Thread by @Fynnderella1

1) Masking was a non-starter! To the argument “Why do Drs. use them in surgery?” It’s just to keep particulate out of wound field- nothing else!
▪Ritter et al., in 1975, found that “the wearing of a surgical face mask had no effect upon the overall operating room

2) environmental contamination.”
▪Ha’eri and Wiley, in 1980, applied human albumin microspheres to the interior of surgical masks in 20 operations. At the end of each operation, wound washings were examined under the microscope. “Particle contamination of the wound

3) was demonstrated in all experiments.”
▪Laslett and Sabin, in 1989, found that caps and masks were not necessary during cardiac catheterization. “No infections were found in any patient, regardless of whether a cap or mask was used,” they wrote.

4) Sjøl and Kelbaek came to the same conclusion in 2002.
▪In Tunevall’s 1991 study, a general surgical team wore no masks in half of their surgeries for two years. After 1,537 operations performed with masks, the wound infection rate was 4.7%, while after 1,551 operations…

5) performed without masks, the wound infection rate was only 3.5%.
▪A review by Skinner and Sutton in 2001 concluded that “The evidence for discontinuing the use of surgical face masks would appear to be stronger than the evidence available to support their continued use.”

6) ▪Lahme et al., in 2001, wrote that “surgical face masks worn by patients during regional anaesthesia, did not reduce the concentration of airborne bacteria over the operation field in our study. Thus they are dispensable.”

7) ▪Figueiredo et al., in 2001, reported that in five years of doing peritoneal dialysis without masks, rates of peritonitis in their unit were no different than rates in hospitals where masks were worn.
▪Bahli did a systematic literature review in 2009

8) and found that “no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative wound infection was observed between masks groups and groups operated with no masks.”
▪Surgeons at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, recognizing the lack of evidence supporting the use of masks,

9) ceased requiring them in 2010 for anesthesiologists and other non-scrubbed personnel in the operating room. “Our decision to no longer require routine surgical masks for personnel not scrubbed for surgery is a departure from common practice. But the evidence to support this

10) practice does not exist,” wrote Dr. Eva Sellden.
▪Webster et al., in 2010, reported on obstetric, gynecological, general, orthopaedic, breast and urological surgeries performed on 827 patients. All non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries, and none of the

11) non-scrubbed staff wore masks in half the surgeries. Surgical site infections occurred in 11.5% of the Mask group, and in only 9.0% of the No Mask group.
▪Lipp and Edwards reviewed the surgical literature in 2014 and found “no statistically significant difference in

12) infection rates between the masked and unmasked group in any of the trials.” Vincent and Edwards updated this review in 2016 and the conclusion was the same.
▪Carøe, in a 2014 review based on four studies and 6,006 patients, wrote that

13) “none of the four studies found a difference in the number of post-operative infections whether you used a surgical mask or not.”
▪Salassa and Swiontkowski, in 2014, investigated the necessity of scrubs, masks and head coverings in the operating room

14) and concluded that “there is no evidence that these measures reduce the prevalence of surgical site infection.”
▪Da Zhou et al., reviewing the literature in 2015, concluded that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either

15) patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”
Schools in China are now prohibiting students from wearing masks while exercising. Why? Because it was killing them. It was depriving them of oxygen and it was killing them. At least three children died during

16) Physical Education classes -- two of them while running on their school’s track while wearing a mask. And a 26-year-old man suffered a collapsed lung after running two and a half miles while wearing a mask.
Like everything, risk/benefit analysis is always necessary.

@pettypodcast1 @KristenMeghan @Tammy_K_Clark feel free to add commentary. I’ll add one more:
Another risk citation:

nature.com/articles/s4159…

18) Neil Orr’s study, published in 1981 in the Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England outlined for six months, from March through August 1980, the surgeons and staff in that unit decided to see what would happen if they did not wear masks during surgeries.

19) They wore no masks for six months, and compared the rate of surgical wound infections from March through August 1980 with the rate of wound infections from March through August of the previous four years.

20) They discovered, to their amazement, that when nobody wore masks during surgeries, the rate of wound infections was less than half what it was when everyone wore masks. Their conclusion:

21) “It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all” and that wearing a mask during surgery “is a standard procedure that could be abandoned.”

22) in light of this, and 50+ years of published evidence, do you truly believe that dirty thing on your face is protecting you from an airborne particle 0.09 microns in size? Just stop. It’s a grotesque policy steeped in folklore not science!

Thx to reader-

https://twitter.com/RodneyCorbine/status/1620476160567300096

More great content.

https://twitter.com/bullfrog35/status/1477499174123819009

More great content

https://twitter.com/bullfrog35/status/1477499174123819009

Large community mask study in children- proving what we’ve known for decades!

https://twitter.com/andrewbostom/status/1620622735599865856

26) Another great mult. Citation resource. vernoncoleman.org/sites/default/…

27) And do note, Elf #Fauxchi laughed (and still does) at the buffoons that followed the most ludicrous excuse for science -

washingtonexaminer.com/news/fauci-lau…

28) Then there is this.
Showing we did everything opposite of appropriate- as I stated along with Kurt Wittowski in 2020- before they cancelled him. That’s why the smart, experienced ones are being replaced with #CardboardScientists #WokeDocs and #NonScienceYesMen

https://twitter.com/andrewbostom/status/1621958864156385283

29)Our current state of affairs is such that we no longer practice true science. Someone has an agenda, and pays a lab or team of authors to research a way to plausibly support said agenda. That’s not science. It’s politics!

https://twitter.com/NarfGb/status/1622675383245017101

30) Low brow articles have taken the place of applied science, and decades of scientific proof. Personal agenda, monetary gain, virtue club- whatever the reason, it’s sad, yet those arguing for public mask use reveal who they are. Take note.

https://twitter.com/bullfrog35/status/1622693702622912512

31) In case you are hard of hearing, reading, or just dim…
We’ll just keep adding to the pile knowing you are still using them to signal virtue. Not really for protecting anyone or yourselves-
empathy.guru/2023/02/05/qui…

32) If this all went through your brain space with no effect, perhaps you are merely working your way through the loyalty rewards to get to that free toaster.

33) worthless and even harmful in pandemic just like 1918.

https://twitter.com/bullfrog35/status/1628478077226602496

34) the citations are endless. Toss the masks, and not in parking lots, waterways or anywhere else but in incinerator!

32) more harm than good-
frontiersin.org/articles/10.33…

More masking analysis. This madness has been proven to be ineffective for decades. How anyone suggests it, implemented it, bought into it, and continue to, is beyond comprehension. The worst are hospitals.

https://twitter.com/andrewbostom/status/1645429746853986304

35) even dangerous-

thekylebecker.substack.com/p/massive-stud…

36) in addition to being non-efficacious, dirty and contributing to pollution, there is more.
They are dangerous.

https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1647529049554837504

37) the awakening of what I stated in 2020 about CO2? Only 3 years late. No big deal. 🥴

https://twitter.com/Risemelbourne/status/1650264802399510528

38) as journals politically drag their feet, the Finnish school masking study is finally out. Guess what?

bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.11…

39) We knew long term community masking would yield deleterious consequences. From d speech and learning delayed to brain a Sears in kids, this was always a horrible idea. Colleague, pediatric neurosurgeon told us about the spike in brain abscess in masked children mid 2021.

40) We already know they are ineffective. Most in 1918 died of secondary infection from masking. I’ve included many citations and there are hundreds more. Now we have enough time and subjects to show that they actually cause HARM. We were not born with our mouths covered.

41) we certainly shouldn’t live this way because some ignorant bureaucrats said so, or some political healthcare workers who forgot science parades around in them.
Never allow this again.

drpanda.substack.com/p/cdc-investig…

42) So why, out of nowhere, in 2020 was N95 deemed efficacious to mitigate viral spread? We l’ e all known for decades this couldn’t be true. What’s different? Well, modeling and re-creating, of course. Does this translate into real world data of airborne viruses?

https://twitter.com/bullfrog35/status/1653072907311140870

(We’ve)

43) and thanks to @RodneyCorbine for this sweet compilation. One or two bad MODELING studies in corrupt 2020 cannot possibly stand up to our mountains if evidence.

archive.org/details/Masken…

44) I think a close second was closing schools because of an infection that affected the elderly and those with average of 3-4 comorbidities.

https://twitter.com/drcraigwax/status/1661134745843924993

45) prolonged use is damaging, yet all of the gov agencies pushed mandates. What an incredible farce. They want control and conformity. There is no interest in health. The public is a nuisance.

https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1667903630102474755

46) there is endless evidence that they are all ineffective for everything involving disease infection or spread. Always have been. Maybe I was trained when truth mattered, but I never bought in to the optic game.

https://twitter.com/AnteMedicus/status/1522627568251330561

47) Admit you fell for it because a bureaucrat told you to. Then stop.

48) New 2022 RCT- jury is out. Your N-95 doesn’t work for the 500th time.

acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M2…

49) yes the beloved masks can contribute to death.
#3tablets nih.gov/news-events/ne…

Aaaannd 50)
If we do ent have enough already-
We know it does nothing for aerosolized airborne viruses, now let’s assess fomite transmission #washyourhands

https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1692794920443011213

51) Published on @CDC site 5/20. What changed? Politics? The science hasn’t for decades. “In this review, we did not find evidence to support a protective effect of personal protective measures or environmental measures in reducing influenza transmission.”wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26…

@cdc 52) face coverings much like the mRNA, more risk than benefit (all risk no benefit)
#sideeffects

https://twitter.com/FreeWCH/status/1647799794591563776

@cdc 53) ….more detriment. Remember, most died during the Influenza pandemic in 1918 of bacterial pneumonia. Yes they pushed mask use then!!!

https://twitter.com/Vegan_Bobcat/status/1693729390247776466

@cdc 54) Top epidemiologist calls out @CDC for mask misinformation (as did I in 2020)

archive.li/Qq4i3

@cdc 55) For perspective- (and this doesn’t even include the giant gaps on the sides, and around your nose-🥴

https://twitter.com/TheSocrateej/status/1691137859485573120

@cdc 56) more harm, no good. t.co/LVo2sBuIdo

@cdc 57) what it’s really effective for in community use-
See Stanford Prison study.

@cdc 58) brownstone.org/articles/studi…

@cdc 59) dangerous

dailymail.co.uk/health/article…

@cdc 60) leave the children alone.

cell.com/heliyon/pdf/S2…

@cdc 60) TiO2. Sounds like fun.

idp.nature.com/transit?redire…

@cdc 62) Coming full circle. As I said in 1), splash guard, and theater.

https://twitter.com/doc_gero/status/1699877473784135844

@cdc 63) starting to repeat myself.

https://twitter.com/kevinnbass/status/1699803737383129259

@cdc 64) Even bloody CNN is starting to finally get it.

https://twitter.com/Fynnderella1/status/1699624467717075021

@cdc 65) More comprehensive studies. It’s been proven a thousand times over.

mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/8…

@cdc 66) N95 data
No difference 🥴

@cdc

https://twitter.com/bullfrog35/status/1706775297822253289

@cdc 68) Even positive signal papers were manipulated-propaganda.
@CDCgov is captured propaganda for pharma and globalist directives. Science be damned.

https://twitter.com/TracyBethHoeg/status/1709371816479952993

@cdc @CDCgov Norwegian peer review study showing increase of SC2 infection among the masked. 🥴
Not only ineffective, harmful.

cambridge.org/core/journals/…

@cdc @CDCgov 70) 2020 thread I did of mask ineffectiveness for viruses.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1275981…

@cdc @CDCgov Don’t forget the kiddos.

adc.bmj.com/content/early/…

https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1731332055328256430

@cdc @CDCgov Need 60 more? Great thread to support this one in even more detail.

https://twitter.com/EmilyVBurns/status/1398022430476713987

@cdc @CDCgov 73) early thread in 2020 on my 3rd banned Acct. threadreaderapp.com/thread/1275981…

@cdc @CDCgov 73b)

https://twitter.com/LynnFynn3/status/1276568992505901062

@cdc @CDCgov 74) from @andrewbostom andrewbostom.org/2021/02/stop-r…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 75) 45 mask studies since the 100+ weren’t enough…. threadreaderapp.com/thread/1362439…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 76) swprs.org/face-masks-evi…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 77) more- ongoing-

maskscience.org

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 78) increase risk!

medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 79) more detriment. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 80) 150 mask papers (making 300 citations on this thread)

brownstone.org/articles/more-…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 81) Masks

Phthalates (plasticizers) in face masks:


Detected were:
- DBP (dibutyl phthalate)
- BBP (butylbenzyl phthalate)
- DNOP (di-n-octy phthalate)
- DEHP (diethylhexyl phthalate)mdpi.com/1420-3049/27/2…

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 81b) ….DEHP is an endocrine disruptor (i.e. a chemical that can interfere with the hormonal system), BBP is classified as a reproductive toxicant.

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 82) How is CDC shocked that none of it works for a 0.09 micron respiratory virus when I knew since my early days on the bench? Embarrassing.

https://twitter.com/thackerpd/status/1754840788884668786

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 83) @CDCgov Yet again, backpedaling on something we knew for decades. This is how you know the agencies are politicized.
They need to be shut down. How many kids are mentally affected?

https://twitter.com/thackerpd/status/1755575114047893908

@cdc @CDCgov @andrewbostom 84) And if all of this wasn’t enough, here is 86 more!!!
Stop your madness. It doesn’t work for airborne respiratory viruses. Period.

https://twitter.com/13orangesbc/status/1692909740324454885