Steve Kirsch | 27 Nov 2021

So why were “experts” hailing the Bangladesh mask study as proof that masks work? Because they were so desperate to point to something to support their belief system–even a study that was worthless.

We all know masks don’t work for respiratory viruses as I’ve pointed out before. If masks started working all of a sudden against respiratory viruses on command of the CDC, it would be proof that CDC pronouncements can change the laws of physics. That would be big news.

My new favorite book on the masking topic is the one written by Dr. Judy Mikovits:

All you have to do is read the free preview to know how it ends: “If that means you are sitting alone in your bedroom and wearing a mask as you read, …, then keep that mask on. I doubt you will be wearing it when you finish this book.”

She did an awesome job. I highly recommend it and the Kindle version was only $4. Well worth it.

If the medical community wants to prove masks work, there needs to be a well-done randomized trial and there isn’t one. The best study to date is the Danish mask study and it showed (prior to manipulation to get it published) that mask had a negative effect. Read the BMJ editorial about this.

If masks actually worked, the NIH would be funding a very well-done randomized trial to prove to everyone that they work. They don’t do that. The reason is simple: they know the masks don’t work. Get it?

The public thinks masks are protecting them when in reality they are making things worse which increases fear which leads to greater compliance with the vaccine objective and masking orders. A death spiral.

Studies indicate wearing a mask 8 hours is like breathing 1.5 days in Shanghai.

So when this new Bangladesh mask study was written about in Nature on September 9, I knew it drew an erroneous conclusion (which happens all the time in medicine) despite it being endorsed by infectious disease experts. The author is a science journalist.

I didn’t have the time to dissect it at the time.

In an earlier draft of this post, I asked my readers for the best writeups that takedown the masking study. Here are the winners.

The winners

Literally within minutes of publishing this article, the winners emerged:

1. truthsleuth
2. Martin I

The answers

A thorough dissection of this study by the very eloquent El Gato Malo on Sept 1bad cattitudebangladesh mask study: do not believe the hypepeople tend to call economics “the dismal science” because it’s so difficult to do controlled experiments. you cannot simply run the economy once with interest rates at 4% then again at 6% and compare. it’s inherently limiting to the discipline. but this…Read more3 months ago · 117 likes · 90 comments · el gato malo

and his immediate follow up on Sept 2 after he was attacked:bad cattitudemore on the bangladesh mask studygoodness, it’s not every day one gets called a liar AND a silly, so (against better judgement) i’m actually going to take the time to rebut lyman here because his claims are badly wrong and serve as a useful foil to further exploration some of the manifold failings of this travesty of a…Read more3 months ago · 87 likes · 62 comments · el gato malo

Other excellent takedowns:

1. Bangladesh Mask Study: ‘Extremely Weak Tea’
   An excellent short commentary with commentary by other experts
2. That Bangladesh Mask Study Shows AT BEST A Population Seroprevalence Reduction Of 0.0026%, And Likely Smaller: Plus Four New Studies Showing Mask Mandates Are Useless
   An excellent response by statistician William Briggs on this study and other studies showing they are useless.
3. Revisiting the Bangladesh Mask RCT (Nov 23, 2021)
   Agrees with the other analyses. The author actually got the data. There is no measurable effect here. It’s random noise.

I made a generous contribution to William Briggs and for that I now have proof that I am part of the elite!

Still not convinced?

If you still aren’t convinced, I encourage you to read through all the comments below. They are all excellent. Thank you all for your comments!

The bottom line

1. Masks don’t work.
2. “We have no burden, no burden whatsoever, not even in the least degree, to prove mask mandates don’t work. Mask mandate supporters, however, must show conclusive evidence that their mandates provide value. This they cannot do, and have not done.” [from William Briggs]
3. The Bangladesh study was junk.
4. Anyone who claims the Bangladesh study was good is incompetent and is spreading misinformation. Twitter should ban these people (like Monica Gandhi who is quoted in the Nature article).
5. You don’t want to mess with “the bad cat” (aka el gato malo).

Amelia 3 hr ago This is one of the best analysis of what is wrong with the Bangladesh “study” http://www.argmin.net/2021/11/23/mask-rct-revisited/ (via @FatEmporer on Twitter)