Why mask mandates are potentially dangerous and unethical, part 1
The lack of benefits, lack of safety testing, and political disruption caused by mask mandates mean that mask mandates were and continue to be unethical
The following discussion cites a wide range of experimental and observational studies to make the case that chronic masking might be harmful for health.
However, few of the studies that I reference are “gold standard”. The case that masks cause harm is weak, if provocative and compelling as an hypothesis.
This apparent weakness is from a wiser point of view a vindication of my deeper point:
Rigorous, randomized controlled trials examining whether such harms occur have not been conducted. In truth, almost no rigorous randomized controlled trials on the subject of masking for respiratory pathogens even examine harms at all.
What’s worse, such randomized controlled trials find little to no benefit.
In short, the best evidence regarding community masking for respiratory viruses finds little to no benefit, while no substantial examination of harm has been conducted at all.
Despite this, mask mandates were widely promoted. Billions of people were affected.
The following article discusses what harms might exist—but we don’t know for sure, because we have been making recommendations without rigorously examining these risks.
Inasmuch as the following discussion is speculative, it’s only speculative because the authorities haven’t bothered to test these ideas. Instead, they have rushed to make recommendations or even mandates governing billions of people around the world.
Despite this, few randomized controlled trials of masks were conducted during the pandemic.
The deeper point should therefore be clear: given the potential for harm, the unlikely benefit, and the profound political dysfunction that they produced, mask mandates were a deeply unethical public health intervention.
In an ideal world, those who implemented them should be held accountable for their abuse of science and scientific institutions to push their widespread use globally.
Without any further ado…
===
A review published last year by Cell Press shows mask-wearing may contribute to stillbirths, irreversible cognitive deficits in children, testicular dysfunction, and much more.
Before beginning, I want to point out that during the pandemic, I dismissed others' concerns about the topic and insisted on masking. I masked my children in public and I regret doing so. Anti-maskers made me angry. I was wrong. I am sorry.
Now:
- "She is breath of fresh air!"
- "Would you like to go outside and get some fresh air?"
In the English language, there are many phrases and idioms that hint at the beneficial effects of the outside air well-being, equating fresh air with relief.
What if these turns of phrase actually reflect an underlying biological reality?
What if our common expressions reflect important facts about human health?
There is a large body of literature suggesting just that.
This article from The Atlantic, published just months before mask mandates would become the rage among America's elites, examined the question with respect to cognition thoroughly and came to disturbing conclusions:
Now, this popular article cited a number of scientific papers to show what this systematic review showed:
Elevated CO2 levels, up to 0.5% (5000 ppm; normal atmospheric CO2 is 350 ppm, or 0.035%), impair cognition, mainly of the higher forms of decision-making.
One notable study was this one from investigators from Harvard and Syracuse. In it, investigators a clear dose-response relationship between CO2 levels and multiple cognitive domains in the research subject. This is illustrated by the figure from the paper below:
Note that the "high CO2 condition" was only 1500 ppm, or 0.15% CO2.
This will become relevant in a moment.
This brings us to masking.
Masking has long been insisted to provide benefits to reducing Covid transmission, without downsides.
"What's the harm?" it has been frequently demanded.
The harm has to do with CO2, the levels of which can become very high and cause health problems.
This was the subject of this paper published by Cell Press and the subject of this article.
This paper starts by noting that the 8-hour threshold limit for safe CO2 concentrations by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is 0.5%; the 15-minute threshold limit is 3%; and the concentration at which death occurs is about 10%.
The paper reviewed studies examining CO2 concentrations under or near masks and found that they far exceeded the 8-hour and sometimes even the 15-minute safety threshold set by NIOSH:
0.42-0.94%
2.8-3.2%
0.22-0.29%
2.8%
1.41-1.7%
2.4-2.6%
2.8-3.2%
1.28-3.52%
Here's the table:
This increase in inhaled CO2 occurs because masks provide breathing resistance and create a dead space that traps CO2.
Note that one study did find concentrations of only 0.22-0.29%. This was the only study that measured CO2 at the bridge of the mask, which may have artificially reduced the CO2 levels and not reflected those that are inhaled. Otherwise, virtually all studies exceeded the 8-hour CO2 exposure safety threshold of 0.5% set by NIOSH. Most, as mentioned, even exceeded the 15-minute CO2 exposure safety threshold.
These are the same masks that were mandated for everyone to wear publicly during the pandemic, and which many people wore all day long.
Now compare these values to the highest values in ppm from the Harvard/Syracuse study that showed strong effects on cognition: 1500 ppm, or 0.15%.
Again, here is the table from the Harvard/Syracuse study. See the 1500 value on the x-axis. That’s just 1.5% CO2.
Now compare with %’s in this table, which I will show again:
These studies show up to 3.52% inhaled CO2, which translates to 35200ppm.
This is 23 times higher than the highest CO2 concentrations (1500 ppm) from the Harvard/Syracuse study at which cognitive impairment was found in a dose-response manner.
This is a disturbing finding.
Next, the study authors asked whether the current research literature shows that these masked CO2 concentrations actually produce increases in blood CO2 levels.
After all, maybe the CO2 measured under the mask might be high, but this might not translate to elevated blood CO2.
The studies reviewed showed a very robust increase in blood CO2 levels.
Table below showing this increase in blood CO2 levels:
But do these elevations in blood CO2 levels correspond to the very high CO2 concentrations seen in inhaled CO2 in the first table we showed?
The answer is yes.
To see this, here's the abstract from a 1967 study conducted by the U.S. military where they put human subjects in 3% CO2. It shows a virtually identical 3-4 mmHg increase in arterial CO2 as many of the mask studies shown in the table immediately above.
In fact, many of the mask studies report a significantly higher elevation in arterial CO2 than 3-4 mmHg, suggesting the possibility that the inhaled CO2 is even higher than the 3-3.5% measured by most of the studies we have seen before.
Finally, the authors reviewed studies conducted on animals that investigated asked at what CO2 levels animals show adverse health effects.
It found:
0.48% CO2 for 10 minutes per day for 20 days in pregnant guinea pigs caused stillbirth and birth defects in 68% of the pups.
I have screenshotted these remarkable and disturbing findings, provided in the image below.
3% CO2 (equivalent 0.8% for humans) chronically in pregnant rats caused stillbirth and birth defects.
0.3% CO2 (chronically, pregnant rats) caused brain damage, increased anxiety, impaired memory and learning in rat pups born to their mothers
0.3% CO2 (chronically, young mice): Brain damage, increased anxiety, impaired memory and learning in young mice chronically exposed to 0.3% CO2 during development to adulthood
2.5% (0.5% for humans) (4 hours, male mice): Destruction of testicular cells and sperm in adult male mice exposed to 2.5% CO2 for just 4 hours.
Table of these studies below:
The authors noted that some animal research resulted in a recommendation by the U.S. Navy to keep CO2 concentrations on submarines below 0.8%.
This research found at 3% CO2, rat mothers miscarried and gave birth to pups with deformities.
This makes inhaled CO2 at high concentrations a teratogen.
Therefore the Navy set the limit at 0.8% to account for species differences and protect female Navy sailors.
0.8%!
Recall that most masking studies saw concentrations of inhaled CO2 far above 0.8%.
See, again, below:
What are the implications for pregnant women?
We shall discuss that in part 2.
If you found this article useful or interesting, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.