This post was first published at Freenations and we re-publish with the author’s kind permission.


As the UK plans to make mask wearing compulsory in shops from 24th July it is clear that those countries which have since the beginning of the COVID 19 crisis made masks compulsory in public have, if anything, a far worse record on infections than the UK. I have looked at the patterns of infections in 12 countries which made masks compulsory from an early date during the crisis.

Venezuela: cases still rising in July

Israel: a big second wave started in early June and cases still rising

El Salvador: cases still rising in July

Cameroon: cases still rising in July

Argentina: cases still rising in July

Turkey, started in mid March, still 1000 cases a day

Cuba, very few cases and deaths

Colombia, cases still rising in July

Czech Rep, big second wave began late June

Slovakia, second rise in cases end June July

Austria, after big fall cases rising again in July

Poland daily cases have not declined since March


The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons report that:

A COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) particle is 0.125 micrometers (μm)

•A study evaluated 44 masks, respirators, and other materials with similar methods and small aerosols (0.08 and 0.22 µm).

•N95 FFR filter efficiency was greater than 95%.

•Medical masks – 55% efficiency

•General masks – 38% and

•Handkerchiefs – 2% (one layer) to 13% (four layers) efficiency.

• Conclusion: Wearing masks will not reduce SARS-CoV-2.

•N95 masks protect health care workers, but are not recommended for source control transmission.

•Surgical masks are better than cloth but not very efficient at preventing emissions from infected patients.

•Cloth masks will be ineffective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, whether worn as source control or as personal protective equipment (PPE).

“Masks may confuse that message and give people a false sense of security?”

The most effective masks – the N95 (also called FFP2) the US Government prevents from general sale so they are available to health workers. The British Government took a similar line but they are now available online in the UK.

Dr Denis Rancourt reviewed the scientific literature on wearing masks as a means of preventing COVID19.

There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.”

“It would be a paradox if masks and respirators worked, given what we know about viral respiratory diseases: The main transmission path is long-residence-time aerosol particles (< 2.5 μm), which are too fine to be blocked, and the minimum-infective-dose is smaller than one aerosol particle.”


The sight of one of the Government’s most senior medical adviser’s perpetually taking off and putting on his mask while giving evidence to a Select Committee makes a mockery of mask wearing. At the beginning of the crisis Government warned that we should not touch our faces – in case we had touched a surface which had been infected. Now we are to be ordered to repeatedly touch our masks which (if the Government is right about air born infection) will be full of virus particles!


The attempt to enforce the wearing of masks in shops will further cripple the high street (and its myriad shops employing millions of workers and family businesses). If the scientific sources supported the move the economic risk MIGHT be justified. But they do not. The very compulsion suggests a dangerous environment which will put off from normal commercial activity a populace already intimidated by hysterical politicians.

Indeed mask wearing may even make the chances of infection greater as the confined, warm, damp atmosphere created by the masks is an accelerator of the virus particles.

However one of the accepted dangers of spreading the virus is the circulation around a shop or office by means of air conditioning systems.

In air conditioned environment these large droplets may travel farther.

However, ventilation — even the opening of an entrance door and a small

window can dilute the number of small droplets to one half after 30 seconds.


At last even the Government is waking up to the possible fraud in compiling Covid deaths in the UK. This website suggested weeks ago that genuine deaths FROM Covid were probably less than 10% of the figures given by Public Health England and accepted by the Government.

The Former cabinet minister Sir John Redwood summarises the false nature of the Government’s COVID death statistics:

“…….. officials had been changing the basis of compiling the death figures, with each change designed to add numbers to the totals. I warned that it was probably leading to double counting, that anyone with Covid 19 symptoms could be put down as a Covid 19 death though they may have died of something else, and some were said to have CV 19 when there had been no test to prove that. A a death certificate could cite  CV 19 as part cause of death based on some CV 19 like symptoms with no test, whilst also citing another more likely cause of death as well. Without a test there is the possibility that people had misreported common colds, flu, catarrh or allergies  as well as something serious that killed them.”

It is generally now accepted that, as I have previously maintained on this website, there are

– deaths from (ie genuine direct COVID cause)

– deaths with (death by another cause but patient tested for COVID) and

– deaths because of COVID19 (deaths caused by those unable to get treatment because the COVID panic had shut their hospital to them or stopped their treatments)

– deaths from despair of the massive economic consequences – ie suicides

It may well be that the last three above will in the end outnumber the first!



Print Friendly, PDF & Email