New Studies Once More Show Masks Don’t Work | CLIP | Truth Over News

Hi everyone, and welcome to Truth Over News. If masks worked, the past two and a half years would have been completely different. Just wear a mask and get on with life as usual. That would have been great, but that's not what happened, because masks don't work. Several new studies are now again confirming this. And yet, masks are making a comeback. In some cases, they never went away, such as for anyone using New York City or Canadian modes of transport. And mask mandates never went away for children either, whether at summer camps or in schools. To understand why we are still being targeted with unscientific mask mandates, we have to look at the underlying reasons why they were introduced in the first place. Contrary to the media's narrative, the politicization of masks wasn't driven by people who asked questions about the lack of data. It was driven by politicians and activists pushing anti-scientific remedies for reasons that had nothing to do with health. We all remember how Fauci and the public health establishment early on in the pandemic said that masks were useless against airborne viruses. That information was, surprisingly, correct. Every single pre-pandemic study on masks, dating all the way back to the Spanish flu of 1918, showed that masks don't work. A study from May 2020, after the pandemic started, but before the politics of masks, also showed that masks, as well as hand sanitizer, were completely useless. And it doesn't take a genius to understand why. Viruses such as COVID-19 are very, very small, about 100 nanometers. A nanometer is one billionth of a meter. By comparison, the width of a human hair averages about 100,000 nanometers. Unsurprisingly, the COVID virus is not visible, not even when using the best optical microscopes. The only way we can see the COVID virus is by using an electron microscope, which technically isn't actually seeing it. Instead, what happens is that the electron microscope shoots electrons at a target, and based on the reflection patterns, an image is rendered. No cloth or surgical mask is going to capture such tiny objects. In fact, surgical masks were designed to deal with splatter during medical procedures to prevent a surgeon's saliva from getting into an open wound. They were never meant to block airborne viruses. They can't. So what about N95 masks? Well, the number 95 tells us that the mask is only 95% efficient. N95 masks typically capture particles that are larger than 300 nanometers. That means they cannot capture the COVID virus at 100 nanometers. But they can capture COVID in its aerosolized form, which is how the COVID virus travels through air. So these masks could theoretically work. But there are other problems. First, there's leakage. Any opening on the edges around the nose or on facial hair, no matter how small, will let in and out massive amounts of particles, in particular because air seeks out the path of least resistance, meaning the openings. The second problem is that we have real world data, because Germany mandated N95 masks and they made no difference in their outcomes. Third, there's the fact that a COVID infection can be triggered by inhaling just a few hundred virus particles. In comparison, a single sneeze emits many tens of thousands of virus particles. It's just very, very difficult to avoid exposure. Even if we were to assume that an N95 mask was perfect at filtering virus particles and that it had no leaks, neither of which is realistic, you'd still be stuck with the five percent that do get through as part of the definition of N95 masks. All of this was already known, but now we also have a lot of real world data. And once again, it shows that masks do not work. We were told that masks worked because countries like Japan and Korea proved so. But the data tell a different picture. Despite universal mask compliance, Japan and Korea are currently experiencing massive caseloads far exceeding anything seen in the United States. We were also told that Hong Kong was doing great because everyone wore masks. What the media did not report is that earlier this year, Hong Kong's case rate and death rate far exceeded anything seen in the United States at any time during the past two and a half years. Masks didn't prevent these outcomes. And the science, real science, not the media's fake science, proves it. Early in the pandemic, Denmark conducted an experiment, the Danish Mask Study. Unlike many other studies that rely on anecdotal information, this study followed the gold standard, a randomized controlled study. To illustrate what this means, viewers may recall the much publicized story of the hairdresser who didn't get sick while wearing a mask and cutting a COVID patient's hair. What we didn't have was a control group, meaning we didn't have the same hairdresser without a mask doing the same thing. That's why such anecdotes are without meaning, no matter how much the media pushed them. The Danish Mask Study was different. It involved thousands of people split in two groups, the mask-wearing group and the non-mask-wearing group. The leader of the Danish Mask Study, by his own admission, had a preferred outcome. He hoped that masks would work. But that didn't happen. After several months, there was no difference in infection outcomes between the two groups. By the time the study concluded in the latter part of 2020, no publisher would publish the results. That is how badly the mask mob had poisoned and politicized the debate. But two years on, it now appears easier to publish unwelcome studies, and a number of new studies again show that masks just don't work. The first new study, published in the Lancet Medical Journal, set out to prove or disprove a heavily criticized CDC paper that claimed that masks worked in schools. While the CDC studied cherry-picked data, the new study used the same data set, but without cherry-picking, meaning that there was six times more data to begin with. The new study also took account of differences across school districts. Unsurprisingly, it found that if you don't cherry-pick data and instead incorporate a larger sample and longer period of time, you find that there's no significant relationship between mask mandates and case rates. A second recent study looked at two adjacent school districts in North Dakota. One district had a mask mandate, and the other one did not. Once again, there was no difference in outcomes between the two districts. Later when the mask district gave up its mandate, both districts still had the same outcomes. Masks just didn't make any difference, one way or the other.