An article in the Bristol Post 19^th October 2021, has reported that “new cases of Covid-19 have prompted a school in South Gloucestershire to reintroduce face masks in communal indoor areas”. The parents of pupils attending the Winterbourne Academy were sent a letter stating that this would be to ‘avoid partial closures’ in the area and wearing facemasks and one way systems will be reinforced after the October half term.

The Academy advises parents that they will remain open and the children should continue to attend as normal if they remain well. Parents were encouraged to continue with twice weekly LFD testing of household members aged 11 in order to “help identify cases promptly.”

There are many reasons why this is a ridiculous move, this article is THROWING A VERBAL BLACKBOARD RUBBER AT THOSE WHO WEREN’T PAYING ATTENTION, as clearly someone at the front of the class has not been doing their homework on the topic of the efficacy, health and safety or necessity of enforcing the wearing of facemasks on our children.  

By Patricia Harrity

GOVERNMENT GUIDELINES

With the original government guidance stipulating that facemasks were to be worn in the classroom and anywhere indoors had impossible to keep two metres apart has been removed, now the government can only advise that face coverings should be temporarily worn in communal areas if the number of positive cases substantially increases in school (unless exempt). The school in question appears to be following government guidelines and due to increased “cases” but what did they expect when asking the families to test all those over 11 years old twice a week?

FACEMASKS ARE NOT REGULATED OR RISK ASSESSED

Firstly, face coverings intended for use by the general public are not PPE or medical devices, they do not carry a CE/CE UKNI/UKCA mark and not regulated by the governments’ Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. It would be an impossible task to regulate the various facemask worn by children particularly as the government has advised that face coverings can be bandanas, cloths, or a handmade cloth covering. The facemasks worn by children have not been safety tested, nor has a risk assessment been carried out in the schools enforcing the measure.

HOW SAFE ARE THE FACE COVERINGS?

Meaning many masks have been sold over the last few months which have not be assessed for safety prior to being worn for hours a day by children. In April 2021 the European Commission published a safety alert regarding a popular mask from a company called Under Armour, because it contains the chemical polyhexanide (PHMB). ‘PHMB preservative and antimicrobial agent and its use was restricted under EU regulations in 2016 is harmful if inhaled and may cause an allergic skin reaction.               

Damage to organs can occur through inhalation and repeated exposure and is also suspected of causing cancer.’ Alarmingly the mask was still on sale at multiple outlets in the UK, including Sports Direct, House of Fraser and Wiggle until July 2021, Under Armour stopped selling the mask on its own website due to the safety alert. Of course, this is just one mask, but how many more are out there with similar safety risks that the children might already be wearing?

ASYMPTOMATIC INDIVIDUALS DO NOT TRANSMIT OR INFECT OTHERS

Especially when there is no reason to be wearing them. A recent study on infectivity exposed 445 individuals deemed “asymptomatic” to “asymptomatic” SARS-CoV-2 carriers. In other words, individuals who merely tested positive with a PCR test. They were placed in a shared quarantine space for a median of 4 to 5 days. The study found that not one of the 445 individuals became infected with SARS-CoV-2. Meaning – Asymptomatic individuals do not transmit or infect others.

MASK EFFICACY IS WEAK

Research conducted over the past 40 years have shown that facemasks have weak efficacy and most of them are primarily testing using surgical masks or the N95 respirator not a bandana or fashion mask. This is not the research your government want you to know about doctors and scientists saying the same thing are hushed up.

THE DIRECTOR OF EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE AT OXFORD – “MASKS ARE USELESS”

An example of this was seen when, Professor Carl Heneghan director of evidence-based medicine of Oxford university and also editor of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) publication Evidence-Based Medicine, issued a warning that face masks are “useless” at protecting against infection with the coronavirus.  Heneghan also reported his agreement with a Randomized Controlled Trial conducted in Denmark, namely the ‘Danmask-19 trial’ . The trial had over 6,000 participants half wearing disposable surgical face masks and told to change them after eight hours of use. After a month there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected.

Professor Heneghan, was censored by Facebook for sharing the study

MASK ARE HARMFUL TO PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLGICAL HEALTH

The fact they show weak efficacy is being ignored as is the physical health of the pupils and that wearing facemasks increases the resistance of air movement when inhaling and exhaling and could be detrimental to health research1 teams2. 

Prolonged and continuous wearing of facemasks results in trapped air remaining between the mouth, nose, and the facemask, is repeatedly rebreathed in and out of the body. This air contains low O₂ and high CO₂ concentrations, causing Hypoxemia (low blood oxygen) which when severe can provoke heart and brain complications (studies 1, 2, 3 4 5, 6).

THE CONSTANT FIGHT OR FLIGHT RESPONSE

Also, low oxygen content in the arterial blood can cause Myocardial ischemia,, Serious heart arrhythmia, , right/ left ventricular dysfunction, dizziness and low blood pressure source. The lowering of oxygen in the blood also challenges the homeostasis the stress responses. This is the fight or flight response, although it is an important reaction in life-threatening or unpredictable situations, it activates the nervous system, the endocrine system, the cardiovascular and immune systems. Prolonging this state of stress causes the body to operate on survival mode, raising blood pressure and increasing in pro-inflammatory state and immunosuppression. Therefore, is detrimental to both physical and psychological health.

PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH

Psychological health is also compromised through wearing facemasks, for example facial expressions cannot be seen which affect basic human to human connectivity resulting in a negative psychological effect on both the wearer and individuals nearby.  Wearing masks also acts as an elimination of self-identity, it is dehumanising and partially deletes individuality and uniqueness of individuals (Source). All of which results in poor mental health. Relationships and social connections being basic human needs, and a reduction in our social connections results in poor health both mentally and physically  A Significant increase in depression has been seen in children throughout the plandemic.

Dr Duncan Astle from the MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit at Cambridge university says;

“Childhood is a period where mental health may be particularly vulnerable to reduced peer interaction and loneliness. Now that children have returned to school, their wellbeing, socialisation and enjoyment are crucial. Teachers may need additional resources and training to help them support children with low mood”.

This is unlikely to happen if the children are wearing masks.

THE CLOTH OF COMPLIANCE

If teachers are willing to enforce facemask measures on the children, they certainly have not looked at the research. They are entrusted with the education of our children and should educate themselves and they will see that facemasks are ineffective and harmful. They simply provide a visual measure of all those who are still complying with their narrative.

Unfortunately, teachers are allowing the children to be measured up for their compliant role in the New World Order.

A Final thought

“TELL THAT TO SURGEONS” – is a typical response when from those advocating wearing masks it is worth noting a study published by surgeon Dr. Orr, and colleagues, Colchester. Comparing wound infection for six months, maskless concluded that minimum contamination was best achieved by wearing no mask and the standard procedure of mask-wearing during surgery could be abandoned.