Featured Image
Various face masksShutterstock

May 31, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — A new study has concluded that there is no correlation between mask mandates and slowing the spread of the coronavirus. Instead, the study published May 25 (but not yet peer-reviewed) pointed out that virus containment strategies need further research.

The study was completed by biology professor Damian D. Guerra from the University of Louisiana and Biochemistry professor Daniel J. Guerra. The study, which included the total number of cases in 50 states from March 2020 to March 2021, focused on the efficacy of wearing masks during major and smaller surges. The findings were identical.

The two professors found, “Mask mandates are not predictive of smaller or slower shifts from low to high case growth … Our main finding is that mask mandates and use are not associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 spread among US states. 80% of US states mandated masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mandates induced greater mask compliance but did not predict lower growth rates when community spread was low (minima) or high (maxima).”

“We infer that mask mandates likely did not affect COVID-19 case growth, as growth rates were similar on all days between actual or modelled issuance dates and 6 March 2021,” they continued.

Not only were masks found not to stop the spread of COVID, but the risks were not taken into consideration when the mandates were instituted.

The risks of wearing masks, the study noted, include:

  • Prolonged use of wearing a mask (more than four hours per day) promotes “facial alkalinisation and inadvertently encourages dehydration, which … can enhance barrier breakdown and bacterial infection risk.”
  • Masks “increase headaches and sweating and decrease cognitive precision.”
  • “By obscuring nonverbal communication, masks interfere with social learning in children.”
  • “Masks can distort verbal speech and remove visual cues to the detriment of individuals with hearing loss; clear face-shields improve visual integration, but there is a corresponding loss of sound quality.”

The only positive result of wearing masks, the researchers said, was that they “may promote social cohesion as rallying symbols during a pandemic.”

The study concluded that “further research is needed to better understand the risks of long-term daily mask use.”

This most recent study is only one of the many voices pointing to the problems associated with the use of masks.

In November 2020, a major study published by the Annals of Internal Medicine [that] found no statistically significant difference in COVID-19 cases between mask-wearers and non-mask-wearers.

The Danish randomized controlled trial was the first in the world to test for the efficacy of face masks to prevent wearers from contracting the coronavirus.

1.8% of those who were asked to wear masks were infected with the virus according to antibody testing, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), or hospital diagnosis, while 2.1% of the control group tested positive.

In March, Dr. Joseph Mercola reported on a recent online study published using data from Germany’s first registry recording the experience children are having wearing masks. Parents, doctors and others can enter their observations; the registry had recorded use by 20,353 people as of October 26, 2020.

The data on 25,930 mask-wearing children included 24 health issues. The report side effects like “irritability (60%), headache (53%), difficulty concentrating (50%), less happiness (49%), reluctance to go to school/kindergarten (44%), malaise (42%) impaired learning (38%) and drowsiness/fatigue (37%).”

Currently, according to a state by state update published by the AARP, 17 state governments within the U.S. still require masks to be worn by those who are not fully vaccinated.

“To date, 22 states that had orders broadly requiring residents to wear masks in public places have lifted them,” the update states. “Eleven states did not impose mask mandates at any point during the pandemic. Several states, including Florida, Texas, Arkansas and Iowa, have moved via legislation or executive to prevent cities, counties and school districts from instituting their own mask rules.”