(Steve Watson) There is no proven effectiveness
Related Global Anger Builds As Elites Worldwide Break Quarantine Rules
by Steve Watson, July, 31st, 2020
The Netherlands has decided not to mandate the wearing of face masks in public, citing the fact that there is no scientific evidence to suggest they are effective against the spread of the coronavirus.
Stillness in the Storm Editor: Why did we post this?
The news is important to all people because it is where we come to know new things about the world, which leads to the development of more life goals that lead to life wisdom. The news also serves as a social connection tool, as we tend to relate to those who know about and believe the things we do. With the power of an open truth-seeking mind in hand, the individual can grow wise and the collective can prosper.
– Justin
Not sure how to make sense of this? Want to learn how to discern like a pro? Read this essential guide to discernment, analysis of claims, and understanding the truth in a world of deception: 4 Key Steps of Discernment – Advanced Truth-Seeking Tools.
Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Send an email to [email protected], with the error and suggested correction, along with the headline and url. Do you think this article needs an update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at [email protected]. Thank you for reading.
Source:
Medical mask filter particles that are three microns or larger. Viruses are five to three-hundred nanometers. Another words, electron microscope tiny. Wearing a mask to filter out viruses is akin to using a chain-link fence to block mosquitoes.
As a Dutchie I’m sorry to inform you that non-medical face masks are already mandatory in all forms of public transport in The Netherlands, which has been a political choice, not a health related one.
The masks have also recently become an experiment for the mayors of the larger cities in The Netherlands to make them mandatory in busy spots like marketplaces.
Not because of health reasons, because these things are of no value for preventing getting infected, says this Minister for Medical Care Tamara van Ark (by the way: hardly anyone in The Netherlands even knows she and her ministry exist) , but to influence our behaviour. She really states this, out in the open! And without explaining why it is necessary to do so.
I don’t need a face mask: I’m baffled already!
Thanks for the update from the frontline. Helps to have in person eyes on this.
There may not be “scientific” evidence that masks can be effective, but let’s look at them from a common sense viewpoint.
In the normal process of speaking, humans occasionally discharge saliva droplets into the air around them. These droplets float around until they evaporate or until they land somewhere.
If that “somewhere” happens to be on somebody else’s mucus membrane, AND if the droplet contains an active pathogen, the pathogen can be absorbed by the recipient, raising the possibility that the recipient incurs disease.
It’s not gonna happen all the time, but it is a risk.
In humans, mucus membranes are normally covered by clothing, except for those in the mouth, nose and eyes.
Masks protect the mouth and nose. Eyes can be protected by glasses.
They’re not foolproof, but they make it harder to transmit a disease.
Fair points in that I can tell you’re honestly sharing them but I think there’s more to it. If I may offer my own thoughts, from a “common sense” perspective.
The scientific view is a “commonsense view” if science is done right. All the research I’ve seen, that is valid, and not all of it is for sure, says that masks don’t offer perfect protection from vapor and moisture discharged from the nose and mouth, even if one is wearing an N-95 mask. And most other masks barely offer any protection at all. Thus the benefit is moderate even in best-case scenarios, with no benefit at all in the worst case. At the same time, any mask restricts airflow and causes a build-up of CO2 in the body, forcing the autonomic nervous system to overcompensate, leading to respiration issues, impaired kidney function, headaches, increased heart rate, and blood pressure, and lowered blood PH levels, known to increase diseases and feed cancers. Mind you, all of this for a virus that only affects the most immunocompromised with a mortality rate of.025%, less deadly than the yearly flu).
What the mask does do is make people fear better who have an irrational fear, given the science that is acknowledged even by the mainstream, at the cost of increasing fear and anxiety due to lack of seeing facial features, which has been proven psychologically and neurologically to increase anxiety due to an inability to perceive emotive facial movements (the same situation that causes a mental illness with infants and children who are neglected or abused, causing with life long mental problems as adults). Remember, most of the communication is emotive (non-verbal) and is directly related to perceiving one’s sense of social acceptance and gauging authenticity. Thus the lack of seeing faces causes emotional distress, whether you realize it or not.
While I respect a person who askes me to wear a mask (in a private space they are in ownership of, either a home or a business), and I will honor their free will rights. I do think as a national policy, and in the arena of a general discussion of practicality and principle, I don’t think a) masks are effective, b) is far more damaging physically and psychologically than not wearing them, and c) and aren’t called for given that even if we weren’t wearing masks at all, only a very small population of people would even be at risk (the immune-compromised). What’s more, consider that there are far more proven and damaging health risks we don’t make the same sweeping measures to deal with, like second-hand smoke or the seasonal flu. Why the radical shift in policy when there are far more risker issues than COVID-19?
Personally, I don’t want to submit to an unscientific, irrationally, emotionally driven “go along because it makes people feel better” position on this issue. This is the same kind of logic (go along to make people feel better, even though it’s scientifically and ethically wrong) that has historically caused untold suffering and hardship (e.g. the extermination of millions of “undesirables” {completely on an unscientific basis} because it made people feel better, to cite an extreme example}).
So there’s my sense of the situation, for what it’s worth.
the