A welcomed affirmation of numerous earlier studies on the subject, the new publication states that "widespread masking may have done little to nothing to curb the transmission of COVID" – which is exactly what this writer was saying all along.
"... wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flu-like illness / COVID-like illness (nine studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (six studies; 13,919 people)," the study further found.
The same goes for N95 masks and P2 respirators, which we were told provide extra protection. This study found that:
"... wearing N95 / P2 respirators probably makes little to no difference in how many people have confirmed flu (five studies; 8407 people); and may make little to no difference in how many people catch a flu-like illness (five studies; 8407 people), or respiratory illness (three studies; 7799 people)." (Related: Face masks were a ploy to enrich communist China, where most of them are manufactured).
The validity of this review is likely to be the subject of much debate, but its findings speak for themselves. Face masks do not work, despite what the "authorities" have been telling us since early 2020.
At the very least, the findings should stoke a healthy debate over mask-wearing – the type of debate that never happened as the prevailing "science" simply did not allow it. In fact, experts in their field were banned left and right from social media for daring to even just question the universal masking policies.
"The Centers for Disease and Control Prevention (CDC) initially rejected the use of a mask mandate," reports Jonathan Turley.
"However, the issue became a political weapon as politicians and the press claimed that questioning masks was anti-science and even unhinged. In April 2020, the CDC reversed its position and called for the masking of the entire population, including children as young as 2 years old. The mask mandate and other pandemic measures like the closing of schools are now cited as fueling emotional and developmental problems in children."
Children everywhere are depressed, sick, and in some cases dying because of mask mandates and school closures. They were separated from their friends and teachers for a prolonged period of time and confined behind a computer for Zoom-based "learning."
This created a developmental disaster the likes of which this world has never seen. Children need to socialize around others, not be told that other human beings are walking germ factories to be avoided at all costs.
"... I expect that these studies will be debated for years. That is a good thing," Turley says.
"There are questions raised over the types of studies used and whether randomized studies are sufficient. The point is only that there were countervailing indicators on mask efficacy and a basis to question the mandates. Yet, there was no real debate because of the censorship supported by many Democratic leaders in social media. To question such mandates was declared a public health threat."
"The latest review will not conclusively answer the scientific questions around mask efficacy, but it should answer any lingering questions over the harm of censorship. We never had a serious debate because of the government-corporate-media alliance to snuff out dissenting views on pandemic policies. The result may have been avoidable emotional, economic, and social harm to the population as a whole."
More related news can be found at BadMedicine.news.