On May 18 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the United States made a game changing announcement with regards to COVID. According to its recommendation, fully vaccinated people could go about their lives without wearing masks, neither indoors not outdoors.
Many people showed a sign of relief while others ran to vaccination points all over the United States as vaccines became available. Hundreds of people even travelled from their countries to the United States to get vaccinated because vaccines were either not available where they livein their countries, or because their government decided to roll out a very slow vaccination campaign.
What very few people reflected upon is that governments are not human property owners and that no agency or private organization can compel people to be hiding under their beds in fear, masked up 24/7 or vaccinated against their own best judgement. The reason for all this being that, those practices, when forced on anyone, violate basic human rights.
The gravest of all these violations is mandatory medical treatment. Involuntary treatment refers to medical treatment undertaken without the consent of the person being treated.
There is not one single instance in which the Constitution allows a government to forcibly imprison someone against their own will -unless a crime has been committed- obligate anyone to wear a mask, vaccinate or in any other way medically treat citizens against their own will. Yet, all we have seen and heard since COVID appeared is that everyone must be isolated, masked up and vaccinated as a condition to be accepted back into society.
Government officials have made it clear that those who don’t respect government’s illegal confinement, mask-wearing and vaccine mandates will be permanently banned from society as we know it. No, they won’t be imprisoned per se; at least not for now, but they will indeed be prohibited from accessing basic services such as buying groceries, receiving medical attention, working, traveling and visiting government buildings.
Despite science being clear that masks do not protect people from getting infected with COVID, governments and private businesses continue to demand that people wear them. Although science proves that lockdowns do not correlate with fewer infections or deaths related to COVID, governments continue to impose lockdown policies on citizens, limiting their constitutional right to freely move within the boundaries of their country.
The only result of lockdowns is unemployment and poverty
Understanding the failure of lockdowns is relevant because it is demonstrated that being confined in place not only does not prevent infection, but that it actually increases the number of COVID cases.
According to the American Institute of Economic Research (AIER), lockdowns do not control the spread of COVID. In fact, the use of universal lockdowns is a science experiment with humans used as lab rats.
“There is no relationship between lockdowns and virus control,” states the AIER. All there is to support the idea that lockdowns work is bad data and outliers. Given the fact that complete and permanent lockdowns have no precedent anywhere, it is government’s resposibility to hold the burden of proof when it comes to illegally obligating people to stay home under their beds. However, governments have not only not shown proof that lockdowns work, but they have used them to control free movement for the sake of power grabbing.
As in the case of climate change, the case for COVID lockdows is based on “dire computer-generated forecasts derived from empirically untested models,” says the AIER. The result of such models are far from real outcomes. On the other hand, common sense supported by the numbers shown by anti-lockdown studies, are “evidence-based, robust, and thorough, grappling with the data we have”.
History shows that humans possess a very limited control over viruses, unless they experiment with these pathogens in a lab. Fear and coercion, two strategies used by government to lock us down, make us wear masks and get vaccinated, are not real strategies for managing viruses, but they are great to get complete control over society.
Intelligent decision-making and therapeutic treatments are much better helpers, but again, over the last 15 months, governments have all but censored alternative therapies to fight COVID. From Hydroxichloroquine to Ivermectine, used by hundreds of doctors to prevent COVID infection and treatment, were dismissed as dangerous, while mRNA experimental vaccines were celebrated as acceptable.
According to a study by Rabail Chaudhry, George Dranitsaris, Talha Mubashir, Justyna Bartoszko and Sheila Riazi, “Full lockdowns and wide-spread COVID-19 testing were not associated with reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality.”
Another study by by Christof Kuhbandner, Stefan Homburg, Harald Walach, Stefan Hockertz, from June 2020, proves that in Germany the spread of the coronavirus in Germany receded autonomously, before any interventions became effective. Not only that, this study also proved that only a maximum of 17% to 20% of the population needs to be infected with the virus to reach herd immunity.
This fact is completely different to what governments have said about mass infection. They claimed that at least 70% of people were required to be protected from COVID, either via natural immunity or vaccines, to reach herd immunity. Later government officials claimed that only vaccines could offer the kind of her immunity necessary to go back to normal.
A third study from April 2020 by Matthias an der Heiden, Osamah Hamouda, explains that “not all infected people develop symptoms, not all those who develop symptoms go to a doctor’s office, not all who go to the doctor are tested and not all who test positive are also recorded in a data collection system”, which basically means that total COVID infection numbers are dramatically overblown to instill fear among people, especially the most vulnerable.
A fourth study by Simon N. Wood from Cornell University, “a Bayesian inverse problem approach applied to UK data on COVID-19 deaths and the disease duration distribution suggests that infections were in decline before full UK lockdown (24 March 2020), and that infections in Sweden started to decline only a day or two later,” further confirming that lockdowns are not responsible for lesser COVID incidence.
A fifth study from June 2020 by Stefan Homburg and Christof Kuhbandner details that “the United Kingdom’s lockdown was both superfluous and ineffective.”
Perhaps the most shocking of all studies is that of Professor Ben Israel’s analysis of virus transmission.
Back in April 16, 2020, he explained that:
“Some may claim that the decline in the number of additional patients every day is a result of the tight lockdown imposed by the government and health authorities. Examining the data of different countries around the world casts a heavy question mark on the above statement. It turns out that a similar pattern – rapid increase in infections that reaches a peak in the sixth week and declines from the eighth week – is common to all countries in which the disease was discovered, regardless of their response policies: some imposed a severe and immediate lockdown that included not only ‘social distancing’ and banning crowding, but also shutout of economy (like Israel); some ‘ignored’ the infection and continued almost a normal life (such as Taiwan, Korea or Sweden), and some initially adopted a lenient policy but soon reversed to a complete lockdown (such as Italy or the State of New York). Nonetheless, the data shows similar time constants amongst all these countries in regard to the initial rapid growth and the decline of the disease.”
On this link, you can ready tens of other studies that prove that lockdowns are an inefficient way to end infection, a disruptive practice that wreaks havoc on society and a violent impulse carried out by politicians, bureaucrats and medical establishment buffoons to cling to power.
Mask mandates’ inefficacy in COVID containment
In the same way that lockdowns were imposed and continue to be forced on populations, mask mandates are still tormenting millions of people worldwide.
Similarly to what happens with lockdowns, science tells us a very different story when it comes to masking up and a masks’ ability to prevent COVID infection.
According to a study by Damian D. Guerra and Daniel J. Guerra, the number of COVID cases did not significantly increase in populations where masks were not worn, compared to those where masks were always worn.
“Case growth was not significantly different between mandate and non-mandate states at low or high transmission rates, and surges were equivocal.”
Both government health agencies and the media have been telling us for the best part of the last 16 months that mask use significantly reduced COVID infection, but they have never bothered to prove it. In fact, when scientific observation is brought to the forefront, mask wearing not only does not protect people from COVID, but it also raises the risk of getting ill from other sources such as bacteria that accumulate in mask fabric.
“Growth in positive COVID cases were comparable between states in the first and last mask use quintiles adjusted for normalized total cases early in the pandemic and unadjusted after peak Fall-Winter infections,” the study explains.
Indeed, authors of the study explain, “Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges. Containment requires future research and implementation of existing efficacious strategies.”
This study, funded by the University of Louisville College of Arts and Sciences, was published on May 18 2021 but has seen little to no coverage from mainstream media. The study has not garnered government attention either, as it shatters its official assumptions that masks help prevent COVID infection.
According to its authors, the study was carried out with publicly available information, and patient consent was obtained before conducting the analysis and publishing the findings.
Another study conducted in Denmark in November 2020 proved that masks do not stop the spread of COVID.
“The researchers found no statistically significant difference between mask wearers and bare-faced participants” and “the recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers.”
Just last March 5th, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention put out a report which recommends wearing masks, however, the report also says that “daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period,” which prompts people to ask why should anyone wear mask?
More reference studies often cited to justify mask wearing actually demonstrates conclusively that there is a clear relationship between mask use and protection against infection. This conclusion was reached by a study titled “The use of mask and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: A systematic review of the Scientific Evidence Respiratory Viruses 2012”.
Opposite from what common wisdom tells us, masks actually have the potential to cause disease, not to prevent it. In a recent article written by Neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock, he concludes that “Face Masks Pose Serious Risks to Health”.
In his article he affirms that “no studies have been done to demonstrate that either a cloth mask or the N95 mask has any effect on transmission of the COVID-19 virus.” Therefore, Blaylock says, any recommendations to do so are based on no conclusive evidence.
A study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine shows that mask wearing had little statistical significance when it comes to preventing infection. The conclusion was that:
“The recommendation to wear surgical masks to supplement other public health measures did not reduce the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate among wearers by more than 50% in a community with modest infection rates, some degree of social distancing, and uncommon general mask use. The data were compatible with lesser degrees of self-protection.”
The World Health Organization acknowledges that there is a lack of evidence that wearing masks protects healthy persons from COVID, yet, governments continue to mandate the use of cloth masks. Why?
Using N95 masks can cause significant hypoxia and hypercapnia, as well as significant reductions in blood oxygen. Researchers examined the blood oxygen levels in 53 surgeons using an oximeter. They measured blood oxygenation before surgery as well as at the end of surgeries. They found that the mask reduced the blood oxygen levels. The longer the duration of wearing the mask, the greater the fall in blood oxygen levels.
A drop in oxygen levels is associated with an impairment in immunity. Hypoxia can inhibit the type of main immune cells used to fight viral infections. Hypoxia increases the level of a compound called hypoxia inducible factor-1 (HIF-1), which inhibits T-lymphocytes and stimulates a powerful immune inhibitor cell called the Tregs. Given this situation it is clear that wearing a mask sets people up for contracting infection, not to prevent it. In sum, mask wearing puts people at an increased risk of infections.
According to Blaylock’s article, cancer patients whose cancer has spread are at a higher risk from prolonged hypoxia as the cancer grows best in a microenvironment that is low in oxygen. Low oxygen causes inflammation, which promotes the growth, invasion and spread of cancer. Repeated episodes of hypoxia are a meaningful factor in atherosclerosis and increases all cardiovascular diseases.
If all of that does not prompt you to remove masks from your face and that of your children or elderly, there is another danger. A person infected with a virus, if wearing a mask on a regular basis, especially an N95 mask, will be constantly rebreathing the viruses, raising their concentrationin their bodies.
As scientific observation has proven, people who have the worst reactions to COVID have the highest concentrations of the virus, and the most common result of this high concentration is deadly cytokine storms.
This result takes us to the third crime being committed by governments against their people, which is forced vaccination. If a higher concentration of viruses causes cytokine storms and some COVID vaccines are injecting viruses -even attenuated ones- into people’s bodies, perhaps that explains why thousands of men and women are falling dead after receiving a COVID vaccine. As of May 6 2021, according to CDC numbers, around 4000 people have died in the US alone, after getting the COVID vaccine shots. There is no word on official statistics related to deaths recorded after people received their COVID shots in Europe, Latin America or Asia.
A total of 4000 people dead after receiving a COVID shot in a country of 300 million people seems like a small price to pay for social sanity and to go back to normal, unless of course you ask those who lost loved ones after they received the COVID vaccine.
The important point here is that whether you decide to lock yourself down under your bed, wear three masks while driving your car with the windows closed or taking a COVID vaccine, those should be decisions that you make on your own. Government does not have the power to compel people to do any of those things, and neither do you. It is illegal, unconstitutional and a violation of human rights to employ coercive measures to force people to stay confined, to limit free movement, to close businesses, to wear a mask or to vaccinate against their will. No matter whether you are pro all of those measures or against them, forcing anyone to do any of those things should be strongly opposed.