New Study Confirms Masks Are Harming Children Due to Unsupported Policies

New study confirms the harm of masking children

A new study co-authored by Tracy Beth Høeg looks at the side effects of masking, an issue completely ignored by experts and politicians desperate to gain control over individual behavior.

And in their discussion it becomes immediately clear why their research and conclusions are completely ignored by the mainstream media.

“There is a lack of robust evidence that masking children has a benefit in reducing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or other respiratory viruses,” they explain. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

“The highest quality evidence available on masking children from COVID-19 or other viral respiratory infections has shown no positive impact on transmission. Mechanistic studies demonstrating reduced viral transmission through the use of face masks and respirators have not translated into actual effectiveness. Identified harms of masking include negative effects on communication and components of speech and language, the ability to learn and understand, the development of emotions and trust, physical discomfort, and a reduction in the time and intensity of exercise.”

It’s a masterpiece. No notes.

As the Cochrane Library review explained, how the data shows how decades of accumulated evidence confirmed: Masks don’t work. For everyone, but especially children, who could not wear or use masks properly, even if they were proven to work. Which they didn’t do.

Experts demanded and politicians ordered that they be worn anyway, based on speculation, hope and mechanistic studies that were conclusively debunked. And the damage was remarkable.

“Adverse effects on communication and components of speech and language.” “Ability to learn and understand.” “Emotional and confidence development, physical discomfort and reduction in time and intensity of training.”

They are simply the basic building blocks of human development that children need to grow into balanced, physically and mentally healthy teenagers and adults. As Høeg and the other authors explain, this inevitably means that forcing children to mask fails any objective measure of harm and benefit.

“The effectiveness of masking children has not been proven, while the documented harms of masking in children are varied and not negligible and should give rise to careful consideration. Recommendations to mask children fail basic harm-benefit analyses.”

Her next section looks at the complete dismantling of the CDC and the US public health bureaucracy, how they handled COVID, and how poor the example is for future pandemics.

“In many places across North America, children as young as two years old were required to wear face masks for several hours each day, both indoors and outdoors, at school and in child care settings.” [1], [2]. This was in stark contrast to European countries where wearing a mask was never recommended for children under six, and in many countries never for children under twelve [3]. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations for child masking differ significantly from international guidelines [3], [4], [5]. The CDC continues to recommend masks for children up to age two in certain situations [1], [6]in the absence of strategies to overcome these limitations. In the event of a future public health threat, clear and consistent communication from public health officials about the criteria used to withdraw temporary public health recommendations during data collection could help alleviate public concern, “to reduce distrust and facilitate a return to a more normal life in which ineffective recommendations are immediately discarded.”

It is a quiet, thorough demolition of the incompetence and authoritarianism of the US National Institutes of Health.

They reiterate that there is no evidence to support masking children and state that there is no real-world evidence of the effectiveness of mask mandates for children because no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to determine whether masking children Would prevent spread of COVID. Imposing policy without evidence is inexcusable, but it’s even worse when you consider the demonstrable harm.

“Speaking, language and learning: To decode speech, people rely on the visual information provided by a speaker’s face. Seeing mouth movements and facial gestures speeds up word recognition and improves language comprehension [12], [19], [20], [21]. The integration of audio and facial information is crucial for speech perception and development. Visually impaired children often experience delays in speech and language development [22]which could be at least partly due to a reduced cognitive ability,” they write.

Masks prevent children from learning, seeing mouth movements or facial expressions. They fundamentally impair a child’s ability to speak and speak. Among many other issues covered in the full study.

This damage was already known before COVID. This is not new information; and it’s obviously common sense. So why have health authorities ignored this and instead promoted evidence-free guidelines and regulations?

There are few reasonable explanations: panic, fear or incompetence. Probably a combination of all three.

Imposing their absurd, fatalistic hyper-safety thinking on adults was and is one thing. It’s another thing to force it on children. And their refusal to admit that they were wrong certainly meant that the children’s growth and development would be damaged and stunted for years to come, while also ensuring that there would be frightened, misinformed parents who would leave their children would continue to force people to wear masks indefinitely.

When you consider these consequences, rationality fades and the disturbing likelihood of malicious intent becomes much more real.