A recent Stanford study released by the NCBI, which is under the National Institutes of Health, showed that masks do absolutely nothing to help prevent the spread of COVID-19 and their use is even harmful.
NIH published a medical hypothesis by Dr. Baruch Vainshelboim (Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States).
NOQ Report uncovered the study:
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. 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.
Instead, a DuckDuckGo search reveals it was picked up by ZERO mainstream media outlets and Big Tech tyrants will suspend people who post it, as political strategist Steve Cortes learned the hard way when he posted a Tweet that went against the face mask narrative. The Tweet itself featured a quote and a link that prompted Twitter to suspend his account, potentially indefinitely.
The NCBI study begins with the following abstract:
Many countries across the globe utilized medical and non-medical facemasks as non-pharmaceutical intervention for reducing the transmission and infectivity of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Although, scientific evidence supporting facemasks’ efficacy is lacking, adverse physiological, psychological and health effects are established. Is has been hypothesized that facemasks have compromised safety and efficacy profile and should be avoided from use. The current article comprehensively summarizes scientific evidences with respect to wearing facemasks in the COVID-19 era, providing prosper information for public health and decisions making.
The study concludes (emphasis added):
The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.
Here is the table for physiological and psychological effects of wearing a facemask:
Here is the full study:
Children haven’t been able to go to school because of Covid, but they can strut across a stage with drag queens at midnight.
A viral video of prepubescent children being paraded across a stage at a drag queen show in South Beach at midnight was making the rounds Monday.
“Why in the hell to do these people got these f*cking little bitty ass kids at this f*cking drag show, y’all?” a woman said. “It’s 11:40 at night.”
The drag queen took the child’s hand and led her and another masked child across the stage, showing them how to pose and dance for cash.
The date of this drag queen event is unclear, however there are weekly drag queen shows debuting Sunday nights at The Palace.
VIDEO (language warning):
— ✨LINDSAY✨ (@DistortedLinds) April 18, 2021
Apparently there’s no money in launching projects to actually look at the science and the decades-long and well-documented coverup of vaccine injuries at the hands of flagrant cdc quackery and deception (backed by pharmacorps buying every regulatory agency and news medium in sight) which is finally beginning to see the light of day even at the WHO. They should have listened to the parents all along. They should have paid closer attention to the 2020 election for that matter.
Scientific american used to be a decent magazine. Now it’s a testament that nothing is safe from the moneychangers.
That Russia placed “bounties” on the heads of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan was one of the most-discussed and consequential news stories of 2020. It was also, as it turns out, one of the most baseless — as the intelligence agencies who spread it through their media spokespeople now admit, largely because the tale has fulfilled and outlived its purpose.
The saga began on June 26, 2020, when The New York Times announced that unnamed “American intelligence officials” have concluded that “a Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing coalition forces in Afghanistan — including targeting American troops.” The paper called it “a significant and provocative escalation” by Russia. Though no evidence was ever presented to support the CIA’s claims — neither in that original story nor in any reporting since — most U.S. media outlets blindly believed it and spent weeks if not longer treating it as proven, highly significant truth. Leading politicians from both parties similarly used this emotional storyline to advance multiple agendas.
The story appeared — coincidentally or otherwise — just weeks after President Trump announced his plan to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2020. Pro-war members of Congress from both parties and liberal hawks in corporate media spent weeks weaponizing this story to accuse Trump of appeasing Putin by leaving Afghanistan and being too scared to punish the Kremlin. Cable outlets and the op-ed pages of The New York Times and Washington Post endlessly discussed the grave implications of this Russian treachery and debated which severe retaliation was needed. “This is as bad as it gets,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Then-candidate Joe Biden said Trump’s refusal to punish Russia and his casting doubt on the truth of the story was more proof that Trump’s “entire presidency has been a gift to Putin,” while Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE) demanded that, in response, the U.S. put Russians and Afghans “in body bags.”
What was missing from this media orgy of indignation and militaristic demands for retaliation was an iota of questioning of whether the story was, in fact, true. All they had was an anonymous leak from “intelligence officials” — which The New York Times on Thursday admitted came from the CIA — but that was all they needed. That is because the vast majority of the corporate sector of the press lives under one overarching rule:
When the CIA or related security state agencies tell American journalists to believe something, we obey unquestioningly, and as a result, whatever assertions are spread by these agencies, no matter how bereft of evidence or shielded by accountability-free anonymity, they instantly transform, in our government-worshipping worldview, into a proven fact — gospel — never to be questioned but only affirmed and then repeated and spread as far and wide as possible.
Maybe they WERE targeted with such weapons, but if so the primary suspect would have to be the western alliance. Why do I say this? Because the narrative doesn’t hold water. This DEW is not being used as a surveillance tool. The energy needed to cause such symptoms far exceeds that needed for surveillance and clearly makes this a deliberate provocation. Especially in the current political climate, russia would be incomprehensibly stupid to do this. Staging a false flag against russia would make much more sense.
Dr. Richard Fleming, physicist-nuclear cardiologist, issued a dire warning that experimental covid vaccines are not effective, but could cause Mad Cow disease.
“I’m not anti-vax,” Fleming told War Room, Tuesday. “I’m just anti-bad medicine.”
Fleming says the vaccine companies own data, from Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson, all show their vaccines make zero difference in stopping covid. The Emergency Use Authorziation data “shows there is no difference.”
“It’s just random chance,” he said.
However, the risks are high.
“In the animal model, they develop spongiform and Mad Cow disease,” Fleming said. “We also know 2 weeks afterwards they develop…what causes Alzheimer’s and neurological disorders.”
Fleming warned the effects could take a year and half to show in humans.
Fleming, who in the 1990s discovered inflammation causes cardiovascular disease, said man-made spike proteins in the vaccines also cause inflammation. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was pulled for its link to blood clots in women.
The vaccines have “no statistically significant benefit,” Fleming said, but cause “inflammation and blood clotting, Lewy bodies [associated with dementia], Mad Cow disease, and nothing to benefit.”
Fleming said the Biden regime should call for immediate reevaluation of “whether there’s any demonstrated efficacy” of the vaccines, “because there’s not.”
“Secondly, what are the potential consequences of having already vaccinated a substantial number of individuals in this country?” Fleming said.
Fleming also called for a full review of the people who were involved in coronavirus gain of function research. Dr. Anthony Fauci outsourced the National Institutes of Health gain of function research to the Wuhan Institute of Virology using taxpayer dollars.