On the Banks

WTMWD #48: What is "Non-Violent Communication" and what does it have to do with liberty? With Gretchen Wahlstedt

 

 

 

 

I speak with my sister, Gretchen Wahlstedt, about her experiences with Non-Violent Communication, what that actually means, and the role it can play in the fight for liberty. We also talk about the current state of civil (or not-so-civil) discourse, and whether anything can be done to bridge the growing divisions between people in 2020 America.

 

 

 

WTMWD #47: Why Japan is Different, ALSO: Next Week's Truly Indie Film Fest that You Won't Want to Miss

 

 

 

 

 

 

I talk with radio DJ and director of the Japan Indies Film Festival. We try to pin down what it is that makes Japan so awesome, touch on the role of immigration restrictions on culture, and even mention masks. We also talk about next week's film festival, and did I mention that it's FREE?

Japan Indies Film Festival is here - Nov. 16-17 in Japan, which is Nov. 17-18 in the US.

You can find Mike's radio show here.

The article Mike mentioned, "5 ThingsNobody Tells You About Living in Japan" is here.

"Japan REJECTS the West's Culture of Emotional Outrage" is here.

And the Walter Block article he mentions, "Thirteen Floors" is here.

You can see Mike's articles on LRC, here.

And my dad's article, "What Is Anarchy?" is here.

 

 

 

 

WTMWD #46: When Libertarians Cheer the Total State, with Don Boudreaux

 

 

 

 

 

I ask economics professor and columnist Don Boudreaux what the Hell is going on. He doesn't know either. We commiserate.

You can find Don at Cafe Hayek.

His article "Why so Gullible About Government in the Face of Covid-19?" is here.

...and his other recent article, "Covid Collectivism" is here.

 

 

 

End All Licensing Everywhere - Especially in Medicine

 

 

Image: Public domain.

 

This is a policy piece from 1995, titled "The Medical Monopoly: Protecting Consumers or Limiting Competition?" It's not like any of what is in here is new information. But good luck getting the power-motivated political system to recognize real solutions. That's not the business it is in.

 

We desperately need to put an end to the deadly means of political power as a way of making decisions.

From the paper:

 

"What should government do if it is serious about cutting health spending and improving access to affordable health care? The first step should be to eliminate the anti-competitive barriers that restrict access to low-cost providers, namely licensure laws and federal reimbursement regulations. Americans should not be forced to substitute providers against their will; rather, they should be free to choose among all types of health care providers.

 

"Instead of imposing strict licensure laws that focus on entry into the market but do not guarantee quality control, states should hold professionals equally accountable for the quality of their outcomes. That will reduce the need for strict licensure laws and other regulations that are purported to protect the public at large.

 

"The time is right for eliminating barriers to nonphysician health care providers. Many Americans are seeking low- cost nontraditional providers and even choose to pay out-of- pocket for their services. Breaking the anti-competitive barriers of licensure laws and federal reimbursement regulations will provide meaningful health reform, increase consumer choice, and reduce health care costs."

 

The time has always been right. 

 

 

 

 

 

Maajid Nawaz Embarrasses Epidemiologist Over Lockdowns

 

 

 

This is painful to watch.

But watch it. 

From Sean Hickey's commentary at Leading Britain's Conversation:

Professor Gabriel Scally explained to Maajid Nawaz that a second lockdown would serve to buy time to get the UK's test and trace up to standard.

Maajid asked whether the member of the Independent SAGE considers "the potential cost and deaths from having a lockdown and weigh them up."

Long story short, Professor Scally had zero idea what the costs of the lockdowns might be, and after some sputtering and name calling, admits as much.

 

WTMWD #45: Kevin Kiley on his Court Victory Against CA Governor Newsom

 

 

 

 

I speak with California legislator Kevin Kiley after the favorable ruling in his case against Governor Gavin Newsom's one-man rule.

My earlier episode with Kiley is here.

The court ruling is here.

Kevin Kiley's blog post about the ruling is here, and news coverage of the ruling can be found here and here.

 

 

 

Fear, Pharma, and Paradigms: I Talk with Tatiana Moroz

 

 

I was on The Tatiana Show earlier this week, talking about how fear is used to control people, the history of the pharmaceutical industry's takeover of medicine in the US, and asking whether we really have to learn all over again about the devastating effects of centralized decision making on society.

You can listen here. 

And take a listen to some of her other episodes - she's had some awesome guests, from Ross Ulbricht's mother to that awesome gym owner in New Jersey who stood up to that state's governor's authoritarian orders. Check them out here!

 

CA Governor Newsom's Executive Orders Ruled Unconstitutional - Court Issues Injunction Against Future Orders

 

Image: Public domain.

 

UPDATE: I'm changing the headline, because technically, the judge didn't rule on Newsom's "lockdown orders," but on the vote-by-mail order that Kiley and Gallagher sued him over. As I mentioned below, the point of that was to establish a ruling that would then apply to other orders. With her injunction, the judge has made it clear that she is applying the ruling to any future such orders (orders that amend statutory law), but what remains unclear is what will happen with the existing orders that she has said are unconstitutional.

From the judge's ruling:

"Injunctive relief is proper in this case for the following reasons: The Governor has issued a multitude of executive orders under the purported authority of the CESA, many of which have amended statutory law."

So the question is: Will these other orders Newsom has already issued-orders that she is saying are unconstitutional–also be voided? And if so, when?

Last week, CA legislator Kevin Kiley was a guest on my show, talking about his (and fellow legislator James Gallagher's) lawsuit against Governor Gavin Newsom, over his authoritarian lockdown orders. (Although, just to be clear, the one order that they went after in their suit had to do with voting by mail–their hope being that the precedent established there would apply to his other orders. Which it looks like it has.)

Today, the judge ruled in that case–in Kevin and James' favor. According to Kevin:

 

Today, a California Superior Court ruled in favor of me and fellow legislator James Gallagher in our lawsuit challenging Gavin Newsom’s abuse of power.

The Judge ruled Newsom violated the Constitution. She also issued an injunction restraining the Governor from issuing any more unconstitutional orders. You can read the ruling here.

This marks an end to Gavin Newsom’s one-man rule. It makes clear that the laws of the State of California do not countenance an autocracy under any circumstances – not for a single day, and certainly not for eight months with no end in sight.

The Court rejected Newsom’s extraordinary claim that a State of Emergency “centralizes the state’s powers in the hands of the Governor.” This is the unlawful basis on which Newsom has collapsed California’s system of checks and balances, issuing 57 Executive Orders and changing over 400 laws unilaterally.

The ruling is “tentative,” meaning Newsom has a few days to try to persuade the Judge to change her mind, but it’s rare for a tentative ruling to change. While Newsom can appeal, we are confident the decision is on solid legal ground and will stand.

 

I have been trying to read the ruling itself, but am unable to access the site–I imagine everyone is trying to read it right now. Once I get it, I will post an update. 

But here is what Kevin had written earlier, about expectations for a ruling. Without having seen the ruling itself, it sounds to me like Outcome 3 is what they got:

 

I see four possibilities.

Outcome 1: Newsom wins. Obviously, this is the worst outcome, although we could appeal. He could prevail either on the merits or on a technicality.

Outcome 2: We win a narrow victory. This is where Newsom has started to place all his chips. In his Trial Brief, he barely even tries to defend the legality of his conduct. Instead, he implores the Court to limit its ruling to one Executive Order – in a word, damage control.

In our view, that’s insanity. Our Complaint clearly asks for a permanent injunction against all such unlawful orders. While this outcome would still have value, affirming that the Governor isn’t above the law, it is not what we are hoping for.

Outcome 3: We win a full victory. This would “enjoin the Governor from further exercising legislative powers in violation of the California Constitution.” Newsom would be legally restrained – the only antidote to his historic lack of self-restraint.

A number of his previous orders would immediately be exposed as unlawful, while others may become newly vulnerable. As a matter of law, our republican form of government would be vindicated. 

Outcome 4: The Emergency Services Act is ruled unconstitutional. At the last hearing, Newsom’s lawyer himself said this is “one of the possible outcomes of the case.” It would result in the immediate termination of the State of Emergency and all emergency orders.

While this is not the most probable initial result, if it did happen, Newsom would seek an immediate stay of the ruling while he appealed.

The constitutionality of the Emergency Services Act is a question that would inevitably be decided by the California Supreme Court – which may be where this case ends up, one way or the other

 

What happens next? Since the ruling is "tentative", Newsom's team has a few days to try to convince the judge to change her ruling. Kiley thinks it is unlikely that she will. We will see. And if she doesn't? 

That's what I'm hoping to get Kevin to come back on my show to discuss.

Finally: The last time I donated to any election campaign was when Ron Paul was running for president. So, for me, it's kind of a huge departure to say: Please go and donate to Kevin's campaign.

You can do that here:

Donate

 

 

 

Pockets of Beauty: Japan Indies Film Festival 2020

 

 

 

 

My friend Mike, who lives in Tokyo, is running the Japan Indies Film Festival this year, in association with the Raindance Festival in London. Mike tells me that the festival was originally going to be held in a theater, but then "all of this" happened... so now it is online.

The trailer above is for "Life of a Geisha", which premiered in 2018 - and Mike says that it was the first film to sell out three showings in all of Raindance history. It is showing again with JIFF, beginning on November 16, here.

I've just looked briefly at some of the films that will be screened, and this looks fantastic! Some of the films are available now for viewing, so I'm going to try to watch a few before the actual festival dates (Nov 16-17 in Japan, 17-18 in the US). I'm not entirely sure what "immersive" means, but these look fascinating.

Here is the full press release:

Good news filmmakers! 

Japan Indies Film Festival will run November 16/17 immediately after our international partner, London's Raindance Film Festival ends (October 28 - November 7). Following government advice, our debut festival will be online only using a state-of-the-art (and very expensive) digital delivery system.

This platform is the exact same platform that is running Cannes, Sundance, Toronto, SXSW and Raindance Film Festival. This is will be Japan’s very first FREE online film festival. We thank Raindance Film Festival for helping us to show your films to the world!

"The JIFF platform is an ideal stepping stone to the very important Japanese audience for independent films. I am delighted that we are able to support this innovative venture with like-minded individuals.” - Elliot Grove, Founder, Raindance | British Independent Film Awards

All films will be available here (sign up now to watch the films for free!): https://bit.ly/2I0pSeU

 

Mike Rogers

Founder/Program Director

JIFF Japan Indies Film Festival

There is a lot of talk around the world now about how we are in a "spiritual war." And we are. I don't think you even have to come from a religious perspective to see that. The way I see it is, there are two forces battling each other: Creation vs. domination; freedom vs. tyranny; peaceful coexistence vs. violence. As it says at the top of this blog, there is the river, often filled with blood from the violence imposed by one side of humanity–and there are the banks, where all of life happens. Where people create, and trade, and just get on with their lives. 

There are many ways of engaging in this spiritual warfare, but in my view the most powerful way to fight the forces of violence and tyranny and domination is to simply create. To create beauty, and meaning, in the face of all the destruction, the force, the ugliness, and the tremendous efforts being put into dividing us all against each other. The forces of darkness–and that is exactly what we are up against–can inflict a lot of damage, they can kill, they can impoverish, they can destroy. But they cannot stop us from telling our stories and loving the people in our lives and creating beauty wherever we can. There are many ways to fight evil, and I think that this is one of the best. So, if you think so too, go on over to the JIFF site, check out some films, donate to support them if you can, and make a small strike against evil in the world.

 

 

A Year Ago Today: Some Gratitude and Some Rage

 

 

This photo is actually from a year ago yesterday. My dad had gone into ER because (we later found out) he had a stress fracture in his knee. He was able to stand, and even walk, so they sent him home, but the next day–a year ago today–he couldn't stand, and went into the hospital. We didn't know it then, but he was leaving his home for the last time. From the hospital, he went into rehab, to build his strength while his knee healed. 

What we didn't know was that his cancer was progressing very fast. And on Christmas night, he was taken from rehab back to the hospital. Four days later he passed away, with all of us with him. 

I hate that my dad is gone. I wish we could have had him for many more years. But given that he is gone, there are some things I am grateful for about his passing:

1. I am grateful that we didn't know how bad his cancer was, or that he was dying. That's a weird thing for me to say, because normally I want all the information I can get and I am deeply opposed to deception. (And I don't mean that anyone deceived us here, just that we didn't know.) But this time... I'm glad we didn't know. I'm glad that we were able to honestly sit there with him and tell him that the plan was to get him stronger so we could bring him home;

2. I'm beyond grateful that my family lives here, in the same town as my parents, and that I was able to visit him nearly every day that he was in rehab. I am so grateful for the time I had with him, even though I still kick myself for not spending more time with him;

3. I am grateful that I told him, after he had been in rehab for well over a month, and was getting very tired of being there, that nobody could force him to stay there and if he really wanted to come home we would make that happen. He said no, that he thought the best plan was to stay there and work with the therapists to get stronger. But I am so glad I got to tell him that–it would have haunted me forever if I hadn't;

4. I am grateful that we were able to resolve all of our shit well before he died, and that there was nothing left unsaid between us;

5. And I am grateful that he told me how much he appreciated my being there for him those last few months. I didn't think he needed to say it at the time, and was almost offended that he thought he did. But it matters now and I'm so glad he said it.

When we took my dad into ER, a year ago yesterday, my mom started doing her qi gong in the hospital–to hold herself together, I'm sure. I got some pictures of her, and this is one of them. I love these pictures. They say so much about their relationship, and about each of them as individuals. About how they were each very different from each other, on different paths and with very different focuses in life, yet still so deeply connected.

Losing my dad was really hard. It is still really hard. It wasn't long after he left us that "it" all started "coming down"–just like he'd spent our whole lives telling us it would. And if he had gone into the hospital, and into rehab, only a few months later than he did, our experience would have been very very different.

I get that the elderly are the most at risk from Covid-19. Just as they are from a host of other infectious pathogens that entire economies haven't been destroyed over. And I get that that risk–for them, not for the rest of us–seems to be worse than for flu and other corona viruses. But none of that justifies how this has been handled. None of that justifies shutting people away and not allowing them to see their loved ones in their last months, weeks, or days of life. 

I agree that measures should be taken to protect the elderly from Covid-19 (and from other things that might kill them, including loneliness and despair). But if isolating them in that way is the best that the people making these decisions could come up with, then they have failed so miserably that they should never again be allowed to have responsibility for anything beyond–possibly–dressing themselves. Everyone involved in coming up with, and enforcing, these decisions should be so deeply ashamed as to be placed on suicide watch for a good long time.

I can't even imagine, and don't want to, what our last two months with our dad would have been like had he gone into the hospital today instead of a year ago today. He hated being in that place. He chose it, because he thought it was the best way for him to build up his strength, but he did not like being there. The only thing that kept him going was being able to see his people every day. I don't even want to think about what a nightmare it would have been for him, and for us, knowing how miserable and alone he was every day, or the guilt and pain we would have to live with forever after he died.

What has been committed here is a crime. Call it a crime against humanity, or call it a crime against a whole lot of people, but it is a crime and we need to call it that. And one day, the people responsible for this crime will be held accountable.  

 

 

WTMWD #43: Kerry McDonald on a powerful weapon against teen depression. Also: What to do about Halloween!

 

 

 

 

I speak with unschooling mom and homeschooling advocate Kerry McDonald about an upcoming 4-day webinar to help inspire teens' inner entrepreneurs – and about why it is more critical than ever that we encourage our teens to find ways to create and to contribute now.

We also talk about Halloween...

FEE's "Entrepreneur Week" is Nov. 16-19, and is FREE. You can sign up here.

Kerry's book, "Homeschooling in the Time of Covid-19" is available for download here.

Her article "How our Culture Disempowers Teens", from last year, is here.

And her recent article on the Halloween bans is here.

 

 

WTMWD #42: Kevin Kiley's Lawsuit Against Governor Newsom Could Set a Critical Precedent

 

 

 

 

 

 

I spoke with California legislator Kevin Kiley this week, about his (and fellow legislator James Gallagher's)  lawsuit against Governor Newsom's authoritarian orders, and his one-man rule.

You can see Kiley's opening arguments in the case here.

And his blog, with updates on the lawsuit, is here.

 

 

 

WTMWD #41: Bad Assumptions Drive Bad Policy: Masks and Viruses, with Roger Koops

 

 

 

 

 

I speak with retired scientist Roger Koops, about the nature of viruses and how flawed assumptions about how they operate in the natural world have driven mask recommendations and mandates that may do more harm than good.

We also talk a little about how people in Japan have responded to the virus, and how the national and local governments there have reacted.

Roger Koops is a contributing author for AIER, and is also a retired scientist, with a PhD in chemistry and over 25 years in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. He has authored or co-authored several papers on pharmaceutical technology and chemistry.

His article, "The Year of Disguises" is here.

 

 

WTMWD #40: "They could have done this on any cold virus" - Kevin McKernan on PCR deception

 

 

 

 

 

 

I speak with founder and CSO of Medicinal Genomics, Kevin McKernan, about some of the problems with PCR testing, as well as some of the incentives to produce high positive test numbers, both of which are making it difficult to get a meaningful picture of SARS-Cov2 infections and cases.

You can find Kevin  on Twitter, and he recently Tweeted about some of these issues here.

The paper on molecular mimicry that he mentions is here.

The CMS document that spells out penalties for failure to report positive test results is here (p.5)

And the FDA's Emergency Use Authorization summary for the Roche qPCR test is here.

My previous episodes with Kevin are here and here.

 

 

 

Phenomenal Speech by RFK Jr.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elixir of Fear: A Halloween Story for Our Time

 

 

This is a Halloween story for 2020. It is also a fanfiction tribute to one of my favorite children's writers, John Bellairs. 

You can download the full PDF below.

Enjoy. 

 

*        *        *

 

Normally at this time of year, Harrison felt excitement in the crisp autumn air. Like an electrical charge. Watching the Halloween decorations go up, thinking about his costume, about Halloween parties and trick-or-treating. He was eleven now, and knew that he'd be getting too old for trick-or-treating in another year or so. But he was glad it wasn't this year.

Then again, he wasn't even sure there would be any trick-or-treating this year. Everyone was so afraid. And when he asked his parents about it, they just looked at each other and got serious expressions on their faces. He decided not to ask again.

This year, that sense of excitement was gone. There was a crispness in the air, but it came with a heaviness. Almost like something tangible oozing through the air. Something he couldn't get away from. Unseen, but slimy, dark, heavy, creeping around… like the musty old robe he had put on for the doctor's ceremony. It was almost as if that horrid old sack of rotting cloth had enveloped the whole world and was dragging down everything it touched.

The crows cawed despairingly into what was now a quiet emptiness. There would be no Halloween parties this year. He hated to think about it, but… the way things were going now, it looked like there wouldn't be Trick-or-Treating. Probably not even any decorations.

And that was the least of his problems. 

 

    *       *        *

 

Will eleven-year-old Harrison Barnavelt be able to get the magical elixir from the mysterious Dr. Faustis? Or will he end up as the victim of his evil scheme? 

Find out, in "Elixir of Fear", a work of fanfiction based on the world created by John Bellairs:

Download Elixir of Fear final for PDF

 

If you enjoy "Elixir of Fear", you might also enjoy my other books:

Annabel Pickering and the Sky Pirates

Urban Yogini: A Superhero Who Can't Use Violence

 

 

Seriously, YouTube? YT Scrubs Dr. Reiner Fuellmich Video: "Everything must be done to make sure that no-one will ever again be in a position of such power"

 

I guess the folks at YouTube don't like talk of taking authoritarian power away from people.

...No worries, it's still up on Bitchute:

 

 

I posted about this earlier, here. But YouTube has pulled down the video.

Here's what I said:

Listen to Dr. Reiner Fuellmich explain how international lawyers can prosecute the perpetrators of the Covid-19 panic and rights violations:

"All the above-mentioned cases of corruption and fraud committed by the German corporations pale in comparison, in view of the extent of the damage the Corona Crisis has caused and continues to cause.

"On a political level, everything must be done to make sure that no-one will ever again be in a position of such power as to be able to defraud humanity or to attempt to manipulate us with their corrupt agendas."

Here's how he plans to do that.

 

 

 

WTMWD #39: Swedish MD Sebastian Rushworth on Why the Herd Immunity Question is not as Simple as it Appears

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I speak with Swedish ER doctor Sebastian Rushworth, about the workings of the immune system and Covid-19. Among other insights: The media (and much of research) focuses on antibodies, but T-cell immunity may be better suited to viral infections; antibodies always wane over time, this is nothing new; the evidence shows that the lockdowns have had no effect on transmission; as the data piles up, it is becoming clear that Covid-19 is indeed very much like a bad flu virus in terms of deaths. Oh, and Sweden is back to normal and we all should be too.

You can read Dr. Rushworth's blog here.

And the article I mentioned, "Herd Immunity Without Antibodies?" is here.

 

Why FB's "Fact Check" of Mask Harm Claims is Utter Bullsh*t - Addendum to "Why I Won't Be Putting Masks on my Kids"

 

So I've just seen that Facebook has "fact checked" the claim (made in my most recent post) that "Wearing face masks can cause carbon dioxide toxicity; can weaken immune system." (I've written elsewhere about why Facebook's "fact checkers" are not really fact checkers.)

Here's why this is bullshit:

1. From the "fact check": "While it is true that hypercapnia can be life-threatening, the claim that it can be caused by wearing face masks, either surgical masks or respirators, is unsupported and runs contrary to existing evidence..." It goes on to claim that healthcare workers "...wear both types of masks for long hours at work without reported impacts to their work performance."

In my post, I cited two studies showing that wearing N95 masks can cause hypoxia, with headaches being the primary symptom revealed by the studies. If the "fact-checkers" want to claim that they are only going after claims of "hypercapnia" and not "hypoxia", then that would be utterly disingenuous. It is clear from the evidence I provided that wearing these types of masks does create serious health problems, whether because of oxygen deprivation or excess CO2 levels. 

2. The "fact checkers" go on to assert, quoting an article in Forbes:

“Take surgeons, for example—during long procedures, they wear surgical masks for hours with no ill-effects on their carbon dioxide levels. Having a surgeon with an altered mental state would not be in the best interests of either the patient or the surgeon and thankfully, this simply does not happen.”

This may be true, I don't know, as I haven't looked into studies on CO2 levels for surgeons using masks. However I did link to a study that looked at the impact on oxygen levels among surgeons wearing masks, and it showed that oxygen levels were indeed adversely affected by the masks.

3. They go on to say: 

"The claim that wearing masks would weaken the immune system is also unsupported by scientific evidence. Prolonged wearing of face masks can cause problems such as discomfort, skin irritation, and even pressure ulcers^[3], however immunodeficiency is not among the problems caused by prolonged face mask use."

This is complete horseshit.

In my post, for example, I cite two studies showing that wearing N95 masks can cause hypoxia among healthcare workers. I also link to studies showing that hypoxia enahnces immune suppression, that hypoxia negatively impacts Th1 function, and that "hypoxia-driven immunosuppression" contributes to creating favorable environments for cancer cells. Also, tangentially related (not necessarily related to immune function), a study showing that continuous cloth mask use was correlated with higher infection rates than was "standard practice" mask use (non-continuous).

So yes, immunodeficiency absolutely IS among the problems caused by prolonged face-mask use, you criminally dishonest pieces of manure.

I'm sure there is more, but I'll stop there.

...except for this last point. The fact checkers say, at the very end:

"A much more likely cause of hypercapnia and asphyxia that the general public should be aware of is covering one’s face with plastic. Because plastic is not porous enough to allow for quick air exchange, unlike face masks, it poses a genuine suffocation risk as cases in the past have demonstrated, and warning labels on plastic bags are used to remind people of this risk."

And I get why they had to say that. 

Because anyone who is stupid enough to take Facebook's "fact-checkers" seriously, is also stupid enough to put a plastic bag over their head and expect it to protect them. This is actually the most responsible piece of information in the entire article.

 

 

 

Why I Won't Be Putting Masks on my Kids:

 

 

 

 

This is a video that by some miracle is still up on YouTube. It is in German, and maybe that's why it's still up. It is a video of a German neurologist, Dr. Margarite Griesz-Brisson MD, PhD, explaining that wearing masks for any extended period of time can cause permanent brain damage.

There's a translation here (which I can't personally vouch for as I don't speak German), and a partial transcript here. From that transcript:

“The rebreathing of our exhaled air will without a doubt create oxygen deficiency and a flooding of carbon dioxide. We know that the human brain is very sensitive to oxygen depravation. There are nerve cells for example in the hippocampus, that can’t be longer than 3 minutes without oxygen – they cannot survive. The acute warning symptoms are headaches, drowsiness, dizziness, issues in concentration, slowing down of the reaction time – reactions of the cognitive system.

"...The second problem is that the nerve cells in your brain are unable to divide themselves normally. So in case our governments will generously allow as to get rid of the masks and go back to breathing oxygen freely again in a few months, the lost nerve cells will no longer be regenerated. What is gone is gone.

"For children and adolescents, masks are an absolute no-no. Children and adolescents have an extremely active and adaptive immune system and they need a constant interaction with the microbiome of the Earth. Their brain is also incredibly active, as it is has so much to learn. The child’s brain, or the youth’s brain is thirsting for oxygen. The more metabolically active the organ is, the more oxygen it requires.  In children and adolescents every organ is metabolically active.

"To deprive a child’s or an adolescent’s brain from oxygen, or to restrict it in any way, is not only dangerous to their health, it is absolutely criminal. Oxygen deficiency inhibits the development of the brain, and the damage that has taken place as a result CANNOT be reversed.

 

Dr. Griesz-Brisson is not the only one saying this. 

In March, a study of healthcare workers in Singapore found that "(m)ost healthcare workers develop de novo PPE‐associated headaches or exacerbation of their pre‐existing headache disorders" after increased (mandated) PPE usage, including wearing N95 masks. This repeats the findings of a similar study done in 2003, and another study from 2008 found that surgeons experienced a decrease in oxygen saturation levels after the first hour of wearing a surgical mask.

As Dr. Griesz-Brisson points out, headaches can be one symptom of oxygen deprivation. And while these studies involved the use of N95 masks and surgical masks, not cloth masks, I have heard anecdotally from several people who wear masks to go shopping, etc. that doing so gives them headaches and can cause lightheadedness and a drop in O2 levels (yes, one friend measured this.) So while it is technically true that these studies were not done using cloth masks, I am pretty confident that one would get the same results if they were.

There are other studies showing some of the harm that face masks can cause, including immunosuppression. I won't go into all of them here, but am providing a few links in case anyone wants to look at them.

Meanwhile, in early September, a group of 70 doctors in Belgium wrote an open letter to the Flemish Minister of Education, calling on him to "abolish mandatory mouth mask at school." The doctors argued that forcing masks on children hampered their development and would cause serious problems for them. 

From their letter:

In recent months, the general well-being of children and young people has come under severe pressure. We see in our practices an increasing number of children and young people with complaints due to the rules of conduct that have been imposed on them. We diagnose anxiety and sleep problems, behavioral disorders and fear of contamination. We are seeing an increase in domestic violence, isolation and deprivation. Many lack physical and emotional contact; attachment problems and addiction are obvious. ‘

The mandatory mouth mask in schools is a major threat to their development. It ignores the essential needs of the growing child. The well-being of children and young people is highly dependent on the emotional connection with others. (…) The aim of education is to create an optimal context so that a maximum development of young people is possible. The school environment must be a safe practice field. The mouth mask obligation, on the other hand, makes the school a threatening and unsafe environment, where emotional connection becomes difficult.

 

But, as with mandatory vaccines, doesn't every parent have a duty to put their own child in harm's way in order to potentially protect others?

To put it bluntly: No.

However, for those who are genuinely worried about the harm you might be causing to others by not wearing a mask, or by not putting a mask on your child, take heart: It really does look like–with a few very specific exceptions–wearing a mask is not going to help anyone else, and in fact could be helping to spread the virus.

And, as many epidemiologists and others have been saying from the beginning of all of this, it does not make sense to try to isolate an entire population from a new virus in the first place. The way that humans have always dealt with new pathogens is to interact with them and develop immunity to them. More and more doctors and scientists are speaking out about this now.

But getting back to the mask efficacy issue, here are some links to articles that explain why I say that the masks aren't going to help prevent the spread of the virus (if you think that's a worthy goal in the first place):

This is a very good piece from Jeremy Hammond, back in June, examining the mask efficacy issue, including a discussion of the specific situations in which they may help prevent transmission. (I spoke with Jeremy about masks on my podcast in June.)

This is a wonderful piece from Roger Koops, who has a Ph.D in chemistry, and is the author of several papers on pharmaceutical technology and chemistry. He goes into painstaking detail here, to explain how serious PPE masking works, and how cloth masks interact with viruses. It is well worth reading the entire piece, although I will warn you that you won't come away with any false sense of security regarding cloth masks and viruses intact.

This letter from Patricia Neuenschwander details many of the reasons that healthy people should not be wearing masks, and includes links to studies supporting what she says. She includes a reference to this study from the Chicago School of Public Health, which says:

"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..."

And finally, (it's not really "finally" because there's a lot I'm not including here) the folks at Rational Ground have put together some illuminating graphs that shed light on the effect (rather, non-effect) that mask mandates have had where implemented. You can see those here.

They have also created a phenomenal interactive tool that looks at mask use by location, against Covid-19 cases and deaths. I really recommend taking a look.

In fact, because I know that some of you won't take a look, I'm going to post a few sample results from that tool, as well as some of their graphs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't really know what else to say. Except that every time I see a post from one of my parent friends, about how they are getting their child to wear their mask, I just want to weep. Especially when it is a parent of a child with special needs. Our kids are already "harmed" developmentally. They don't need more harm done to their brains through oxygen deprivation. And certainly not for a cause for which there is little if any justification.

As always, I welcome any information that counters any of what I have posted here. I would especially love to be wrong about the harm that masks can cause to children. Because I know that no matter what I or others say on the topic, there will be countless parents who still decide to put masks on their kids.