‘Infection was higher the more often people said they wore masks’

WND News Center

It seems that those COVID mandate skeptics, those who raised science-based questions about masks, the experimental shots and their side effects and injuries and more – and were attacked, censored, vilified and abused, actually were onto something.

A report from Just the News now has revealed a study that confirms those masks largely were ineffective.

As were some of the shots, according to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is taking Pfizer to court in his state under its consumer laws.

Just the News said a systematic review of studies of mask mandates for children, published in the British Medical Journal’s Archives of Disease in Childhood, concluded there was “no association” with infection or transmission in 16 of 22 studies, along with a “serious” risk of bias in others.

And, the report added, “Self-reported SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher the more often people said they wore masks, according to a Norwegian study accepted for publication Nov. 13 in the Cambridge University Press journal Epidemiology and Infection.”

The report noted those conclusions “cast further doubt” on those public health authorities demanding the mandates and also those scientists who claimed that they were the answer to the threat that came from the China-sourced COVID pandemic.

The report said, “Emails turned over under public records requests show that National Institutes of Health officials were privately questioning the effectiveness of cloth masks and forthcoming vaccines just a month after then-NIH Director Francis Collins appeared to plot with colleagues to organize a ‘quick and devastating take down’ of the anti-lockdown Great Barrington Declaration.”

YouTube, according to Sen. Rand Paul, censored him multiple times, becoming “an arm of the government” over his doubts about the politically correct mask and shots agenda.

In fact, one analysis in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences charged that such “censorship” often is from scientists themselves, not just those officials with “dark motives.”

“The paper, co-authored by dozens of scholars known for challenging orthodoxies in their fields, cited ‘self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups’ as motives for censorious scientists,” the report said.

There were complications in the studies involving school days, school size, testing practices and more in the six students that did allege lower infections with mandates, the report said.

“Hope MDs and public health officials will always be willing to change minds with evidence & data,” UCSF’s Monica Gandhi, wrote on social media, according to the report.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., took a victory lap, stating “We were right.”

Paxton said in an interview that while a shot maker boasted the product was 95% effective, it likely was more like 1%.

He said the company literally tested its shots on the American population.

And he said the manufacturers, who made billions of dollars from the government by providing the shots, knew they were less than effective, and lied about it.

He said he’s going to court over the issue, as while the federal government gives blanket immunity to vaccine makers, they don’t have the same protection under Texas law, and its suing them under deceptive trade practices requirements.