Antimicrobial Face Mask does not protect users against bacteria, viruses, germs or other disease organisms. (Photo: Katy Grimes for California Globe)
New Study By Stanford-NIH Adjacent Researcher Hypothesizes Masks Are Ineffective Against COVID
The Globe has been reporting negative effects of mask mandates since last year
By Katy Grimes, April 20, 2021 1:39 pm
CORRECTION and UPDATE: This story has been updated with a clarification that better explains the relationships between the study’s author and various institutions whose proximity to the author cast a greater impression of support from those institutions than was warranted. The study upon with this story is based has since been retracted, with the publication including a notice that reads, “Existing scientific evidence clearly shows that approved masks with correct certification, and worn in compliance with guidelines, are an effective prevention of COVID-19 transmission.” The Globe is grateful to various readers whose comments on our story provided valuable insight, as well as watchdog publications who have been carefully following this particular study and the way it’s reported.
“Did you hear about the peer-reviewed study done by Stanford University that demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that face masks have absolutely zero chance of preventing the spread of Covid-19? No? It was posted on the the National Center for Biotechnological Information government website,” NOQReport.com reported. “The NCBI is a branch of the National Institute for Health, so one would think such a study would be widely reported by mainstream media and embraced by the ‘science-loving’ folks in Big Tech.”
The study — which the California Globe has since learned is not quite as “Stanford koshered” or as closely associated with the NIH as the NOQReport indicated — found: “The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective of viral and infectious disease such as SARS-CoV-2 and COVID -19.”
Instead, it was revealed that no legacy media reported on this. For some odd reason, legacy media appear to want to perpetuate the mask myth… as if they like wearing the cloth face mask.
In July 2020, the Globe purchased a cloth mask from a pharmacy in preparation for a plane trip. This is the warning on the box: “Antimicrobial Face Mask does not protect users against bacteria, viruses, germs or other disease organisms.” (see photo above)
Only proving it was a mask narrative, Twitter suspended former Trump adviser Steve Cortez when he Tweeted out the study with his comments:
Twitter has suspended @CortesSteve for citing a Stanford NIH study about masks. pic.twitter.com/2y460zkN0Z
— R.J. Kassam (@RaheemKassam) April 17, 2021
The Globe has been questioning and reporting on the lack of mask-science since Spring of 2020—over a year ago. We have talked with nearly 20 Epidemiologists, Virologists, Immunologists, various physicians, public health MDs, and medical experts.
Here is one article:
“According to immunologists and epidemiologists California Globe has interviewed, ordering people indoors, schools closed, mandatory mask-wearing and social distancing is the opposite of what should be done for the health and well-being of society. Herd immunity is supposed to be the real health goal, while protecting those most vulnerable – in the case of coronavirus, is the elderly and infirmed confined to nursing homes.”
The Governor issued an Executive Order and had his Public Health Department issue a new directive Thursday, which said this:
“Over the last four months, we have learned a lot about COVID-19 transmission, most notably that people who are infected but are asymptomatic or presymptomatic play an important part in community spread. The use of face coverings by everyone can limit the release of infected droplets when talking, coughing, and/or sneezing, as well as reinforce physical distancing.”
What once was a directive to flatten the curve has morphed in to “people who are infected but are asymptomatic or presymptomatic play an important part in community spread.”
And in another article:
California Globe reported Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, Professor of Medicine and Public Health at University of California, Los Angeles said:
“I don’t think there’s any evidence that wearing a surgical mask has any benefit to protect someone in general from exposure, or from being infected. We usually recommend people who are ill wear surgical masks to prevent transmission [to others]… it may be kind of an awareness tool, but in terms of its direct benefits, there’s no data,” Dr. Klausner added.
Dr. Brosseau and and Dr. Sietsema, both national experts on respiratory protection and infectious diseases at University of Illinois at Chicago, said, “We do not recommend requiring the general public who do not have symptoms of COVID-19-like illness to routinely wear cloth or surgical masks because, There is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission.”
Another Globe article found:
“The Center for Disease Control did a pool analysis of 10 RCTs that examined the impact of face masks on reducing influenza infections within a community,” California Globe reported in “Why I’m Not Wearing a Mask.” “They concluded that these studies “found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks.” These studies covered a wide range of environmental settings from University dorms to households, but the results were the same across them all.”
“’There is limited evidence for their [masks] effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission,’ they found. This applied to masks ‘worn by the infected person for source control OR when worn by uninfected persons.’ They unambiguously concluded that there was ‘no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.’”
An April 2020 Globe article reported:
COVID-19 virus is primarily transmitted between people through respiratory droplets – sneezes and coughs.
Droplet transmission occurs when a person is in in close contact with someone who has respiratory symptoms and is coughing or sneezing. The respiratory droplets can then be transmitted through the mouth and nose, or eyes, if exposed to potentially infective respiratory droplets.
This is why many medical experts say masks won’t prevent exposure to COVID-19 because to actually wear enough gear to prevent exposure, you’d need to wear goggles to protect your eyes as well as a mask that covers the nose and mouth. And it’s still a big maybe.
As one doctor semi-jokingly said, “if cloth underwear can’t keep a fart from escaping, how can a cloth mask protect against a contagious virus?” While he was being funny, his point was that cloth masks are not effective, and are not used in hospitals.
The study concluded, “Wearing facemask mechanically restricts breathing by increasing the resistance of air movement during both inhalation and exhalation pro-cess[12,13]. Prolonged an d continuous effect of wearing facemask could be detrimental for health.”
And the study found that the psychological effects of wearing a facemask are quite negative, as the Table 1 graphic shows.
“Follow the science”has new meaning.
Be sure to re-read, “The Miserable Pseudo-Science Behind Face Masks, Social Distancing And Contact Tracing,” a June 2020 Globe article.
CLARIFICATION (May 12, 2022): Although the California Globe was referring broadly to the conversation about this issue and accurately reported that NOQReport.com had indeed covered the study, the Globe is not and never was implying an endorsement of the study itself. The study in question is “Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: Health hypothesis.” Its author, Baruch Vainshelboim’s affiliation was listed as “Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System/Stanford University.” A Stanford university spokeswoman disavowed Vainshelboim, telling the Associated Press in April 2021, “Stanford University has never employed Baruch Vainshelboim. Several years ago 2015 he was a visiting scholar at Stanford for a year on matters unrelated to this paper.” A spokesperson for the VA Palo Alto healthcare system also downplayed the association, saying he was never officially employed by VA and “his time in this role is completely unrelated to this paper.” The Globe also mentioned that the original source said that the study was produced by NIH. The article was indeed posted on pubmed.gov, which is, according to NewsGuard, a government-owned database of medical literature run by the National Library of Medicine, which is a branch of the NIH.” However, that agency was— again, according to NewsGuard—”not involved in the research for this paper.” We don’t believe the Globe story implied that it was, but just to be perfectly clear, it was not. The headline of this story was updated to reflect the reality of the study’s author’s affiliations.
- California, New York, and Illinois Experienced Largest Domestic Population Losses 2023 and 2024 - December 20, 2024
- Suspicious Minds: Gov. Newsom’s Fishy ‘Bird Flu’ State of Emergency - December 19, 2024
- Gov. Gavin Newsom and AG Rob Bonta are Playing Political Theater with Illegal Immigration - December 19, 2024
RELATED ARTICLES
-
-
August 4, 2020 -
Katy again thank you for being one of the few rational journalists reporting on the lack of evidence that masking-up keeps us all “safe”. It is disturbing that this study is not being covered by the legacy news groups!
I took the time to write our California Public Health Department and share the study and my concerns over the danger of continued mask mandates especially for children. I hope many fellow Californians will contact the state and county health departments to reexamine the mask mandate. It needs to end now.
I encourage all to read the published report at the NIH:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/
Thank you for your great reporting not just on this, but on so much. I check California Globe daily, and post pieces on GAB so sheeple will wake up!
Will the scientific facts matter to any of these totalitarian monsters? Fauci? Biden? Harris? Pelosi? CA Legislators? Newsom? London Breed? Gov. Whitmer? Trader Joe’s? Walgreens?
When has Fauci ever accepted a debate? Never. When will he or Gates or the Klaus Schwab character stop? Never. At this point in their psyop, they only have three choices:
1. run/declare “retirement” soon,
2. keep forcing their plandemic thru until they die or
3. go to jail.
Increasingly, their worst nightmere scenario is happening now.
Humanity is-worldwide-waking up to the deception. Finally shaking off any last bits of disbelief of such deception and betrayal and fraud and allowing ourselves to be conned this bad and for this long.
The criminals LOVE these masks on us. The masks play right into their (blood soaked) hands to control all of humanity.
Now masked people are at risk to get-or already have- the sicknesses’ listed in Table 1 of this-another great article not allowed on the “one narrative only” channels .
Be prepared people-Fauci is. He anticipated sicknesses from the masks . He is already planning for our “future harm” . In the NIAID minutes* he is planning for cure$ for upper respiratory issues! He is never going to stop. We have to stop him and taking off the masks will do just that. It shows that we are not as easily duped, led, stupid, lazy , un-motivated or unwilling to get off of our ___ and do our own research-and share that research- as they thought we all were.
What are their biggest threats? HUMANITY WAKING UP. Humanity PUSHING BACK. Humanity mailing/e-mailing this article to a school near us to get these masks off our children now!
*David Martin | Full Interview | Planet Lockdown 1:23:11
https://davidicke.com/2021/02/14/david-martin-full-interview-planet-lockdown/
Stockholm syndrome:
“Create an atmosphere and environment of chaos, suffering, hopelessness and danger and then rescue the subjects from this condition so that the persecutor is perceived as being a friend, protector and savior.”
Brannon Howse
When it’s a life or death matter, everyone should question everything. I see too many people defending the people who want people dead.
no, this won’t make a difference and it won’t be reported on and if it does manage to see the light of day I will be censored because it does not adhere to the accepted narrative.
we are all toast.
Masks, like everything else about the Wuhan China virus, has been POLITICIZED. Real scientists from the start have doubted the effectiveness of masks. I agree with Charles. Scientific results won’t matter to people like Fauci et al..
While I am glad Stanford published this study it was settled science long ago that masks do not protect you from viruses. I looked up existing studies published by major medial journals (before covid) and they all universally stated that masks do not protect you from viruses. I don’t know if these studies have been memory holed due to their inconvenient truths. Masks also have almost zero protection from bacteria and fungus spores.
I remember well The Globe’s reporting on this that wasn’t seen elsewhere. Relentless reporting in many many well-researched articles, in fact, throughout this crazy COVID year. In context, it wasn’t such a smooth ride to report the truth about the uselessness of masks as the opposition to it was particularly fierce then and many people were beyond apoplectic to think that their precious masks might not be necessary. Grateful that Katy Grimes stuck to her guns to give us the lowdown on it in spite of the denial, and much of that denial was downright nasty, as I recall.
News outlets have had to adjust the story since it was not a Stanford study. The author was a visiting scholar years ago. We’ve got to get our facts right or we look like cuckoos.
Here is the info on the study:
Yes, it was by Stanford: Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis
Baruch Vainshelboim⁎
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer
Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States
⁎Address: VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Cardiology 111C, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94304, United States.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/
The author lied about his association with the VA Hospital.
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-629043235973
ANNNnnnd, several studies have indicated that cloth masks from China may have been constructed with various combinations of toxic chemical materials and/or nanotech threads that react to heat & moisture…threads that behave like “worms”…
Serious tinfoil hat stuff, but given China’s belligerence and defensiveness about the source and timing of the virus, combined with their aggressiveness since Biden’s installation, it becomes more plausible to think that they are also using the masks to sow more disease in response to the primary disease that they released…
https://thecoloradoherald.com/2021/video-chinese-masks-contain-tiny-worms/
This was not published by Stanford. This was not published by the NIH. This was not peer-reviewed. This is a “hypothesis” published by “Medical Hypotheses.” BTW “Medical Hypothesis publishes quite varied things such as “Shoes cause schizophrenia” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987704003536
Yes, it was by Stanford: Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis
Baruch Vainshelboim⁎
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer
Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States
⁎Address: VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Cardiology 111C, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94304, United States.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/
Hello Katy
I love the Globe, your writings are great…however, this one might be a stretch? I am always open to any and all conversations, and not that Snopes is the be all end all of fact, but thought this was interesting. Thoughts?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/stanford-nih-mask-study/
Here is the info on the study:
Yes, it was by Stanford: Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis
Baruch Vainshelboim⁎
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer
Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States
⁎Address: VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Cardiology 111C, 3801 Miranda Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94304, United States.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/
Hi Katy, I’m a huge fan and ally of your brand of responsible journalism. Also, snopes is partisan hackery at its finest. This paper, though, is at best a reasonably researched meta-analysis. The journal publishes non-peer-reviewed articles. It may not be the best choice to defend the idea that masks don’t work. The droplet issue is a consideration. Please do not take this as personal criticism, and keep up your great work!
Snopes is a fact check site that exists solely to reinforce leftist lies.
That is absolutely, 100% true. But Snopes will say it’s false. 🙂
It was not by Stanford, they have replied to numerous investigative reporters that have contacted them to the point where it was just easier to publicly post about it : https://twitter.com/StanfordMed/status/1384957123864444930
Bbbbbbbut – what about the Symbionese Quadruple Covid Variant that was purportedly maybe recently discovered somewhere? We must wear masks! We’re all gonna die!
Ha ha, no kidding. Or “breakthrough COVID” after vaccination! Oh my!
If you ask me it’s all lies. Made-up stories. Sounds like you do too. Notice the scare stories pop up JUST as people think they are about to be “set free” — you know, having had the vaccine and all! Sigh..
I had also researched the author of the hypothesis. I am very skeptical of Snopes and AP for calling his research paper fake. He backs up his hypothesis with past studies. Please refer to the Danish Mask Study and the 2015 CDC study concerning in general viruses and masks.
The SGT website does a good job explaining the importance of this paper. The science of mask efficacy is not settled!
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
https://www.sgtreport.com/2021/04/new-study-highlights-face-mask-problems-with-safety-and-efficacy/
The trolls really came out of the woodwork on this story. The study is linked in the article at the NIH. The author’s information is all there, as are the 67 footnotes. He cites the WHO, CDC, American Thoracic Society, OSHA, American College of Sports Medicine, American Heart Association, Dr. Fauci, and Dr. Ioannidis.
It sure makes me wonder why they have to lie about this.
Then there is this:
At Lewrockwell.com, Doctor uses vape clouds to illustrate how masks do not work: https://www.lewrockwell.com/political-theatre/doctor-uses-vape-clouds-to-illustrate-how-masks-do-not-work/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/
What? That shows how masks do work. Normally when blowing vape smoke it easily goes 10 feet. In his video it shows how constrained the “smoke” is to close to him. That is why distancing + masks is recommended. A quick visualization of the simplest masks limiting spread https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNeYfUTA11s
Thanks Katy.
The video really demonstrates that masks do not block vapors the size of the virus.
I understand some commenters were fact checking and came across Snopes and the AP fact checkers as I had. Those sites hung their hat on the authors background and disregarded the type of publication it was designed to be. It is a contrarian hypothesis meant to challenge the notion the masks are effective.
Many want to believe the government always has our best interests at heart. Unfortunately, history proves that to be wrong.
Vulnerable and scared, wear a mask and stay home. All that don’t fear death, live free.
If all else fails, remember the cloth underwear/fart connection and keep it simple, stupids…