Video text/sources/more info...
The website smartairfilters.com, which sells such products and one could argue has a vested financial interest in promoting the following type of viewpoint, cites tests that concluded, quote...
3M industrial filters were able to capture over 95% of particles down to 0.007 micron. Given that news outlets have claimed surgical masks can’t capture nanoparticles, it’s particularly surprising that the surgical mask was able to capture 80% of the tiny particles.
N95 Masks and Surgical Masks Are Equally Effective
There’s scientific evidence finding that (1) masks prevent flu infection and (2) surgical masks prevent infection of viruses like the coronavirus (Covid-19), as well as more sophisticated N95 masks. End quote.
The tests alleging surgical masks capture very small particles are contradicted by official sources. If the tests purportedly showing otherwise are to be trusted even for the sake of argument, then it seems that the controlled test conditions are impossible in real world application despite the smart air filters retail site's claim to the contrary based on their testing of mask efficiency with a quote really expensive fit-test machine end quote. Controlled tests to back up the veracity of controlled tests is no way to go about combating droves of real world data that contradict the test results accuracy when it comes to anything but the artificial setting in which they were conducted. That is at best. At worst, the implication that the tests conducted were flawed in methodology or outright fabrications is demonstrably still on the table given the quantity and quality of contradictory info. Let's dig in starting with the aforementioned official sources.
"OSHA says these surgical masks don’t protect “against airborne transmissible infectious agents due to loose fit and lack of seal,” but they can “contain the wearer’s respiratory droplets.” Basically, these masks are meant to protect others from the person wearing it.
The FDA, however, states that surgical masks do stop the wearer from inhaling large particles from outside: “If worn properly, a surgical mask is meant to help block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter that may contain germs (viruses and bacteria), keeping it from reaching your mouth and nose.”
OSHA recommends surgical masks for dentists and other medical professionals who don’t work in sterile environments, but it doesn’t say how long the masks last. OSHA recommends surgical masks “be properly disposed of after use.”"
The mandating of officially ineffective masks can't possibly make people use the masks properly, which according to research only 1 in 8 people do. This led to the headline "We’re so bad at wearing face masks that we may as well not wear them."
A couple studies suggestive of one conclusion is one thing, but the gold standard of scientific literature is a white paper that takes a much more comprehensive look at an issue. This is done by evaluating a large volume of pertinent published scientific literature including the most recent research available. Keep in mind one of the studies used by the filter sales company website was from 2009 and is the most important concerning their conclusions. Luckily for this debate a white paper was just recently published in August 2020 by By Denis G. Rancourt, PhD entitled, “Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy.” In June an update was published by the River Cities' Reader news site, operational since 1993, which hosted the original white paper as well, this time titled, Still No Conclusive Evidence Justifying Mandatory Masks.
Rebuttals were allowed to be published alongside Rancourts work. After reviewing these debunking attempts, the publisher had this to say, quote:
"We received many submissions against and for Rancourt's paper. After reviewing the attempted refutations, we remain resolute in our original support for his conclusions. Not one proved Rancourt's analysis of the randomized controlled tests to be false or misleading. Nor did any of the attempted refutations answer or overcome any of Rancourt's concerns regarding potential harm from mandated mask wearing.However, in the spirit of open debate and sharing opposing views, we provide links to several of the submitted refutation efforts below. While some submitters resorted to unpersuasive ad hominem attacks on Rancourt, we stand by Rancourt's scientific and academic credentials, training, experience, and capabilities to provide the analysis and review of said RCT's." End Quote. Furthermore, surgical masks have been found ineffective and even detrimental in clinical settings by a undeniably substantial amount of scientific research.
Getting back to smart air filters retail site and their cited tests that showed quote Masks can filter particles as small as 0.007 microns – 10 times smaller than viruses, and much, much smaller than the PM2.5 cutoff. What’s more, they work surprisingly well, even while people are wearing them. Surgical masks don’t work as well as N95 masks, but they are cheaper and more readily available. This makes them useful alternatives when other masks aren’t available. End quote.
First off, the study cited for these claims, unlike their internally conducted mask fitting/leakage test, was independently conducted and can be found at clinicaltrials.gov, which includes this noteworthy disclaimer, quote: Listing a study on this site does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. The safety and scientific validity of a study listed on ClinicalTrials.gov is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. End quote.
We already demonstrated that real world research data flies in the face of these claims. Furthermore, anti-mask advocate JP Bernier had this to say, quote: two factors of the tests they did not mention is 1) duration of the test, and 2) humidity of the air being tested. My understanding is that both surgical and N95 masks are pretty effective (if sealed properly) for short durations. The medical being such that capture is in part due to electrostatic properties of the material, which becomes useless when saturated. The glaring problem, in mine and many other's opinions, is the nature of asymptomatic people's abilities to transmit the virus [at all]. What I would like to see is a test conducted on someone who tested positive, but is asymptomatic, and see how many "viruses" that person is blowing a) without a mask at all, and then b) with any one of these masks. Doug McKinney, a former firefighter/paramedic who studied biology-chemistry at Utah State University chimed in on the tests in question with this, quote:
Most tests on masks give a median size of particle. Not just what the smallest size can be. In other words you would also need to know the size coming through on the other side. Maybe most of the exhaust is over .3 microns and only a small percentage is not this making the masks look really good. Also viruses are not all equal in size so virus particles means what exactly? End quote.
Anti-mask proponent William Hathaway chimed in by noting issues that the authors of this pre-COVID study very likely couldn't have even imagined would be a factor in such a debate, stating quote: Let's assume the masks are somewhat effective. Where is the research on long term effects on health from extended wearing of masks. There is little to none because this has never been tried before or even thought of as a solution. The answer from the masker is doctors have been doing it forever so it has to be safe?They are ignoring the fact doctors in hospitals are working in a different controlled environment than somebody walking down the street. Mask debate researcher Ashelli Pond expanded upon this point, stating quote: doctors also do not wear them for long periods of time normally. The only time it's longer than 15 to 20 minutes is in surgery and that is a completely sterile environment with increased oxygen in the room. So that's 2 more factors they don't consider. I've also read several articles that state doctors and nurses are more prone to headaches, most likely due to mask wearing, than the average person.
And again, these very professionals have documented time and time again that masks don't benefit them or patients as commonly believed. Not to mention masks not allowing the sick to recover normally by expelling the virus, as well as the healthy weakening their immune systems by not being able to give it the normal practice it needs. Oxygen deprivation and breathing in one's own carbon dioxide is not healthy according to many professionals, especially the ones hip to the effects of 5G on oxygen molecules like Doctor Buttar of d r buttar dot com. However, medical doctors are not needed regarding the issue of our immune system needing training to function properly. No, for that it's best that we turn to the late great comedian George Carlin, who recently before he passed wisely stated that he didn't dismiss 9/11 conspiracy theories because, quote:“I always question the received reality, the consensus reality is often intentionally misleading.”
End quote.
Finally, an anti-mask facebook group participant, Janel Colohan, expressed more concerns that the pre-covid facemask proponents did not look into or likely even consider, given the unforeseen magnitude the facemask issue would evolve into, stating quote:My concern -and looking for someone with knowledge or specific data/information to address:There seems to be valid concerns with the chemicals in the products used to make the masks. Are they safe to literally be inhaling all day every day? Both cotton treated with pesticides in the fields and surgical type masks which are made from plastics such as polypropylene, logically seems very unhealthy to be breathing in. My “surgical” masks (which came straight from China) have a distinct and unpleasant smell right out of the package. And I don’t even have a great sense of smell.
end quote.
Indeed, there are such issues arising, but they are being largely omitted from debates on the overall facemask issue by the pro-mask side. One report entitled, "Reprocessing masks using toxic chemicals is not a solution"states, quote: Nurses at CHI facilities reported that respirators and face masks were being collected for reprocessing using ethylene oxide to decontaminate. The EPA has concluded that ethylene oxide is carcinogenic to humans and that exposure to ethylene oxide increases the risk of lymphoid cancer and, for females, breast cancer. End quote.
Reprocessing is perhaps preferable to reusing, another report put it succinctly enough in the header stating quote: Police in Thailand discover used face masks ‘being repackaged as new’ End quote.
Another danger along these lines resulted in the headline, Customs seize tainted face masks, four arrested, the report goes on to state, quote: Customs on Saturday arrested four people in charge of four pharmacies in Causeway Bay and Wan Chai in connection to the sale of contaminated face masks.
In view of a surge in the demand for face masks amid the coronavirus outbreak, officers had bought the protective products from different shops and sent 24 different brands to laboratories for tests.
The officers said the tests revealed the amount of bacteria in four brands of face masks had exceeded the permitted level. One of the products has contaminants more than ten times the acceptable limit, they said. End quote.
Still another headline sums up more issues, stating quote:
Japan's COVID-19 mask handout tainted by gripes over mould, stains, insects
Stateside such issues also can rear their ugly head, the headline reads, quote: Tennessee governor's free 'sock masks' treated with registered pesticide'I wouldn't wear one,' environmental expert says End quote.
Certainly there are other bad things taking place with all the different entities producing masks. There are going to be ones with unsafe ingredients or levels of chemicals or contaminants. Toxic Chinese goods is a well-established issue generally speaking. For those more terrified of the (not yet isolated and thus not conclusively proven new virus) than of toxic masks, then perhaps the issue of faulty protective equipment is more concerning, it has been reported that, quote: A growing list of foreign complaints about faulty medical gear and testing kits imported from China has upset Beijing’s designs. Within the last few weeks, scientists and health authorities in Spain, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Turkey and Britain have complained of faulty antigen or antibody coronavirus tests purchased from Chinese companies — in some cases, costing these governments millions of dollars.Georgia has canceled a contract with the Chinese company that sent flawed test kits to Spain, and Malaysia has opted to buy testing kits from South Korea instead of China because of the Chinese tests’ reported low accuracy rate.Last week, the Netherlands asked to return 600,000 face masks purchased from China that had inadequate filters and fit incorrectly. On Tuesday, Finland tested a shipment of personal protective equipment, or PPE, from China and found the items unsuitable for hospital use. Australian border officials have also reportedly seized 800,000 faulty or counterfeit masks from China.The problem is worse at home. On March 12, officials at a State Council news briefing announced that authorities had seized more than 80 million counterfeit or faulty masks and 370,000 defective or fake disinfectants and other anti-coronavirus products in the prior month alone. End quote.
And of course the possibility of the feared virus being the actual contaminant itself on masks is credibly looming when juxtaposed with all these aforementioned news items relating to mass mask mandate pitfalls.
Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) reportedly questioned whether his positive coronavirus test could have been linked to his face mask being contaminated in some way, stating quote:
"It's really ironic, because, you know, a lot of people have made a big deal out of me not wearing a mask a lot, but in the last week or two. I have worn a mask, more than I have in the whole last four months," he said. He then questioned whether that could have led to his positive test."But I can't help but wonder if my keeping a mask on and keeping it in place, that if I might have put some germs or some of the virus onto the mask and breathed it in - I don't know. End quote.
Him saying he doesn't know if his hypothetical scenario was the culprit, but he suspects the mask was somehow the culprit leaves open other possibilities and reused masks being marketed as new has been documented. The FERVENT authoritarian pro-mask crowd in government and the sheepish citizenry that act as their unpaid foot soldiers of tyranny will surely ignore altogether or pooh-pooh such a notion despite the factual basis for its plausibility. But that leaves us where we started. Overwhelming factual scientific evidence be damned if any info fits their case they will go with it. Anti-maskers is the insult they levy based on the presumed notion they are also correct about those they label anti vaxxers, who in reality often simply support safe and effective, additive free vaccines. Through and through they are worthy then of their counter derogatory term, that asserts with just cause that they are a bunch of insufferable mask holes.
Can Masks Capture Coronavirus Particles?
N95 Masks vs. Surgical Masks: Which Is Better at Preventing the Coronavirus?
Fact check: Are cloth masks safe? What does OSHA say?
Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy
Still No Conclusive Evidence Justifying Mandatory Masks
Reality Check | Why Face Masks Don’t Work, According To Science
So much debate over whether or not we should be wearing masks in order to fight COVlD but multiple scientific studies over the past decade have already settled this question. Not only do medical masks not prevent the spread of the virus, but a 1995 study proves that wearing a cloth mask can put you at greater risk for infection. Ben Swann breaks down the science.
https://truthinmedia.com/ Editor's Note: Some of these studies compare masks, but some of them are comparing masks to no masks including this section of one study: Continuous Respiratory Personal Protective Equipment Use vs No Respiratory Personal Protective Equipment. That study states "Two RCTs compared respiratory infection risk in HCWs wearing rPPE continuously to convenience-selected controls wearing no rPPE [24] or following routine care...Meta-analysis suggested a protective, but nonstatistically significant, effect against laboratory-confirmed viral infections
Update: @BenSwann_
·
Jul 23
New CDC and WHO Study Proves "No Evidence" Face Masks Prevent Virus
WORLD’S TOP EPIDEMIOLOGISTS: MASKS DON’T WORK!
To Mandate Face Masks; Sweden Says They Are ‘Pointless’ “There is no proven effectiveness”
We’re so bad at wearing face masks that we may as well not wear them
Something Everyone Needs to Know About Masks Right Now
https://www.factsnotmemes.com/articles/something-everyone-needs-to-know-about-masks-right-now/China Has a History of Selling Dangerous Products to U.S. Consumers
Reprocessing masks using toxic chemicals is not a solution -Nurses at CHI facilities reported that respirators and face masks were being collected for reprocessing using ethylene oxide to decontaminate. The EPA has concluded that ethylene oxide is carcinogenic to humans and that exposure to ethylene oxide increases the risk of lymphoid cancer and, for females, breast cancer.
Customs seize tainted face masks, four arrested - The officers said the tests revealed the amount of bacteria in four brands of face masks had exceeded the permitted level. One of the products has contaminants more than ten times the acceptable limit, they said.
Coronavirus: Police in Thailand discover used face masks ‘being re-packaged as new’
Japan's COVID-19 mask handout tainted by gripes over mould, stains, insects
Faulty masks. Flawed tests. China’s quality control problem in leading global COVID-19 fight
Gohmert blames mask for positive COVID-19 test
SWEDEN DIDN'T LOCKDOWN AND ARE DOING JUST FINE. LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT!
Debunking the Plandemic Movie Debunkers
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2020/05/debunking-plandemic-movie-debunkers.htmlDEBUNKED! Experts: 90 percent of US coronavirus deaths could have been avoided if measures taken just two weeks earlier - Two medical experts say issuing social distancing measures just two weeks earlier could have drastically changed the trajectory of coronavirus deaths in the United States.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/zABDvx9eiNkP/RACIST LEFTISTS ATTACK, MOCK DR. STELLA IMMANUEL OVER PASSION TO PROTECT HUMAN LIVES/FIGHT EVIL
https://www.bitchute.com/video/JtsPatYj9Sus/CENSORED Videos Cost Lives! Front Line Doctors Speak On Effectiveness Of Hydroxychloroquine
https://www.bitchute.com/video/dKqOgtbVlGyZ/THE UNCENSORED TRUTH ABOUT HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE
https://www.bitchute.com/video/HP0ZHyAgNeyR/BILL GATES FUNDED HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE STUDY SET UP TO FAIL BY NOT INCLUDING ZINC
https://www.bitchute.com/video/SK9EejSyJu8b/David Crowe: Scientists are detecting novel RNA in multiple patients with pneumonia-like conditions, and are assuming that the detection of RNA (which is believed to be wrapped in proteins to form an RNA virus, as coronaviruses are believed to be) is equivalent to isolation of the virus. It is not...
Plenty of Coronaviruses but no SARS-CoV2: February Study Finds no Evidence of COVID Virus, Still Holds True -
June 2020 Off Guardian Article Still Finds No Proof of SARS-CoV2I have discussed elsewhere how COVID fails Koch’s postulates. This recent June 2020 Off Guardian article Scientists Have Utterly Failed to Prove that the Coronavirus Fulfills Koch’s Postulates goes into greater depth as the authors claim they have “scoured the internet and found no proof that scientists have done the simple steps required to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 conclusively meets even one – never mind all — of the third postulate’s constituent parts.” They go on to state:
“Those parts are:
- isolation from a human patient’s cells of full-length novel-coronavirus DNA
- sequencing of the isolated DNA, then determining that the identical sequence is not present in any other virus, and next replicating or cloning the DNA to form a new copy of the virus
- injecting the new copy of the virus into a statistically significant number of living hosts (usually lab animals) and seeing whether those animals develop the discrete diagnostic symptoms associated with COVID-19 rather than developing the diagnostic symptoms of any other infection or disease.
A few scientists have claimed that some or all of the postulates have been fulfilled. Their papers have been given laudatory coverage by the media, public-health officials and politicians. The problem is that each of these papers falls apart on even cursory examination.”
Corona virus not yet isolated and proven - None of the papers referenced in this article have even attempted to purify the virus. And the word ‘isolation’ has been so debased by virologists it means nothing (e.g. adding impure materials to a cell culture and seeing cell death is ‘isolation’).
https://cairnsnews.org/2020/04/28/corona-virus-not-yet-isolated-and-proven/ COVID-19 has still not been isolated and thus proven to exist. Simple control experiments skipped in strange breach of normal protocol
JOE IMBRIANO WARNED IN 2018 THAT 5G SICKNESS WOULD BE BLAMED ON A VIRUS WITH ALL THE COVID SYMPTOMS!
Various anti-mask Facebook groups whose members contributed their thoughts on the smartairfilters.com arguments:
![](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,<svg height="330px" width="603px" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" version="1.1"/>)
