A scientific look at the mask fallacy – and why we’re told to wear them
By Daniel Bobinski – July 15, 2020
By Daniel Bobinski
Imagine a large grizzly bear is terrorizing your neighborhood. You have a powerful bear gun and potent bear spray that will make the bear go away or allow you to eliminate it if it attacks you. But your government tells you not to use those tools. Instead, they insist you camouflage yourself, hunker down, and hope the bear doesn’t get you.
That about sums up Covid-19 in America. We have powerful methods for getting rid of the virus if one gets a bad infection, but instead we’re told to wear masks and stay six feet apart. Oh, and no large gatherings, either – unless you’re protesting.
Let me first briefly discuss reliable tools for getting rid of a Covid infection, and then we’ll examine the efficacy of masks.
Tools for fighting a Covid infection
It is unfathomable to me the number of people who believe fear-mongering politicians and their media cohorts who convey the idea that catching Covid is a death sentence.
To quote Dr. Vladimir Zelenko of New York:
“COVID is very real. But if we treat it early and the right way, it’s nothing to fear. I saw early use of zinc, hydroxychloroquine, and azithromycin result in an over 99% survival rate in my COVID patients. Don’t let professional scaremongers dictate the narrative.”
The treatment Zelenko is talking about has become known as The Zelenko Protocol, which leads to a 100% survival rate in low-risk patients and a 99.3% survival rate in high-risk patients. What’s a high-risk patient? Zelenko says anyone age 60+ with symptoms and those under 60 with comorbidities or shortness of breath.
The protocol’s success comes from treating on clinical suspicion, which means not waiting for test results. If a high-risk person presents with symptoms, start the protocol right away so the infection doesn’t have time to get a strong foothold.
And what is the protocol? It’s a low-cost (usually $20) prescription.
- Hydroxychloroquine 200mg 2x/daily for 5 days
- Zinc sulfate 220mg 1x/daily for 5 days
- Azithromycin 500mg 1x/daily for 5 days
Another tool gaining attention is using a nebulizer for inhaling the corticosteroid Budesonide. Normally used for treating asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Budesonide inhaled through a nebulizer combined with zinc has produced a 100% Covid recovery rate for patients of Dr. Richard Bartlett of Midland, Texas. At least one hospital has cleared its ICU of Covid patients by using Bartlett’s protocol.
Bartlett wrote that he chose Budesonide over other corticosteroids because “it appears to block most of the cytokine storm inflammatory chemicals that Covid-19 triggers.” He also says, “100% of [his] patients appear to be symptom-free following a course of inhaled Budesonide therapy.” Bartlett has published a Case Study Report for people to review.
The Mask Fiasco
While many doctors across the country are using these protocols successfully, other doctors – and even some states – are refusing to shoot the bear. They just want us to use camouflage – to mask up and hope the virus doesn’t get us.
In ping pong-like fashion, we’ve heard conflicting stories on masks. We have video of Anthony Fauci telling us that masks are useless for preventing viral spread, and then we have video of Fauci telling us facial coverings will prevent the spread.
A little digging revealed a likely reason for this change of advice: Neither the CDC nor the W.H.O. suggest any Covid outpatient treatments. In other words, these agencies have zerosuggested treatments for Covid UNTIL an infected person lands in the hospital.
With this, one can understand why they started recommending masks. These organizations will make big bucks once vaccines come out, so it makes no sense for them to promote the Zelenko Protocol or Bartlett’s Nebulizer Protocol. Yet because these treatments have been successful against Covid, the powers that be had to do something.
Follow the money
If you’ll recall, back in March the coronavirus task force told us everyone would be exposed to the virus, but by closing non-essential businesses and staying home for two weeks, we would flatten the curve and not overwhelm our healthcare systems. Of course, we now know that was a bait and switch.
Here’s my translation of the 40,000-foot view:
- Big pharma and other organizations will make big bank on vaccines, so any competing treatment must be pooh-poohed.
- The CDC, W.H.O. and big pharma don’t have an outpatient treatment recommendation, but they still need to look like they’re doing something, so they changed their story on mask efficacy.
- By making masks mandatory, multiple psychological effects are engaged, such as (a) people believe non-mask wearers are spreading the infection and (b) if we’d all just obey the government, everything would get better.
- Which leads to, “Hurry, government – bring us a vaccine so we can go back to normal.” (see # 1)
Facts on mask efficacy
Until recently, the overwhelming percentage of doctors recommended against masks for anyone who wasn’t sick or caring for someone who was.
Consider that on May 21 of this year, the highly respected New England Journal of Medicine stated, “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.”
Consider the report by trauma & emergency physician Dr. Kelly Victory, who said, “[T]here’s no scientific justification for normal healthy people to be wearing masks.”
Okay, those are statements. What about studies?
As I dug for scientific articles both in favor of and against the wearing of masks (I really do strive to understand both sides of an issue), I came across a thorough meta-analysis of extant studies on mask efficacy. The work was conducted by Denis G. Rancourt, Ph.D, and by reading his paper, “Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to Covid-19 Social Policy,” you will save yourself hours of boring library research.
In an interview Rancourt did with Del Bigtree on The Highwire YouTube channel, Rancourt gave an overview of his research, saying:
“If you use only proper studies – randomized, controlled trials with verified outcomes – they all unambiguously say that there is no statistical evidence of a benefit in terms of reducing risk of getting a viral respiratory disease. They all say it.”
Rancourt also says the current narrative about wearing masks to prevent spreading Covid is simply “a river of talk, it’s a river of posturing, it’s a river of policy statements.” He says you can’t just ask people in a study if they had the sniffles last week. You have to determine if people really got sick.
“[I]f you look at those [studies],” Rancourt says, “and there have been many of them over the last decade, none of them show a statistically significant advantage to wearing a mask compared to not wearing a mask.”
For those who want to dig deeper, Rancourt’s article contains links to each randomized, controlled trial on mask efficacy, and it’s a recommended read.
Are there detriments to wearing masks?
Absolutely. Lower oxygen levels is one result. A 2006 study showed that reduction in blood oxygenation (hypoxia) and/or an elevation in blood C02 (hypercapnia) can create painful headaches for people required to wear masks all day. It should also be noted that people with asthma or hypotension are at a greater risk of stroke, cardiac arrest, or an irregular heartbeat when suffering from hypoxia.
Consider what Jennifer Cabrera, Editor of a Florida newspaper did. She says, “I sent a pulse oximeter to work with a 23-year-old man who works in an open kitchen over a grill.” Here were the readings throughout the day:
- Before shift: 99% O2
- After 3.5 hours of wearing a mask: 93% O2
- After 7 hours of wearing a mask (feeling dizzy): 88% O2
There’s also psychological trauma that can be triggered by mandatory masks. People who have been robbed at gunpoint by masked individuals are reporting traumatic reactions to masks, and women who have been sexually assaulted are reporting the same.
States and health care systems are creating their own crisis
The point to remember is all the properly conducted studies – randomized, controlled trials with verified outcomes – all say there is no statistical evidence of a benefit in terms of reducing risk of getting a viral respiratory disease.
But also remember the story about the bear. When weapons are available to fend off the bear but people are either ignorant about them or told not to use them, people die unnecessarily.
Health care workers wear masks around Covid patients all the time, and yet health care workers get infected. Tragically, some states have banned doctors from prescribing the Zelenko Protocol, and worse yet, some doctors don’t even know it exists. This is a travesty, because even health care workers are dying unnecessarily.
It makes zero sense to hide behind a mask when tools for fending off the bear are readily available – but aren’t being used.
Daniel Bobinski, M.Ed. is a certified behavioral analyst, best-selling author, columnist, corporate trainer, and keynote speaker. He’s also a veteran and a self-described Christian Libertarian who believes in the principles of free market capitalism – while standing firmly against crony capitalism.
Enjoying our content? Appreciate a daily dose of Actual JournalismTM?
Please consider becoming an UncoverDC supporter via PayPal.
- Daniel Bobinski
- Denis G. Rancourt
- Dr. Kelley Victory
- Dr. Richard Bartlett
- Dr. Vladimir Zelenko