Covid-19, Heresies, Medicine, Science
comments 2

It’s Time to Stop Wearing Masks

Children sing Oh Canada! wearing masks

In this paper, David Solway illustrates with exquisite detail that there is no evidence that wearing non-medical masks during the Covid-19 “pandemic” provides any protection against infection. Quite the contrary, mask wearing may in fact increase the risk of contracting the novel coronavirus. Saying so, however, is sure to land you in hot water on social media and among the general public. Pictured above: One of the more disturbing images from the Covid-19 lockdowns has been this one of mask-muzzled grade 3 schoolchildren signing their national anthem.

I refuse to wear a mask. I believe, as many people do—but not enough to make a wrinkle in the vast bubble of mass delusion—that masks are largely ineffective. But the consequences of holding to this belief and appearing in public without a mask can be quite unpleasant.

My experience in the streets and shops of my city will be familiar to those who feel as I do. The masked give me a wide berth. Others stare balefully from the only exposed part of their faces. On occasion I find myself in confrontation with those who believe I am a “spreader” to be mocked, shamed, condemned and threatened.

COVID Rage is all the rage. And I am always astounded by the level of ignorance wedded to self-righteousness among the unvisaged, the tendency to follow the diktats of their political leaders and government appointed medical officers without question and to accept implicitly the reports of a suborned media apparatus. The lack of common sense and the unwillingness to conduct independent research are truly staggering, if entirely predictable. Instead of herd immunity, we have herd mentality.

Masks are not only unsightly, even grotesque, but they obscure proper articulation—I rarely understand what these people are trying to say—and eliminate all signs of personality. One feels one is trapped inside a particularly lurid Zombie movie.

More importantly, masks are generally useless. The weave and filter are not resistant to the miniscule COVID virion. Wearing masks has been compared to setting up a chain-link fence to keep out flies. Former naval surgeon Dr. Lee Merritt has done the research. Viruses are passed by tiny micron particles, she explains, “that sneak out through the mask and around the mask.” As Merritt points out, the popular meme of “viral load,” which masks are said to reduce, is misleading; it takes only one COVID micron and a compromised immune system to trigger the infection. So much for director of the HIV Clinic at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital Monica Ghandi’s argument that masks significantly reduce ingestion of viral particles, and that masking can make you “less sick.” A mask is not a silver bullet, it is a blank cartridge.

We might note that the more sophisticated N-95 masks, which are used by medical personnel, provide insecure protection. Medical Life Sciences tells us that the diameter of a COVID particle ranges from 60 to 140 nanometers (nm) and that N-95 masks are non-functional under 100 nm, rendering them only 50 per cent effective at best. As founder of American Frontline Doctors Simone Gold states: “The facts are not in dispute: (cloth) masks are completely irrelevant in blocking the SARS-CoV-2 virus.” N-95s bring their own problems, as noted below. (Naturally, she has been roundly attacked by “medical cancel culture.”)

Face mask or adult diaper?

Droplets are apparently another matter, being larger than aerosols and thus impeded by masks, whether on the receiving or emitting end. A little common sense tells us that droplets evaporate and the particles hitching a ride on them remain to be breathed in or out. Moreover, a Cambridge Core study concludes that “any mask, no matter how efficient at filtration or how good the seal, will have minimal effect if it is not used in conjunction with other preventative measures, [including] regular hand hygiene.” Since wearers are frequently adjusting their masks, regular hand hygiene is by no means practical or possible. Aerosols or droplets, same difference.

But there is another side to the problem. Science Daily, citing a study conducted at the University of New South Wales, indicates that “cloth masks can be dangerous to your health.” This is also true for the much-hyped N-95. Prolonged wearing is likely to cause hypoxia (diminished oxygen supply). The masker breathes in his own CO2, leading in some cases to grogginess and even somnolence—the reason birds in winter conserve energy and warmth and sleep at night by tucking their heads under their wings.

People who drive masked are asking for trouble. People who wear masks for extended periods are at risk. Hypoxia can also lead to a condition of immune cell dysfunction. The immunologic consequences can be critical, causing neurological damage and rendering the individual susceptible to whatever pathogens are lurking in his own system or in the air around him. This alone is a reason not to wear masks—and certainly not for excessive periods. Even the more reliable surgical masks must be changed frequently. (Plastic face shields are no solution since the larger surface area acts as a storehouse for the viral molecule.)

Obviously, the pro-and-con controversy over the efficacy of masks is particularly contentious. Political and professional reputations are at stake, especially in journals and institutions with a distinctive leftist bias. Politics will mostly trump science, and the common observer must be scrupulously careful in evaluating evidence.

In Quebec, Canada as elsewhere, the state regards its citizens as children, as evinced in this poster explaining how to properly wear a mask, displayed at Georges-Vanier Metro Station in Montreal.

Thus, it comes as no surprise that trusted data sources like the W.H.O.The New England Journal of Medicine, and The Lancet are profoundly compromised and have been compelled to revise or retract some of their studies and surveys. But it is interesting to note that The Center for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) finds that “despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks…assuming 20% asymptomatics and a risk reduction of 40% for wearing masks, 200,000 people would need to wear one to prevent one new infection per week.” 

Timothy Taylor at Conversable Economist points to many random controlled trial studies that “do not find a reason to wear a mask.”Wired magazine is also ambivalent regarding data, stating: “the research literature on mask usage doesn’t provide definitive answers. There are no large-scale clinical trials proving that personal use of masks can prevent pandemic spread; and the ones that look at masks and influenza have produced equivocal results.” 

Such a “large scale clinical trial” has, in fact, just been conducted. A major Danish controlled study involving 6000 participants, the only study of its kind, has been predictably rejected by three medical journals. One of the researchers, Thomas Lars Benfield, states that publication will have to wait until “a journal is brave enough to accept the paper.” The Lancet, among others, won’t touch it, as is to be expected. Reviewing the travesty, Conservative Review editor Daniel Horowitz wonders “how many other scientific and academic studies covering an array of very consequential policy questions rooted in scientific debate are being censored because they don’t fit the narrative of the political elites?” And indeed, why is NIAID Director Anthony Fauci disinclined to pursue a controlled study on the effectiveness of masks? Of course, like CNN journalist Chris Cuomo and Canada’s Minister of Health Patty HajduFauci was spotted not wearing a mask in public. Do as I say, not as I do.

By the same token, Bioengineer Yinon Weiss at The Federalist shows via data comparison and representative graphs of seven European countries and three American states that renewed mask compliance has led to an exponential spike in infection rates, in some cases by as much as 1500 percent. Weiss cites major international studies, as well as the U.S. surgeon general and the Centers for Disease Control, revealing the ineffectiveness of commercial masks. Masks, lockdowns and quarantine protocols merely delay the development of herd immunity and are practically guaranteed to prolong the epidemic. Nevertheless, fear not only of the disease but also of punitive measures and of being conspicuous dissenters exposed to social opprobrium are operative factors.

“Behind our masks, let’s keep smiling!” So says this state-issued poster at Snowdon Metro Station in Montreal. In other words: “Put on your mask and like it!”

Mask hysteria seems primed to continue. Psychiatrist Dr. Mark McDonald calls the standard response to the virus “a pandemic of hysteria…a delusional psychosis…It is killing us physically, mentally, socially, psychologically.” Masks dehumanize us and make us timid and afraid, vulnerable to the designs of our political masters seeking, as Weiss writes, “to twist the pandemic for political and electoral purposes.”

The situation has grown even more perverse. We seem to have reached a point where government propaganda and coercion are no longer necessary. People have become the servants and enablers of the state, having by and large internalized the official compulsion and are now their own stringent monitors and self-appointed mask police—the final ingredient in the time-tested recipe for totalitarian control. Swallow the lie. Become the lie. Enforce the lie.

At best, mask wearing should be discretionary. If you wish to wear a mask, no one can legally prevent you from doing so. But some things are clear. Masks should not be mandated by political authority since: (1) the requirement to do so is an infringement of the Charter rights of free citizens living in a democratic state; (2) masks are largely, and perhaps in most cases wholly, ineffective; and (3) they can be demonstrably harmful to one’s health and the health of other people.

Ironically, mask wearing is the real risk, not only delaying or preventing the development of immunity while inducing a false sense of comfort, but also acting as a disease incubator, and a conceivable threat to non-maskers. A highly qualified friend who has diligently studied the virus for the last six months writes me: “Mask wearers are becoming an additional potential source of environmental contamination, increasing not only their own but the risk to others.”

I do my best to avoid maskers, although it is difficult considering the numbers.


David Solway is a Canadian poet and essayist. His most recent volume of poetry The Herb Garden appeared in spring 2018 with Guernica Editions. A partly autobiographical prose manifesto Reflections on Music, Poetry & Politics was released by Shomron Press in spring 2016. A CD of his original songs Blood Guitar and Other Tales appeared in 2016 and a second CD Partial to Cain accompanied by his pianist wife Janice Fiamengo appeared in June of this year. Solway continues to write for American political sites such as PJ Media, American Thinker and WorldNetDaily. His latest book Notes from a Derelict Culture (Black House, 2019) was delisted from Amazon as of Sunday December 13, 2020.

2 Comments

  1. Marius Kociejowski says:

    That a poet and polemicist as intelligent as David Solway could produce such an essay is lamentable. While he is perfectly correct in saying that a mask affords the wearer little protection the point is that it is not designed for that purpose but to protect other people. The virus is thereby contained to a fair degree. I am writing from a country (Great Britain) in which the lack of leadership has resulted in the highest number of deaths per capita in the world. An island ought to do better than this. The policy with respect to wearing masks has been lax. Compare this country to Japan, which is more highly and densely populated than here, and which, when I last checked, has had 2700 deaths in total, in other words, the same number of deaths in ten months as we have had in two days. New Zealand is another splendid example. Mr Solway might like to investigate further to see why this is so. In the Far East and Southeast Asia there has been a stringent policy with respect to the wearing of masks during pandemics past and present. I write this on a day in which my doctor daughter has lost a colleague to the virus and for whom it was not ‘all the rage’.

  2. Gerry Rayburn says:

    Lamentable is the all too common dupe who believes in the magical power of masking without consulting any evidence and then evokes someone’s death to somehow make it seem (as do all orthodox persons of the mask persuasion) that he who wears no masks cares not for another’s death or worse is somehow responsible for it. @Marius might actually consult the research done on masking rather than invent his own science based no doubt on what he deems is common sense. There are plenty of ways he might educate himself on this topic. One of them is to analyse whether mask mandates have impacted the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK (or anywhere else). If @Marius were clever, he might have a look at Ivor Cummins’s Youtube channel where he has analysed the data on precisely this and other associated issues. He would learn that neither masks nor lockdowns have any impact whatsoever on lowering case numbers. @Marius might also want to read up on the casedemic going on and the hoax being perpetrated on the western world whereby this virus–which has an impact that is 1/10th that of the common flu–has been used as an excuse to obliterate civil liberties and ride roughshod over our human rights. This hoax has been managed through a PCR test protocol redesign that effectively creates cases. What is lamentable is how many asses like @Marius are superstitiously hiding from a bogeyman and enacting pious gestures like commenting on this article written by someone who is well familiar with the literature and the real data on this issue. Here’s an article to remind us of saner times when the disinformation surrounding public masking was treated as it should, with fines and legal curtailment: https://www.smh.com.au/national/farce-mask-its-safe-for-only-20-minutes-20030427-gdgnyo.html

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *