Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science

Adobe Stock
Please Share This Story!
Print this article and hand it to frightened mask wearers who have believed the alarmist media, politicians and Technocrats in white coats. Masks are proven ineffective against coronavirus and potentially harmful to healthy people and those with pre-existing conditions.

My wife and I dined out last night in a very empty restaurant and the young waitress was required to wear a cloth mask. I asked her how she was doing with the mask and if there were any side effects. She related that was consistently short of breath (when away from the table, she lowered the mask below her nose) and that she had actually passed out because of it a few days earlier, taking her straight to the floor. Fortunately, she was not hurt. ⁃ TN Editor

At this writing, there is a recent surge in widespread use by the public of facemasks when in public places, including for extended periods of time, in the United States as well as in other countries.   The public has been instructed by media and their governments that one’s use of masks, even if not sick, may prevent others from being infected with SARS-CoV-2, the infectious agent of COVID-19.

A review of the peer-reviewed medical literature examines impacts on human health, both immunological, as well as physiological.  The purpose of this paper is to examine data regarding the effectiveness of facemasks, as well as safety data.  The reason that both are examined in one paper is that for the general public as a whole, as well as for every individual, a risk-benefit analysis is necessary to guide decisions on if and when to wear a mask.

Are masks effective at preventing transmission of respiratory pathogens?

In this meta-analysis, face masks were found to have no detectable effect against transmission of viral infections. (1)  It found: “Compared to no masks, there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases or influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”

This 2020 meta-analysis found that evidence from randomized controlled trials of face masks did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility. (2)

Another recent review found that masks had no effect specifically against Covid-19, although facemask use seemed linked to, in 3 of 31 studies, “very slightly reduced” odds of developing influenza-like illness. (3)

This 2019 study of 2862 participants showed that both N95 respirators and surgical masks “resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory confirmed influenza.” (4)

This 2016 meta-analysis found that both randomized controlled trials and observational studies of N95 respirators and surgical masks used by healthcare workers did not show benefit against transmission of acute respiratory infections.  It was also found that acute respiratory infection transmission “may have occurred via contamination of provided respiratory protective equipment during storage and reuse of masks and respirators throughout the workday.” (5)

A 2011 meta-analysis of 17 studies regarding masks and effect on transmission of influenza found that “none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.” (6)  However, authors speculated that effectiveness of masks may be linked to early, consistent and correct usage.

Face mask use was likewise found to be not protective against the common cold, compared to controls without face masks among healthcare workers. (7)

Airflow around masks

Masks have been assumed to be effective in obstructing forward travel of viral particles.  Considering those positioned next to or behind a mask wearer, there have been farther transmission of virus-laden fluid particles from masked individuals than from unmasked individuals, by means of “several leakage jets, including intense backward and downwards jets that may present major hazards,” and a “potentially dangerous leakage jet of up to several meters.”  (8) All masks were thought to reduce forward airflow by 90% or more over wearing no mask.  However, Schlieren imaging showed that both surgical masks and cloth masks had farther brow jets (unfiltered upward airflow past eyebrows) than not wearing any mask at all, 182 mm and 203 mm respectively, vs none discernible with no mask.  Backward unfiltered airflow was found to be strong with all masks compared to not masking.

For both N95 and surgical masks, it was found that expelled particles from 0.03 to 1 micron were deflected around the edges of each mask, and that there was measurable penetration of particles through the filter of each mask. (9)

Penetration through masks

A study of 44 mask brands found mean 35.6% penetration (+ 34.7%).  Most medical masks had over 20% penetration, while “general masks and handkerchiefs had no protective function in terms of the aerosol filtration efficiency.”  The study found that “Medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs were found to provide little protection against respiratory aerosols.” (10)

It may be helpful to remember that an aerosol is a colloidal suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas.  In respiration, the relevant aerosol is the suspension of bacterial or viral particles in inhaled or exhaled breath.

In another study, penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. (11)

N95 respirators

Honeywell is a manufacturer of N95 respirators.  These are made with a 0.3 micron filter. (12)  N95 respirators are so named, because 95% of particles having a diameter of 0.3 microns are filtered by the mask forward of the wearer, by use of an electrostatic mechanism. Coronaviruses are approximately 0.125 microns in diameter.

This meta-analysis found that N95 respirators did not provide superior protection to facemasks against viral infections or influenza-like infections. (13)  This study did find superior protection by N95 respirators when they were fit-tested compared to surgical masks. (14)

This study found that 624 out of 714 people wearing N95 masks left visible gaps when putting on their own masks. (15)

Surgical masks

This study found that surgical masks offered no protection at all against influenza. (16) Another study found that surgical masks had about 85% penetration ratio of aerosolized inactivated influenza particles and about 90% of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria, although S aureus particles were about 6x the diameter of influenza particles. (17)

Use of masks in surgery were found to slightly increase incidence of infection over not masking in a study of 3,088 surgeries. (18)  The surgeons’ masks were found to give no protective effect to the patients.

Other studies found no difference in wound infection rates with and without surgical masks. (19) (20)

This study found that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.” (21)

This study found that medical masks have a wide range of filtration efficiency, with most showing a 30% to 50% efficiency. (22)

Specifically, are surgical masks effective in stopping human transmission of coronaviruses?  Both experimental and control groups, masked and unmasked respectively, were found to “not shed detectable virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols.” (23) In that study, they “did not confirm the infectivity of coronavirus” as found in exhaled breath.

A study of aerosol penetration showed that two of the five surgical masks studied had 51% to 89% penetration of polydisperse aerosols.  (24)

In another study, that observed subjects while coughing, “neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS-CoV-2 during coughs by infected patients.”  And more viral particles were found on the outside than on the inside of masks tested. (25)

Cloth masks

Cloth masks were found to have low efficiency for blocking particles of 0.3 microns and smaller.  Aerosol penetration through the various cloth masks examined in this study were between 74 and 90%.  Likewise, the filtration efficiency of fabric materials was 3% to 33% (26)

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks were found to have 13 times the risk of influenza-like illness than those wearing medical masks. (27)

This 1920 analysis of cloth mask use during the 1918 pandemic examines the failure of masks to impede or stop flu transmission at that time, and concluded that the number of layers of fabric required to prevent pathogen penetration would have required a suffocating number of layers, and could not be used for that reason, as well as the problem of leakage vents around the edges of cloth masks. (28)

Masks against Covid-19

The New England Journal of Medicine editorial on the topic of mask use versus Covid-19 assesses the matter as follows:

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection.  Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes).  The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal.  In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.” (29)

Are masks safe?

During walking or other exercise

Surgical mask wearers had significantly increased dyspnea after a 6-minute walk than non-mask wearers. (30)

Researchers are concerned about possible burden of facemasks during physical activity on pulmonary, circulatory and immune systems, due to oxygen reduction and air trapping reducing substantial carbon dioxide exchange.  As a result of hypercapnia, there may be cardiac overload, renal overload, and a shift to metabolic acidosis. (31)

Risks of N95 respirators

Pregnant healthcare workers were found to have a loss in volume of oxygen consumption by 13.8% compared to controls when wearing N95 respirators.  17.7% less carbon dioxide was exhaled. (32)  Patients with end-stage renal disease were studied during use of N95 respirators.  Their partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) decreased significantly compared to controls and increased respiratory adverse effects. (33)   19% of the patients developed various degrees of hypoxemia while wearing the masks.

Healthcare workers’ N95 respirators were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor influenza virus. (34)  And 25% of healthcare workers’ facepiece respirators were found to contain influenza in an emergency department during the 2015 flu season. (35)

Risks of surgical masks

Healthcare workers’ surgical masks also were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor for influenza virus. (36)

Various respiratory pathogens were found on the outer surface of used medical masks, which could result in self-contamination.  The risk was found to be higher with longer duration of mask use. (37)

Surgical masks were also found to be a repository of bacterial contamination.  The source of the bacteria was determined to be the body surface of the surgeons, rather than the operating room environment. (38)  Given that surgeons are gowned from head to foot for surgery, this finding should be especially concerning for laypeople who wear masks.  Without the protective garb of surgeons, laypeople generally have even more exposed body surface to serve as a source for bacteria to collect on their masks.

Risks of cloth masks

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks had significantly higher rates of influenza-like illness after four weeks of continuous on-the-job use, when compared to controls. (39)

The increased rate of infection in mask-wearers may be due to a weakening of immune function during mask use.  Surgeons have been found to have lower oxygen saturation after surgeries even as short as 30 minutes. (40)  Low oxygen induces hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF-1). (41)  This in turn down-regulates CD4+ T-cells.  CD4+ T-cells, in turn, are necessary for viral immunity. (42)

Weighing risks versus benefits of mask use

In the summer of 2020 the United States is experiencing a surge of popular mask use, which is frequently promoted by the media, political leaders and celebrities.  Homemade and store-bought cloth masks and surgical masks or N95 masks are being used by the public especially when entering stores and other publicly accessible buildings.  Sometimes bandanas or scarves are used.  The use of face masks, whether cloth, surgical or N95, creates a poor obstacle to aerosolized pathogens as we can see from the meta-analyses and other studies in this paper, allowing both transmission of aerosolized pathogens to others in various directions, as well as self-contamination.

It must also be considered that masks impede the necessary volume of air intake required for adequate oxygen exchange, which results in observed physiological effects that may be undesirable.  Even 6- minute walks, let alone more strenuous activity, resulted in dyspnea.  The volume of unobstructed oxygen in a typical breath is about 100 ml, used for normal physiological processes.  100 ml O2 greatly exceeds the volume of a pathogen required for transmission.

The foregoing data show that masks serve more as instruments of obstruction of normal breathing, rather than as effective barriers to pathogens. Therefore, masks should not be used by the general public, either by adults or children, and their limitations as prophylaxis against pathogens should also be considered in medical settings.


1  T Jefferson, M Jones, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 7.

2  J Xiao, E Shiu, et al. Nonpharmaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in non-healthcare settings – personal protective and environmental measures.  Centers for Disease Control. 26(5); 2020 May.

3  J Brainard, N Jones, et al. Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID19: A rapid systematic review.  MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 1.

4  L Radonovich M Simberkoff, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinic trial.  JAMA. 2019 Sep 3. 322(9): 824-833.

5  J Smith, C MacDougall. CMAJ. 2016 May 17. 188(8); 567-574.

6  F bin-Reza, V Lopez, et al. The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. 2012 Jul; 6(4): 257-267.

7  J Jacobs, S Ohde, et al.  Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial.  Am J Infect Control. 2009 Jun; 37(5): 417-419.

8  M Viola, B Peterson, et al. Face coverings, aerosol dispersion and mitigation of virus transmission risk.

9  S Grinshpun, H Haruta, et al. Performance of an N95 filtering facepiece particular respirator and a surgical mask during human breathing: two pathways for particle penetration. J Occup Env Hygiene. 2009; 6(10):593-603.

10 H Jung, J Kim, et al. Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 2013 Jun. 14:991-1002.

11  C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.  BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

12  N95 masks explained.

13  V Offeddu, C Yung, et al. Effectiveness of masks and respirators against infections in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.  Clin Inf Dis. 65(11), 2017 Dec 1; 1934-1942.

14  C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.

15  M Walker. Study casts doubt on N95 masks for the public. MedPage Today. 2020 May 20.

16  C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.

17  N Shimasaki, A Okaue, et al. Comparison of the filter efficiency of medical nonwoven fabrics against three different microbe aerosols. Biocontrol Sci.  2018; 23(2). 61-69.

18  T Tunevall. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: A controlled study. World J Surg. 1991 May; 15: 383-387.

19  N Orr. Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre? Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 1981: 63: 390-392.

20  N Mitchell, S Hunt. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms – a costly and unnecessary ritual?  J Hosp Infection. 18(3); 1991 Jul 1. 239-242.

21  C DaZhou, P Sivathondan, et al. Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery.  JR Soc Med. 2015 Jun; 108(6): 223-228.

22  L Brosseau, M Sietsema. Commentary: Masks for all for Covid-19 not based on sound data. U Minn Ctr Inf Dis Res Pol. 2020 Apr 1.

23  N Leung, D Chu, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks Nature Research.  2020 Mar 7. 26,676-680 (2020).

24  S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.

25  S Bae, M Kim, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: A controlled comparison in 4 patients.  Ann Int Med. 2020 Apr 6.

26  S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.

27  C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.  BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

28  W Kellogg. An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks. Am J Pub Health. 1920.  34-42.

29  M Klompas, C Morris, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the Covid-19 era. N Eng J Med. 2020; 382 e63.

30  E Person, C Lemercier et al.  Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance.  Rev Mal Respir. 2018 Mar; 35(3):264-268.

31  B Chandrasekaran, S Fernandes.  Exercise with facemask; are we handling a devil’s sword – a physiological hypothesis. Med Hypothese. 2020 Jun 22. 144:110002.

32  P Shuang Ye Tong, A Sugam Kale, et al.  Respiratory consequences of N95-type mask usage in pregnant healthcare workers – A controlled clinical study.  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015 Nov 16; 4:48.

33  T Kao, K Huang, et al. The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease.  J Formos Med Assoc. 2004 Aug; 103(8):624-628.

34  F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods.  2018 Oct; 260:98-106.

35  A Rule, O Apau, et al. Healthcare personnel exposure in an emergency department during influenza season.  PLoS One. 2018 Aug 31; 13(8): e0203223.

36  F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods.  2018 Oct; 260:98-106.

37  A Chughtai, S Stelzer-Braid, et al.  Contamination by respiratory viruses on our surface of medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers.  BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3; 19(1): 491.

38  L Zhiqing, C Yongyun, et al. J Orthop Translat. 2018 Jun 27; 14:57-62.

39  C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers.  BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)

40  A Beder, U Buyukkocak, et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery. Neurocirugia. 2008; 19: 121-126.

41  D Lukashev, B Klebanov, et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha and its activation-inducible short isoform negatively regulate functions of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol. 2006 Oct 15; 177(8) 4962-4965.

42  A Sant, A McMichael. Revealing the role of CD4+ T-cells in viral immunity.  J Exper Med. 2012 Jun 30; 209(8):1391-1395.

Read full story here…

Join our mailing list!

Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sharon W.

Unfortunately, in Ohio, if we want to keep our jobs, employees must mask up. I definitely have increased upper respiratory issues after wearing one for a few hours. I look for opportunities to lower below my nose. I need to breathe. Today, I drove to another county to get groceries because my county is at Level 3, Code Red, [Mandatory masks in public places]. Yep, our Governor has developed a color-coded event level alert system. I worked at a Nuclear Power Facility for 8 years and if there was a REAL Level 3 threat or especially Level 4, there would… Read more »


When you get the chance. Visit eBay or Amazon and get you some face shields. My job mandates that I wear a mask at work too. Don’t think I would have it would have lasted 3 months wearing the typical face mask.

At times, the face shield gets a little warm on the forehead. I try not to think about it too much so it doesn’t bother me too much. With my face shield I can breath without struggling. And have the luxury of breathing in fresh air.

Andy Pannafino

A complete waste


you are a jerk. You are being brainwashed, un-informed, mis-informed, manipulated and lied to. Get educated and stop being ignorent!!


For weeks when I got up some type of strength (depression and nonstop crying due to I had been told I have no job) to go out and get something I needed. I could not understand why I felt the way I did when I was at the store, it was as if I could not breath or that something was going to happen to me. It was not until a week or so ago that it was the dog muzzle they are forcing me to wear that was interfering with my breathing. I have sensitive sinus issues and should… Read more »


Pathetic sheep.

Joel Peralez

Amen…nothing but a FARCE…!

Rob Ert

Call OSHA and complain.


Your health or your job? leave your job.


Finally some common sense. Since I have been able to conquer Lyme/Babesia with herbal tinctures [allergic to most antibiotics] I would add that you could wear Thieves Essentail Oil ;used by crooks to rob the dead during the black plague so they would not become ill. Aromatic herbs are powerful medicine; mixed with carrier oil like coconut, you will smell good ,moisturize and be safe! Especially since 59 types of hand sanitizer have been found to be toxic.


what herbal tinctures, i too have lyme

Joel Peralez

Let me know about the tinctures mentioned to


The article needs to be condensed and available in 1-2 pages, not the 18 it appears to be in Print Preview.

just sayin

All you need to do is copy and paste to Microsoft Word. I was able to print the entire article in 6 pages.


[…] ‘Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science‘ – Good summary of the evidence, or lack of it, concerning face coverings in Technocracy News and Trends […]

[…] Read More: Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science […]

[…] Read More: Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science […]


I think this mask game will continue until the end of time. When the the immunity passport (the microchip vaccine) and ID2020 type schemes are implemented. I suspect that individuals who participate in these schemes, will not be mandated to wear masks outside of certain work environments. No doubt in my mind that schemes such as the immunity passport, chip loaded vaccines, and digital currency are all leading up to the mark of the beast. It’s been said that a strain of coronavirus is found in the common cold. So it’s logical for me to assume that everyone has or… Read more »

Dan Roley

I am positioned to move to Mozambique for social work w Children link to hiv aids med damage.
I will say_ why are the Panic Stricken unconcerned about CHILDREN ?
not common for kids to get_ covid19 _
And 90 % of the crybabies re death by Covid19 are CHILDLESS ?
mozambique here I come.

Danuta Suchta

I think the same way


[…] Read more Masks are not really Deffective Or Safe […]

[…] A 2011 meta-analysis of 17 studies regarding masks and effect on transmission of influenza found that “none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.” (6) However, authors speculated that effectiveness of masks may be linked to early, consistent and correct usage. Face mask use was likewise found to be not protective against the common cold, compared to controls without face masks among healthcare workers. […]


It is this type of misinformation that endangers those individuals who can ill afford to be exposed to a life threatening virus. Not sure what you hope to gain from this “article.” What I do know is that cognitively challenged individuals will read it and they say “yah, that’s what I thought.” As if the individuals agreeing actually thought.

Patrick Wood

Maybe that cognitively-challenged individual is you.


Multiple scientific studies with citations hardly constitutes misinformation. Maybe the people that are misinformed are the ones that spout the media line and then give “#science” as their sole citation.

Bob Smith

Try looking at the Conclusion in the abstract of citation (1). The conclusion is that there isn’t enough evidence among controlled studies and they recommend wearing masks based on observation evidence of SARS-1. The exact opposite of what this article claims. Many of the other citations do NOT support the claims the author is making, and adding citations with cherry-picked quotations without important context IS misinformation.

Patrick Wood

Bob Smith, if that is your real name, you are trolling this thread. Instead of nitpicking on Huber’s article, bring forth your own proof that masks are safe and effective.

Bob Smith

Hi Patrick. My brother is a dentist. He and his hygeinists wear masks pretty much all day at work while working on patients – it’s actually the law and has been a long time in that profession. It seems like they are all doing fine, so as far as safety goes, I think it’s odd to think that it’s a threat to health (or to be more nuanced, to think that the TRADE-OFF of wearing a mask to reduce transmission of coronavirus is outweighed by some supposed health risks that have not been proven (if you review Huber’s citations basically… Read more »

Patrick Wood

Nit-picking is not critical thinking. Let’s face it: You are in love with face masks and think everybody should wear them. Only a fool would think that man can control a virus regardless of the method. There have always been viruses and not one has ever been contained by the actions of man. So, wear your mask if you choose to do so. Go get your vaccines and pass the time of day nit-picking other expert’s material. I’ll say one thing for you, you are a very clever troll to attempt disrupt the common sense of our readers.


A dentist office is a temperature and humidity controlled environment. Work there is not strenuous compared to manufacturing, process, operations, maintenance, or construction industry work.

Strenuously working on a manufacturing floor in a non temperature controlled humid environment is absolutely not the same thing as the dentist office.

Just to be clear. Wearing a mask is a physical burden in those cases.

Bruce Wales

Well said. I am amazed when confronted with logic that stands, the unbeliever says, “Well, you can’t believe everything you read.”

Melanie Carr

Let’s get something straight: reading an abstract OR a conclusion does NOT count as reading the research. YES, I know that part in the middle with all the methods and outcomes can be grueling to read and boring but it’s what counts for reading research. Then, you need to objectively consider if there is bias, and how well the study was put together. Is it reproducible, etc. Research doesn’t “prove” anything, and the conclusion of research always (more the rule than the exception) recommends more research on the topic. Aside from analyzing the research itself, it should also be used… Read more »



jo narg

Have you actually read any of the papers quoted? Most suggest masks do add to protection.

Mark Bailey

WHERE IS YOUR INFOR MMOOREBLUES? Wheres your tests, please footnote what you post so we can read the tests and lab reports like this article does.


Did you read the studies cited in the article? Here is an excerpt from the first one:

“transmission should be reduced the most if both infected members and other contacts wear masks,”

Charmagne Kubany

And here is an excerpt from the CDC link in the article: Meta-analysis of risk ratios for the effect of face mask use with or without enhanced hand hygiene on laboratory-confirmed influenza from 10 randomized controlled trials with >6,500 participants. A) Face mask… In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I2 = 30%, p… Read more »

Bob Smith

And influenza is not the same virus, so you have to ask whether this study is applicable to coronavirus. Have you asked that? Have you looked for the answer to that question in the science that has been published SPECIFICALLY about coronavirus?


Because it depends on size. Masks are filters, and what matters is size, not the RNA in the virus or anything else. SARS-CoV-2 viruses are 9-12nm. This is much smaller than common bacteria, such as Escheriscia colli or Staphylococcus aureus, which can range from 400nm to 3µm. For comparison, influenza viruses are between 80-120nm in diameter, considerably larger than SARS-CoV-23 Therefore, any mask that cannot stop influenza virus is most certainly incapable of stopping COVID, and in fact masks that could stop flu may very well be incapable of blocking COVId.


Size is irrelevent. the virus does not travel as a single virion but would be contained within a airbourne liquid particle. The material of a mask may reduce the probably of that particle passing through. By how much is the question.


The virus is carried on droplets and the droplet size is trapped by the mask. The droplets are trapped and when trapped do not fall on surfaces where the virus can be viable from hours to days depending on the surface.

Steven Seward

The only trouble is that a mask is not a black hole that destroys everything that enters. It simply catches and holds water droplets containing viruses. After the water evaporates, the virus particles are freely expelled through the mask from the wearer’s exhalation and become aerosolized. Without a mask, the water droplets fall to the ground and are less likely to be inhaled. This might be why Covid infections are skyrocketing in nearly all places that have mask mandates.


Exactly my thoughts! Good grief, just wear the mask.

Patrick Wood

Why should you or the government have the right to force someone to harm themselves by wearing a mask and restricting their airway? What about all the people with COPD, asthma, congestive heart disease, diabetes, cancer, cystic fibrosis, emphysema, compromised immune systems, autism, Asperger syndrome, etc.? What about the elderly whose lungs already naturally weaken with age? Who cares about their health as long as it makes you feel safe, right?


If you are that sick (with one of the issues in your post) then stay at home. This garbage about masks not being useful is pure crap. With these attitudes everyone can expect to have the virus around for a very long time. We’ve been doing the wear a mask/don’t wear one for months and things keep getting worse. Do all of us a favor and put the damn thing on for a while and see if it makes a difference. I’m 70 years old and have bad lungs from years of smoking. I wear a mask when I go… Read more »

Patrick Wood

==> This garbage about masks not being useful is pure crap.
Larry, you have bought the fallacious “greater good” philosophy and that’s the only reason you are loving your mask. Otherwise, you have no proof that masks work as advertised. There are a host of scientists, physicians and epidemiologists who have thoroughly debunked the false narrative of face masks and social distancing. If you don’t trust them or even consider what they say, then you are the ignorant one here.


F00l, take your OWN advice and YOU STAY HOME!


Pure crap! Thats a big FAT lie!


I read the article to see if an interesting alternate perspective is given. Unfortunately, the author doesn’t hold up to a critical read. I don’t have time to look at nearly all of the studies she referenced but the three I did look at indicates she (Colleen Huber) is engaging in major deception. Reference 39. Huber headlines it “risk of cloth masks” and reports that healthcare workers wearing cloth masks had significantly higher rates of influenza-like illness compared to “controls”. What she fails to disclose is that the study was designed to compare the efficacy of cloth masks versus standard… Read more »

George G.

Your criticisms are not without merit. It would have been better to leave aside those studies that do not deal with the use of masks by the general public. They are not relevant to the topic (e.g. N95 masks are too complex to put on properly). But to pretend that these errors undermine the validity of 20 years of converging scientific studies  on the use of masks by the general public is a gross lie. It is therefore you who are trying to mislead the readers Daniel, not the author of the article. Even though it would be better to… Read more »


I too agree that the conclusions on N95’s in this article made me scratch my head. While effective, they aren’t practical for the majority of people. As you’ve pointed out, the science is still very strong that the masks people are actually wearing, and the manner in which they’re wearing them, aren’t effective at all.


Here is yet another study that confirms that masks are useless against airborne pathogens. Yes, all the “boring” details are included, for those who want to see how the conclusions are made.


Life threatening for some not all. The vulnerable s presumably as you put it without a cognitively challenged brain will chose to take precautions. I did say chose here. The cognitively challenged still have a right to read other sources of info that are from medical journals or should we sensor their info to a biass view point all be it a simplified one. If they are challenged they still have rights to information not sensord by yourself Then who ever is responsible for the cognitively challenged can make a more informed decision less biass as main stream media push.… Read more »

George G.

Like all science deniers guided by their ideological fixations, you’re obviously the one with “a cognitively challenged brain” Louise. 


Pathetic, laughable sheep.


Um do you know what peer reviewed means ?


[…] Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe […]

Brian G.

The idiotic push for masks comes from the scientifically invalid aka straw man “case counts.” It (masks) and other offerings to the Kungflu God will continue until an actual metric of the pandemic is released. The only appropriate metric that can determine distribution, volume, and trajectory of any contagious disease comes from random sampling of the population. PCR and antibody tests both should be radomly (as possible, within reason) given to a fixed sample size in a couple dozen areas, and done weekly. Random sampling of population is Epidemic Management 101. Why isn’t it being done??? Methinks it is on… Read more »

[…] Quelle: Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science […]

Dan Rokey

ok. I firmly support the major science facts re inhibited breathing and decrease in co2 exit . I exercise w _ mask_ .. _ without mask..
Obviously without is more efficient bringing O2 in and exhaling co2.
.Worse news is available..
demographics have been a Focus Point for my writing during last 10 years as a non fiction crime victim case writer.
We are being DRIVEN off a Cliff by 3% minorities again.
Demographics can be easily done by YOU _the reader..3% __ ??

[…] bankruptcy and insolvency ruining countless lives. Politicians also locked down society, implemented questionable mask mandates, created an incredible amount of fear, shut down elective services (even ones for […]


Pretty much not wearing masks has “ruined the lives” of about 170,000 in the US and 750,000 globally – not to mention the ongoing damage many who “survived” are encountering.

However, it was not locking down that caused it, not locking down. Spend time studying why Denmark has been fully reopened and yet we will be fighting this for another year, even if a vaccine becomes available.

George G.

That’s right, the masks work for the general public, even though 20 years of randomized controlled trials prove just the opposite. And this virus is  completely  different from all the other viruses of the same type from the past. Now go take your pills before you go back to your isolation cell.

[…] of skepticism, but also as a counterweight to the near-hysteria about the value of mask-wearing.  (Mask Article)  (Mask Article 2)  And again, I am not in any manner discouraging the use of […]

Paul in NH

All of this mazk insanity will continue until 3 November 2020. If, God help us, the liberals happen to win this mask crap will end overnight. If President Trump is reelected, hopefully, this mask foolishness will continue until we the people rise up and revolt against these “ID 10 T” award winners and mask dictators.

George G.

You are optimistic, it is to be feared that the goals being pursued will go beyond the next election.


Actually I think it may be the opposite. Biden on T.V. said “It’s not about your rights. Put the d**m mask on”, so I think it would probably get worse for non mask wearers as they try to usher in more control. F ’em all.

Scott Mansfield

So, of the entire world just waiting till November 3? So it’s a world wide conspiracy just yo make Trump look bad. Got it.


[…] Unlocked Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science Bookmark the […]


Let me speak for the pro-mask, do anything the government says, crowd.

Nu-uhn, masks protect you and keep you from killing grandma. You are an evil, bad person if you dare question their use. If masks reduced your oxygen they must be tight enough to stop the virus. We wear pants so pee doesn’t get on everyone. The CDC is never wrong because Science says wearing a mask works.

George G.

I like your irony, but the problem is that science says just the opposite and that’s why all health agencies, including in Japan, have always advised against masks for the general public.There are no new discoveries to explain the recent reversal.


You lost me at “being prohibited from worshipping” – now that’s funny!

Casey B

The school board just mandated masks for our kids….

George G.

They don’t give a damn about the health effects or even the alleged effectiveness of the masks. Otherwise, they would give basic advice on the appropriate wearing of masks.


Forcing children to wear a muzzle is child abuse. Children are essentially safe from this virus in terms of their relatively insignificant symptoms.

[…] into bankruptcy and insolvency ruining countless lives. Politicians also locked down society, implemented questionable mask mandates, created an incredible amount of fear, shut down elective services (even ones for cancer), and many […]

[…] Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science – by  Colleen Huber, MD – – “A review of the peer-reviewed medical literature examines impacts on human health, […]

[…] Dieser Artikel erschien zuerst auf der Seite Technocracy News & Trends und wurde von Axel B. C. Krauss exklusiv für eigentümlich frei ins Deutsche übersetzt. […]

[…] Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science 42 scientific references cited, published 14 July 2020 […]


Face diapers are to viruses what chain link fencing is to mosquitoes.


“A Tale of the Fungie Family” by D. S. Thau 7-11-20 Once upon a time, there was a little family of cute-as-a-button mushrooms who lived in a forest under a shady tree.  They longed to visit their rich uncle in the big city who made it big in socks, but they had no means of travel. One day, there was news of a nationwide plannedemic, and overzealous mandates, and as a result, Mask Transportation became available.  So the Buttons, excited at relocating, hopped on the N-95 Mask Transit System heading north to the Big City, and sang as they went,… Read more »


The CDC has research that says masks are not effective even –

George G.

All health agencies in developed countries, including in Asia, have always agreed on this point. No new scientific studies can explain the recent reversal. This is a purely political posture (but it is true that these agencies are also political bodies).

[…] Assassination By MASK—Why is Your Govt  trying to kill You […]


Has anyone read the articles that are referenced? Several were published 40+ years ago. Some have notations that the papers have been redacted (meaning removed from publication) or have edits made by the authors that state new information in light of this particular coronavirus. There are also some references that have not yet been peer-reviewed, which is an important part of the process prior to publishing an article, therefore they should not be referenced at all. Plus, the solution that this “meta-analysis” has come to is full of disinformation (by the way, it is NOT a meta-analysis). Regardless, all this… Read more »


I was just going to note the same thing, thank you! One was 100 yrs old and only 6 of 42 were published in the last year (meaning research was even older). I wish sites like this would use more current studies but maybe they’re afraid to be proven wrong.


well maybe that’s because we have been studying coronavirus strains since the mid 60’s
we know their size,
method of entry
method of infection
genetic structure
none of that has changed since the 60’s
This Covid-19 strain has 75 % compatibility with ALL other coronavirus strains, so why wouldn’t older genetic investigation be relevant ?

George G.

I wish sites like this would use more current studies”:  it would give you an opportunity to point out that they are not yet peer-reviewed, as these types of randomized controlled trials and the peer review process are very time consuming.

For your information, there have been no recent randomized controlled trials to contradict those conducted over the past 20 years on this subject.

The reality dave is that you deny scientific results if they contradict your ideological beliefs.


What Science Do You Prefer: ( ) Science of the Year 1520;
( ) Science of the Year 2020; ( ) Science of The Year 2520


There are plenty that were done recently. You just chose to focus on the older ones. Also if you don’t believe in old science, then you better do away with the germ theory and washing your hands…because it was all of the older science that got us to where we are today. Your faulty reasoning literally says,”What’s the point in listening to anyone from way back then? This is the new age science!” It was Ignaz Semmelweis who discovered we should be washing our hands and pushed for antiseptic procedures, Louis Pasteur who developed the process for vaccinations….that was long… Read more »

George G.

I’d already read them all. Most of them are fairly recent. And the one from 1920 has both historical and scientific value, because its methodology was rigorous. The outcome of scientific studies doesn’t become obsolete with time.

The author cites meta-analyses that identify dozens of studies with convergent conclusions. To call yourself this paper a “meta-analysis” and then deny it is a “meta-analysis” is a gross disinformation technique. The author describes his article as a “summary”.

Your claims simply don’t hold up. You obviously do not want to accept the results of these scientific studies because they contradict your ideological fixations. 

[…] into bankruptcy and insolvency ruining countless lives. Politicians also locked down society, implemented questionable mask mandates, created an incredible amount of fear, shut down elective services (even ones for cancer), and […]

[…] 8. Are face masks safe? [Link] […]

[…] and some U.S. states reject that there is the proven effectiveness, citing studies that suggest face coverings aren’t effective, including at least one study supporting Gohmert’s argument that masks could make […]

[…] Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science […]

[…] Source: Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science […]

[…] News produced a paper, Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science, and […]

[…] from July 14, is ‘Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science’, a review of 42 papers about various types of […]


Mask is The Tricks of Bill gates and Marxists••Avoid the RFID theories with 5G antennas and 5G Stations•••

[…] Supporters of mask requirements, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, argue that cloth masks are effective into stopping the spread of the virus, while critics cite studies showing a lack of evidence of effectiveness. […]

[…] by the sick to avoid infecting others, not by the healthy as a prophylactic. They’ve not been proven effective for prevention, are a potential health hazard that can cause serious harm to healthy […]

[…] sick to keep away from infecting others, not by the wholesome as a prophylactic. They’ve not been confirmed efficient for prevention, are a potential well being hazard that may trigger critical hurt to […]

[…] by the sick to avoid infecting others, not by the healthy as a prophylactic. They’ve not been proven effective for prevention, are a potential health hazard that can cause serious harm to healthy […]

Robert Zurunkle

The influenza virus is not transmittable via aerosol. Which is immaterial as the SARS-COV-2 virus IS transmittable via aerosol. Covid-19 is much more contagious than the influenza virus is. Which is why wearing a mask doesn’t decrease the transmission rate. Because that’s not a vector for influenza exposure. The purpose of wearing a mask is to prevent the transmission of the disease by people who have the disease but might not be showing symptoms. It lessens the chance of someone transmitting it if they’re wearing a mask or face covering of some sort. You are presenting useless information in an… Read more »

Patrick Wood

Yes, Robert, we are just that stupid. Since you know so much about masks, you should know that historically the sick get quarantined and wear masks if they must be outside their quarantine area and you leave the healthy alone. Masks and social distancing are worthless to society and will end up causing far more harm to society than COVID-19 itself.


I think I will quote you: “(You) are that stupid.”— your posts in this subject—when the original Posters farce of a “meta-analysis” has been revealed to be fraudulent and deceptive— are idiotic— if you don’t want to wear a mask, because you think you are going to die— DON’T— but there are a lot of businesses and government facilities that also don’t have to admit idiots like you onto their premises.


We are not afraid to die. All of us are going to die. This is a rather a deal about living a worthy life or as a coward wearing a cloth on my face to cover my identity and humanity. I do not deny positive effects masks can have when used correctly, by that i mean when necessary. Surgigal masks are to be worn in operating rooms eg. Or at the dentists office to restrict spatters and such, in my Job to filter dust particles when necessary but when used long term it Will More likely be of harm and… Read more »


Any thoughts on this article? “Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis” It covers many types of coronavirus but only one paper on COVID19 but there is no difference (Figure 6).

[…] Masks Are Neither Effective Nor Safe: A Summary Of The Science (link). […]

[…] Source Article – Posted By: Colleen Huber, NMD via PrimaryDoctor July 14, 2020 […]