Mask mandates ‘have resulted in no reductions in incidence of COVID-19, as detected by positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests among nations or US states.’
February 16, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A new study warns that the wearing of face masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is not only non-effective, but also a hazard to individuals’ health, given that mask wearing seems to lead to an increase in infection rates.
The Primary Doctor Medical Journal, a “peer-reviewed online medical journal” without attachments to businesses or political interests, published a four-part study on the use of masks in relation to COVID-19. The study is entitled, “Masks, false safety and real dangers.”
The final part of the study details the “proposed mechanisms by which masks increase risk of COVID-19,” and is authored by Colleen Huber, a Naturopathic Medical Doctor and Naturopathic Oncologist (FNORI) who specializes on the issues of masks, COVID-19, cancer and nutrition.
Huber’s findings, which have already been subject to peer review and revised accordingly, reveal that the various mask mandates which were implemented throughout the world so quickly in 2020 “have resulted in no reductions in incidence of COVID-19, as detected by positive polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests among nations or US states.”
Quite the opposite is true, states Huber, as she found that “[i]ncreased rates or insignificant change in incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections, as detected by PCR tests, have followed mask mandates throughout the world and in US states.” As a result of her findings, Huber wrote that masks “are therefore a possible risk factor for infection with SARS-CoV-2 and higher incidence of COVID-19 disease.”
In order to defend her statements, Huber points to the results of various studies of mask enforcement and wearing. Following up on a study of 25 countries conducted by the Council on Foreign Relations regarding masks, Huber’s team found that three months later, there was no “clear, identifiable pattern with regard to deaths.” In fact, the countries which had reported the lowest mask wearing in the study had “generally fewer” cases of COVID-19.
Referring to results for a number of U.S. states and various countries drawn from the COVID Tracking Project Data Download and Our World In Data, Huber noted that the cases of the virus had “more often increased than decreased after government ‘mandates’ to their citizens to wear masks in those jurisdictions.”
Seven countries (Israel, Peru, the Philippines, Spain, France, Hungary and Argentina) revealed “no impact” of the mask mandates in terms of either cases or hospitalizations.
However, in the next three months, all seven countries showed an increase in cases, and the same was found in the results from the U.S. Only Mississippi and New York City had drops in infections, as they were found to continue on their “sharp descent” of COVID cases, which had begun two weeks before the respective mask mandates.
“None of the examined jurisdictions experienced decreased incidence of COVID-19 after the introduction of mask mandates, except two that had already begun a sharp descent in COVID-19 cases weeks earlier.”
Huber also drew on the results of the Danish mask study, the first of its kind, which found that masks had no “statistical significance” in reducing the prevalence of infections. She observed that the authors of that study had admitted to having a pro-mask bias, yet could not find any significant effects mask wearing.
Masks as an aid to infection
Huber also warned that masks can be not only an aid in spreading infection, but also pose a risk to personal health. A 2020 study performed by North Carolina’s Duke University found that respiratory droplets fall to the ground quicker, and therefore are less likely to reach someone, when one does not wear a mask. This was due to the “mesh of certain masks” dividing larger, heavier respiratory droplets into smaller, lighter fragments, which were “more likely to stay airborne longer.” With results like these, Duke University declared cloth masks to be “counterproductive.”
Huber mentioned the “nozzle effect” which masks have in channeling the exhaled air through the side openings. Due to higher air pressure behind the mask, “side jets, back jets, a crown jet, brow jets and a downward jet … emerge from the mask in each of those directions.”
Furthermore, “[b]ackward airflow was found to be strong with all masks and faceshields studied, compared to not masking,” Huber wrote.
A jet of exhaled air, capable of travelling “up to several meters” could come from an individual wearing a mask.
In contrast to such mask-propelled jets of exhaled air, those without masks do not pose a risk of being able to transmit particles of the virus “anywhere near the distance that a masked individual can unwittingly contaminate.”
Masks damaging the health of the wearer
Aside from an increased risk of infecting those around, a mask poses a health risk to the one wearing it, Huber wrote. In just ten seconds of wearing a mask, the “available oxygen as a percentage of available air volume decreased to less than the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) required minimum of 19.5%,” and stayed below that figure.
This state of hypoxia causes the body to produce “hypoxia-inducible factor-1 (HIF-1),” which is known “to lower T-cell function.” The cells which suffer as a result, are those known to “fight viral infections,” and hence the mask places the wearer at risk by virtue of depriving the body of the necessary oxygen and cell function needed.
Another effect of HIF-1 is the reduction in an enzyme (ACE2) which “plays key roles in maintaining blood pressure and electrolytes and controlling inflammation.” The receptors for the enzyme ACE2 are the “initial portal” used by the COVID-19 virus to “enter cells of the upper respiratory tract.” Since COVID-19 attacks the receptors for ACE2, and the enzyme itself had already been reduced through lack of oxygen, “the masked person with a new SARS-CoV-2 infection is especially at risk of marked inflammation and accompanying disease severity.”
Huber also explained the danger of hypercapnia (carbon dioxide retention), as carbon dioxide had been found to rise after just “30 seconds” of mask wearing. The retention of carbon dioxide leads to the immobilization of microscopic-sized “cilia,” which play a key role in removing harmful pathogens from the airways. “This leads to predisposing mask wearers to respiratory tract infections and vulnerability to deep entry of pathogens,” Huber warned.
In light of such evidence, not only against the effectiveness of masks in preventing infection, but also concerning the very real danger posed by their use, Huber stated: “This raises concerns that masked persons might more easily acquire, incubate and subsequently transmit a virus that has been the focus of intense attention, fear and concern throughout the world in 2020.”
“Caution is therefore urged against use of masks among those who wish to reduce the risk, either for themselves or others, of infection with SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 disease,” she closed.