesday, January 28, 2020, the then U. S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar, hosted a press conference alongside CDC Director Robert Redfield, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Disease Director, Nancy Messonnier, and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director, Anthony Fauci, to provide further details on the Department’s coordinated public health response to the 2019 novel coronavirus. See the video of this conference below, starting at the 44-minute mark:
Beginning around the 44-minute mark, near the end of the conference, Dr. Anthony Fauci, speaking in a confident, completely committed tone, clearly said the following:
- ... even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory born viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there is a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.
Why Dr. Fauci later completely obliterated his reasoned perspective, to champion face masks and other society-destroying measures, remains a mystery.
A 2020 Study of Nearly Ten Million People in China Added Further Evidence To Fauci's Original Claim
In the latter half of May, 2020, the following study of almost ten million people in Wuhan, China came to conclusions (noted with bullets below) that support Dr. Fauci's confident claims of January 28, 2020:
Cao S, Gan Y, Wang C, Bachmann M, Wei S, Gong J, Huang Y, Wang T, Li L, Lu K, Jiang H, Gong Y, Xu H, Shen X, Tian Q, Lv C, Song F, Yin X, Lu Z (2020). Post-Lockdown SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic Acid Screening in Nearly Ten Million Residents of Wuhan, China. Nature Communications.
- Virus cultures were negative for all asymptomatic positive and repositive cases, indicating no 'viable virus' in positive cases detected in this study.
- None of detected positive cases or their close contacts became symptomatic or newly confirmed with COVID-19 during the isolation period
- ... there was no evidence of transmission from asymptomatic positive persons to traced close contacts.
- Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2. In the present study, virus culture was carried out on samples from asymptomatic positive cases, and found no viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.
- In summary, the detection rate of asymptomatic positive cases in the post-lockdown Wuhan was very low (0.303/10,000), and there was no evidence that the identified asymptomatic positive cases were infectious.
Fact Checking the Fact Checkers
Several fact-check websites have attempted to downplay the implications of this large Wuhan study, using appeals to the study authors' statements in other communications that themselves seem to downplay the authors' own findings.
Judging from some of these questionable comments, it appears that asymptomatic people in areas of significant transmission are somehow different from asymptomatic people in areas of very little transmission. Are we, then, to believe that the word, asymptomatic, has multiple meanings, depending on where asymptomatic people are studied? This does not seem rational.
The study authors also continue to make appeals to mask wearing and other measures that they attribute to controlling disease transmission, which I find circular, because they are assuming the thing that needs confirming.
There is no high-tier evidence that masks work or that mask mandates have any effect on COVID-19 case numbers. As proof of this statement, I have done a detailed, critical review of the list of references that North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services offers as evidence to support mass masking. Click on the linked text to read it.
The authors of the large Wuhan study, therefore, seem deeply vested in a narrative of lockdowns, mask wearing, distancing, and social isolation, despite their own findings. This suggests political activist pressure to stay on script.
In combination with Dr. Fauci's undeniable statement, therefore, the Wuhan study defies what the fact checkers and the study authors themselves downplay, namely that asymptomatic people do not drive pandemics.
Consider the basic process of the study:
- Investigate nearly ten million people.
- Find a group of people in that nearly ten million who are asymptomatic, positive cases.
- Trace their contacts.
- Find that none of the contacts contracted the disease from the asymptomatic people.
How this fails to provide evidence against the role of asymptomatic transmission is beyond reasonable comprehension. The mental gymnastics required to twist this into an opposite interpretation indicates nothing less than irrational fear, ideological compliance under threat of harm, or intentional misrepresentation for reasons of personal gain.
In a nutshell, something very unusual has been going on to enable leaders of the world and leaders of the United States to push such a questionable ideology of universal masking for as long as they have.
Lawyers around the world have been filing cases that challenge the entire lock-down/social-isolation/face-mask ideology. Ongoing legal actions include the following:
1. Cease and desist papers served, December 15, 2020, on Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten by Dr. Reiner Füllmich. Dr. Christian Drosten is a lead author of the seminal paper advancing the RT-PCR process as the standard test for clinically detecting COVID-19 infections. A group of 22 experts in the field have technically analyzed this process in great detail, arriving at the conclusion:
- In light of our re-examination of the test protocol to identify SARS-CoV-2 described in the Corman-Drosten paper we have identified concerning errors and inherent fallacies which render the SARS-CoV-2 PCR test useless.
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich is a consumer protection trial lawyer in Germany and California who served the cease and desist papers on Drosten. He is one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee.
2. A PCR-test lawsuit filed in New York on December 16, 2020.
3. A January 2021 Canadian class action, which will be developed into an international class action for all people harmed by the Drosten PCR-induced lockdowns.
4. A November 2020 ruling by a Portuguese court that the PCR test is unreliable, challenged and later upheld by the highest court in Portugal:
- [The PCR test] is unable to determine, beyond reasonable doubt, that a positive result corresponds, in fact, to the infection of a person by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
5. A January 2, 2021 judgment by the Constitutional Court of Ecuador that all anti-Corona measures to date are based on mere conjectures without any basis in fact.
6. A July 6, 2020 massive lawsuit (190 pages) against Canada Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau and others, a copy of which is available in my Dropbox (click highlighted text).
- A molecular replication process has been misapplied as a useless diagnostic test to falsely identify claimed infections in people who have zero symptoms.
- Healthy people with zero symptoms, yet falsely classified by the useless test as infected, have been categorized as disease threats and primary drivers of a pandemic.
- Irrational fear of unknown people who might falsely test positive with the useless test have caused government leaders to force every human in society to cover their face with cloth.
- Healthy people with zero symptoms, thus, have become classified as trespassers in places of public accommodation, unless they cover their faces with cloth, in accord with the government's irrational fear, driven by the useless diagnostic test.
- All businesses providing public accommodations to healthy people with zero symptoms collectively have become like a cartel limiting normal consumer activity and, therefore, interfering with commerce on a mass scale by collectively discriminating against consumers who do not cover their faces with cloth.
Because the mask requirement has now exerted a collective mass impact, the argument that individual businesses have a right to reject certain customers is no longer the same argument. The effect has gone beyond the individual business, because all businesses act as one business on this particular issue. Consequently, in-person, consumer behavior has been prevented on a mass scale -- behavior that allows an individual to enter the premises, personally handle, inspect, and ascertain product quality and brand choice (particularly with fresh produce).
Preventing such behavior, especially because of such irrational reasons, is a form of harm. Continuing to prevent such behavior makes all business establishments complicit in perpetuating the falsehood of PCR testing and mass masking of people with zero symptoms, now falsely accused of being a disease threat without any evidence to that effect whatsoever.
Real-World Data Falsifies the Claim of Face Mask Effectiveness
Below, you will see four graphs that I have adapted from the websites, Our World In Data and YouGov. These graphs clearly illustrate that face-mask use does not correlate with reduced COVID-19 case numbers.
I have displayed only three examples -- Italy, Spain, and the United States -- showing the relationship between the percentage of people in each country wearing masks and the number of COVID-19 cases per million for each country.
In the final graph, I compare all three high-mask-use countries to Sweden, a low-mask-use country. The three high-mask-use countries show skyrocketing case numbers well after the date when 80% of the people were wearing masks in public, while Sweden showed similar case growth with 8% of its people wearing masks in public.
Pay careful attention to the fact that there is zero difference between 80% mask use and 8% mask use.
In view of this, a reasonable person cannot truthfully claim that face masks have any effect whatsoever on controlling COVID-19 case growth. Many other examples are possible, showing the same general trend.