As Canada sees mask mandates implemented nationwide — despite not all areas being equally affected by the Wuhan flu, or the massive number of predicted deaths ever coming to fruition — there’s a lot of conflicting information on the risk versus benefit of masking the general public.
In 2013, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, whose slogan is “Evidence Driven,” published a review of relevant literature, which clearly states: “No evidence was found on the effectiveness of wearing surgical face masks to protect staff from infectious material in the operating room.” This is specific to sterile, air conditioned, environments.
Now imagine masking the general public, in all indoor spaces — regardless of sterility — and compound that with masking people outdoors in a heat wave.
Then, of course, we see the people who keep their masks in their pockets, purses or hanging from rearview mirrors; who pull them down to their chins; and constantly pull up the nose portion because it falls down. This is NOT sterile.
Meanwhile, the World Health Organization (WHO) confirm in their most recent report, posted June 5:
At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.
As it turns out, dentists have recently highlighted one of these harms. It’s called “mask mouth” and dentists claim that they’ve seen a 50 per cent increase in patients presenting with gum disease and oral decay — in patients who have never had issues before.
Now that dentists have started to sound alarm bells, the WHO has issued new guidance advising people against dental visits until “more is known” about the Wuhan flu. Of course, the WHO dental officer goes on to say:
The likelihood of COVID-19 being transmitted through aerosol, micro-particles or airborne particles … today I think is unknown, it’s open to question at least. This means that more research is needed.
The common theme with these health advisors and “public safety” mandates seems to be based on a lot of theories, unknowns and hypotheticals.
Why can’t we flip that switch and simply say we don’t know enough about the harms and risks of masking the general public, so we’re going to wait until more research is conducted before mandating a broad and far reaching policy with no end date?
Nope. Instead our unelected Public Health Overlords mandate something based on polling and not actual clinical evidence.
Where is the “health” in “public health”? So far, all I’m seeing is a narrative that has proven to be false in real time.