From the Brownstone Insitute

By  Ian Miller 

It’s late 2024, and masking has managed to remain a contentious issue. Years of misinformation from supposed “experts” like Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx and organizations like the CDC have convinced millions of Very Smart People to believe that masks are an effective tool to reduce the transmission of respiratory viruses. This applies also to the flu, despite those same experts and organizations somehow neglecting to recommend masks for the decades of flu seasons pre-2020.

Forcing anyone to mask, given the substantial and robust evidence base showing conclusively that masks don’t work, was an indefensible policy decision. But specifically forcing children to mask was decidedly much, much worse.

And not just because it was a pointless exercise in pandemic theater, with zero evidence of efficacy.

But because it was actively causing harm too, as a new study shows.

New Study Confirms Harms of Masking Children

A new study co-authored by Tracy Beth Høeg delves into the side effects of masking, a subject completely ignored by experts and politicians desperate to exert control over individual behavior.

And in their discussion, it’s immediately obvious why their research and conclusions will be completely ignored by the mainstream media.

“There is a lack of robust evidence of benefit from masking children to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or other respiratory viruses,” they explain. Couldn’t have said it better myself.

The highest quality evidence available for masking children for COVID-19 or other viral respiratory infections has failed to find a beneficial impact against transmission. Mechanistic studies showing reduced viral transmission from use of face masks and respirators have not translated to real world effectiveness. Identified harms of masking include negative effects on communication and components of speech and language, ability to learn and comprehend, emotional and trust development, physical discomfort, and reduction in time and intensity of exercise.

It’s a masterpiece. No notes.

As the Cochrane Library review explained, as the data shows, as decades of accumulated evidence confirmed: Masks Don’t Work. For anyone, but especially for children, who could not wear or use masks properly, even if they were shown to have worked. Which they did not.

Experts demanded and politicians mandated that they wear them anyway, based on speculation, hope, and mechanistic studies that were conclusively disproven. And the harms were remarkable.

“Negative effects on communication and components of speech and language.” “Ability to learn and comprehend.” “Emotional and trust development, physical discomfort, and reduction in time and intensity of exercise.”

Just, you know, the basic building blocks of human development that children need to grow as well-adjusted, physically and mentally healthy teenagers and adults.

As Høeg and the other authors explain, this necessarily means that forcing children to mask fails any objective standard of harms and benefits.

Effectiveness of child masking has not been demonstrated, while documented harms of masking in children are diverse and non-negligible and should prompt careful reflection. Recommendations for masking children fail basic harm-benefit analyses.

Their next section is a complete dismantling of the CDC and the US public health bureaucracy, how they handled Covid, and how poor an example this sets for future pandemics.

In many locations in North America, children as young as two years of age were required to wear face masks daily for multiple consecutive hours, both indoors and outdoors, in school and childcare settings [1], [2]. This stood in stark contrast to European countries where masking was never recommended for children under the age of six and, in many countries, never under age twelve [3]. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)’s child masking recommendations deviated substantially from international guidelines [3], [4], [5]. The CDC continues to recommend masks for children down to age two in certain settings [1], [6], and this is in the absence of strategies for exiting these restrictions. In the event of a future public health threat, clear and consistent communication from public health officials about the criteria that will be used to withdraw temporary public health recommendations while data are gathered could serve to ease public anxiety, lessen distrust, and facilitate a return to a more normal life wherein ineffective recommendations are promptly discarded.

It’s a calm, thorough demolition of the incompetence and authoritarianism of the US public health establishment.

They repeat that there is no evidence to support masking children and explain that there is no real-world evidence showing the effectiveness of child mask mandates, with zero randomized controlled trials conducted to determine whether masking kids would prevent the spread of Covid. It’s inexcusable to mandate a policy with no evidence, but even worse considering the demonstrable harms.

“Speech, language, and learning: Humans rely on visual information provided by a speaker’s face to decode speech. Seeing mouth movements and facial gestures accelerates recognition of words and enhances speech comprehension [12], [19], [20], [21]. The integration of audio and facial information is crucial to speech perception and development. Visually impaired children often have delays in speech and language development [22], which may be due, at least in part, to reduced ability to perceive,” they write.

Masks prevent children from learning, from seeing mouth movements to facial gestures. They fundamentally detract from a child’s ability to develop speech and language. Among many other problems covered in the full study.

These harms were well-known before Covid. This isn’t new information, and it’s obvious common sense. So why did public health authorities ignore it, in favor of promoting evidence-free policies and mandates?

There are few reasonable explanations: panic, fear, or incompetence. Likely some combination of all three.

Forcing their absurd, fatalistic, hyper-safetyism on adults was and is one thing. Imposing it on children is another. And their refusal to admit they were wrong meant the growth and development of kids were most certainly harmed and stunted for years, while ensuring that there would be terrified, misinformed parents who would continue to force their kids to wear masks indefinitely.

When you consider those consequences, rationality fades, and a disturbing likelihood of malicious intent becomes a lot more realistic.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

Ian Miller

Ian Miller is the author of “Unmasked: The Global Failure of COVID Mask Mandates.” His work has been featured on national television broadcasts, national and international news publications and referenced in multiple best selling books covering the pandemic. He writes a Substack newsletter, also titled “Unmasked.”

From LifeSiteNews

By Clare Marie Merkowsky

The available COVID-19 vaccines in Canada all have links to aborted fetal cell lines, and are thus considered morally impermissible by many Catholics and members of other religions.

A Canadian federal labor board will be occupied for years going over grievance hearings from employees that alleged the COVID vaccine mandates discriminated against their religious beliefs.

The Public Sector Labour Relations and Employment Board has now ended in-person hearings over religious grievances relate to COVID vaccine mandates as the hundreds of already active cases will take years to wade through, according to a September 30 report by Blacklock’s Reporter. 

“There are over 350 religious accommodation grievances currently active with the Board,” wrote Christopher Rootham, arbitrator with the Board. “Arbitration hearings dealing with similar policies in the private or broader public sector have tended to last two days, sometimes followed by written submissions.” 

“Therefore scheduling an oral hearing for every religious accommodation case would amount to an impossible burden for the employer, for the bargaining agents and the Board,” he continued, explaining that future cases will be determined through written submissions. 

The Employment Board’s decision comes after dismissing the first of hundreds of complaints from employees who had lost their jobs for following their consciences.  

Beginning in November 2021, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government mandated that a total of 275,983 employees from the RCMP, military and main federal departments provide proof of vaccination as a condition of employment. The available COVID-19 vaccines in Canada all have links to aborted fetal cell lines, and are thus considered morally impermissible by many Catholics and members of other religions.

Those who failed to do so risked dismissal or suspension without pay. While there were provisions for medical and religious exemptions, these were rarely granted. According to internal information, at the time of the mandates, 95 percent of employees had already received the COVID vaccines.  

When the federal mandate was lifted in June 2022, 2,560 employees had been suspended without pay for refusing to show proof of vaccination.    

According to a 2022 Inquiry of Ministry, the Trudeau government admitted that nearly three quarters, 74%, of applications for religious exemptions were rejected while 70% of medical exemptions were also rejected.   

As LifeSiteNews previously reported, federal managers have paid out over $500,000 in settlements to employees that were suspended under the Trudeau government’s COVID vaccine mandate.  

Similarity, LifeSiteNews reported on how over 700 vaccine-free Canadians negatively affected by federal COVID jab dictates have banded together to file a multimillion-dollar class-action lawsuit against the Trudeau government.   

Canadian taxpayers have already paid over $6 million via Canada’s Vaccine Injury Program (VISP) to those injured by COVID injections, with some 2,000 claims remaining to be settled.