Articles

[Art.] The «Pandemic» and the wearing of the mask: does the end justify the means?

Published

on

For more than 18 months, wearing the mask has been part of everyday life for young and old alike on the planet. No one escapes it, whether they are vaccinated or not. A gesture that is not so innocuous, reassuring some, disturbing another part of the population. If this measure is similar to the precautionary principle in the face of the dangerousness of the “pandemic”, what about its scientific justification?

In response, Professor Denis Rancourt, a researcher and professor at the University of Ottawa, who works for the Civil Liberties Association. In an interview dating back to 2020, he provides insights into the management of the pandemic and the appropriateness of using the mask, both indoors and outdoors.

Denis Rancourt wonders about the health crisis, which would not respond a priori to the indicators that could characterize it as “pandemic”. According to him, there has not been a real difference in the number of annual deaths, all diseases combined in 2020. He drew attention to the fact that a pandemic cannot occur at the same time in several countries, and show such a close peak in such a short period of time, as was noted in March 2020 in several places around the world. The high number of deaths accumulated during this brief period would come more from management and health policy choices than from the spread of the virus itself. Isolating patients from a virus, whether it is Covid or not, is contrary to the recommended health measures, including for fragile people with comorbidities. Nothing significant would have been done to improve their state of health, which, conversely, was pejorated, concentrating them in poorly ventilated places, depriving them of human interaction with their relatives and the outside world.

As a scientist, this professor explains in particular that viruses (aerosol particles in suspension) that are found in the form of droplets, do not behave in the same way in winter as in summer, This explains why year after year we observe a recurrence of the bump curve that goes down during the warm season.

Due to the heat and humidity, the droplets load and become thicker, no longer hanging in the air as in winter. This underlines the nonsense of the use of masks during the summer and its ineffectiveness or even its dangerousness. Denis Rancourt recalled that the wearing of the mask was initially intended to be used in a sanitized hospital environment, which requires rigorous protocol and hygiene according to established rules. However, the use of masks by the public in closed and outdoor areas does not meet these criteria and is more harmful to health. Microbes and bacteria will tend to stagnate on the surface of the mask, with viruses passing through anyway. Touching them at all times is worse than not wearing them.

Based on his work and a scientific finding, Denis Rancourt points out that no serious study is able to prove the effectiveness or benefits of wearing the mask to protect against any virus. On the other hand, the opposite is more to be feared because there are many studies that show the harms of wearing a mask.

With other colleagues, Denis Rancourt reportedly sent a communication to the WHO in this regard to alert them to the inconsistency of their recommendations, which contradict what this same institution would have articulated for years. He is surprised that governments around the world have been able to lend themselves to such a game, with the WHO now returning to the usefulness of wearing the mask, while it has always recognized its lack of effectiveness in protecting itself from viruses!

He also deplores the fact that a class of the population has been able to accept all these recommendations which are not based on any scientific basis and wonders: would we have witnessed the end of this crisis if the media stopped talking about it and hammering out the same narrative?

The whole problem lies in the acceptance of a policy and the belief granted by the citizen, even though the directives are not of health interest. In doing so, it makes it possible to create an habituation to accept a directive without questioning itself. The acceptance of these non-scientific measures is a way of proving the obedience of the population (formatting) and its propensity to give up freedoms for its «security».

According to Prof. Rancourt, in the name of a precautionary principle, we have managed to impose a draconian policy that is not based on any reliable data or study, without however measuring the potential dangers for populations. Similarly, Denis Rancourt notes a credulous rhetoric and distortion in the argument “I do it to protect the other and it justifies everything”. However, no comparative study has been able to prove that social distancing, the wearing of masks and the disinfection of the hands are sufficient to the non-transmissibility of the virus

Recall here some interesting studies ignored by the leaders of the countries, including one on the wearing of the mask. The one carried out for more than a year in Germany (among more than 25’000 children), shows a long list of side effects in children.

More recently, another German study shows that children are naturally protected by their immune system against respiratory problems, so it may be inferred that it is unnecessary to require them to wear a mask[1]. Recall here, that another study [2] conducted in 2008 by Dr Fauci, the current health policy advisor of the White House, explains that the high number of deaths from the Spanish flu does not belong to the virus but to a secondary cause, bacterial pneumonia. What should we be asking ourselves: what if we were wrong from the beginning in our understanding of this pandemic?

Should mask use remain a preferred option to contain the pandemic?

N.B. le 27 octobre 2021.


[1] “A team of scientists from the Institute of Health at the Charitable Hospital of Berlin (BIH), the School of Medicine of Charity of Berlin, the University Hospital of Leipzig, and the German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ) in Heidelberg has discovered that children’s immune systems are much more active in the upper respiratory tract than in adults, while highlighting molecular mechanisms to better control infection.”

[1] Science et avenir

[2] Pathologists at the time, he adds, were almost unanimous in the belief that the deaths were not directly caused by the then unidentified influenza virus, but rather resulted from severe secondary pneumonia caused by various bacteria, source:National Institute of Health

Référence : MacIver Institute

Continue Reading

Tendance