“Within an established totalitarian regime the purpose of propaganda is not to persuade, much less to inform, but rather to humiliate. From this point of view, propaganda should not approximate the truth as closely as possible: on the contrary, it should do as much violence to it as possible. For by endlessly asserting what is patently untrue, by making such untruth ubiquitous and unavoidable, and finally by insisting that everyone publicly acquiesce in it, the regime displays its power and reduces individuals to nullities.” — Theodore Dalrymple
A recent study in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, an open access peer-reviewed scientific journal, took an in-depth look at the toxic hazards posed by wearing face masks during the 2020–2023 covid pandemic. Under the public health measures imposed by most government jurisdictions during those four years, “people around the world were forced to wear masks for large proportions of the day based on mandates and laws.”
The study, titled “Wearing face masks as a potential source for inhalation and oral uptake of inanimate toxins — A scoping review,” specifically looked at “the potential of face masks for the content and release of inanimate toxins.”
The scoping review focused on 24 separate studies that evaluated the content and/or release of toxins in 631 masks (273 surgical masks, 228 textile masks, and 130 N95 masks).
Sixty-three percent of the studies showed alarming results. They found high microplastics and nanoplastics release. Dangerous exceedances were also evidenced for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), xylene, acrolein, per-/polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and phthalates as well as for lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), antimony (Sb), and titanium dioxide (TiO2).
A chart that graphically illustrates the “toxic substances and classes that may be responsible for limit value exceedances with resulting potential life-shortening effects” can be found here:
The study’s authors emphasized that their sole focus was on “the direct human health risks resulting from direct absorption of possible toxins from the mask.” They acknowledged certain additional hazards that were not within the scope of this study:
- The risks of the “animate ecosystem” (e.g., bacteria and fungi accumulation associated with mask-wearing);
- The toxicological risks of inhaled CO2 from the mask dead space;
- Toxins that were regarded separately, because their mixture and interaction can contribute to a higher toxicity than can each substance on its own;
- Further risks of chemical reactions in the mask breathing zone, which are turned into “chemical reactors” at the entrance of the airways.
Note that this evaluation took into account only inanimate toxins. This means the overall harms from mask-wearing are likely even greater than cited here.
This most recent study brought the contentious topic of “face masks as a public health measure” back into the spotlight and reaffirmed our native intelligence—namely, that putting industrial material over our mouth and our nose when we breathe is not a good idea.
The unequivocal results of this study are not favorable for any public health official, politician, administrator, or bureaucrat who imposed mask mandates on employees, school children, and the public at large. Indeed, the study’s authors leave no wiggle room when they write:
“Undoubtedly, mask mandates during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic have been generating an additional source of potentially harmful exposition to toxins with health threatening and carcinogenic properties at population level with almost zero distance to the airways (predominantly oral inhalation route) and to the gastrointestinal tract.” [Emphasis added.]
“Moreover, from a toxicological point of view, concerning their potential risks of use, face mask obligations enforced by law 2020–2023 have been introduced without preceding comprehensive risk analyses and without regulatory provisions (as is common for various products). On top of that, there was and still is no empirical evidence for the effectiveness of the masks in limiting the spread of viruses in the general populace.” [Emphasis added.]
There are a number of other reasons besides health to be opposed to mandatory mask-wearing. Wearing face coverings has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects.
Historically, masks have been used to objectify human beings and have been used as symbols of ritual humiliation and submission.
Recently, for example, we witnessed how masks were used as tools of emotional blackmail when children were taught that wearing a mask displays evidence of their “social responsibility.” In fact, what they were really being taught was to obey unscientific appeals to authority.
The masking debate has never been about facts, data, science, or human kindness. Rather, mask mandates are meant to create a climate of fear and to induce people to voluntarily submit to coercion and to perceived power. Mandatory masks are nothing more than psychological training wheels for coercive measures — that is, politically motivated propaganda.
Covering a face, hiding a smile, and smothering laughter are denials of life.
Breath is life. A smile is life. Laughter is life.
Choose life.
