If the tabloids, paparazzi and media were following Jesus around today, headlines would read “Jesus Doesn’t Care.”And that’s your cue to gasp! When it comes to media, it’s all about shock headlines, not necessarily the truth. On the surface, in John 11 it may seem as if Jesus did not care when one of His closest friends was deathly ill. But if we dig a little deeper, we can experience that aha moment that scripture has to offer.
Before we jump into John 11, I want to remind us all of Isaiah 55:8-9. This verse really sets the framework of how we should adjust our perspective when we read a headline or a verse that doesn’t quite seem right at face value. It’s also been a huge reminder for me as I look at the condition of our state and continue to pray for our country. I don’t like what is happening in our state nor in our country, and it’s easy to wonder, “Jesus, do you care?!” The result of the recall effort here in California was a good reminder to lean in and trust even when we don’t understand it.
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,”declares the Lord. As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” Isaiah 55:8-9
In John 11 we read about Jesus’ dear friend Lazarus who was dying. When Jesus received the news, it took him a couple days before deciding to visit His friend. However, by the time Jesus arrives, Lazarus passed away. Many people had come to console Lazarus’ sisters Mary and Martha. At face value, it appears as if there was a crisis that Jesus neglected, resulting in a seemingly avoidable death. GASP! To the crowd, clearly Jesus didn’t care.
Too Slow To Care
In John 11:21-22, we see Martha’s broken heart for her brother as she confronts Jesus, “If only you’d been here, my brother would not have died … “
Notice, she’s blaming Jesus. In her grief, anger, and disappointment, she is blaming the Lord for being too slow to respond.
We see this sort of raw emotion all throughout the Psalms, especially from King David. And I bet Martha was familiar with the Psalms from attending synagogue––she’d read about David crying out to God in raw disappointment. And when we’re disappointed, the Lord is exactly where we should go! The problem some people come across when they express their raw feelings with God is that they stay in their disappointment. They get bitter and angry and turn away from God. But in this story, take notice of what Martha does next. She acknowledges who she is talking to and what He is capable of. She trusts that even after Lazarus’ death, Jesus can do anything (John 11:22).
Unanswered Prayers
I think all of us have felt a prayer request go unheard at some point or another. “He/she wouldn’t have left if you had been quicker to respond.” “I wouldn’t have lost my job if you cared more.” “I wouldn’t be addicted if you’d responded sooner.”
Often, we may feel that His pace is too slow. We urgently ask, “Jesus, don’t you care?” We forget that Jesus doesn’t operate on our time schedule. He has a reason why there’s a delay. You can’t stop trusting because He didn’t meet your deadline. Whenever we put a timeframe to it, we disqualify our trust in Him. When there is a delay, it always comes down to trust. We must trust the pace of Jesus’ walk. As Martha and Mary found out, a delay is not a denial.
A Godless State
As I look at the condition of our state, I am incredibly frustrated. Over 40,000 businesses closed this last year. Over half the homeless population in the entire world resides in California and the funds to help this situation are being misappropriated. More abortions happen in California than in any other place in the world. Drug overdose deaths far outpaced Covid deaths. I could go on and on. We pay the highest amount of taxes, we pay the highest amount for gasoline. The cost of living in California is simply out of control (hence the increased homeless situation). There is a good argument that due to our moving farther and farther away from God we are being judged. There is much scriptural precedent where God judges his people. He allows a leader that does not acknowledge Him or follow any of his principals to be in charge and make it hard for the people. The evil that has existed and increased in California cannot be ignored by God forever. He will judge it and perhaps that time is now.
What Is Your Prayer?
The reality is, we cannot control this situation but we can pray and ask Jesus to intervene on our behalf. Just as our Lord did for Martha and Mary, perhaps even now, Christ will come and heal our state and nation.
Isaiah 55:8-9 reminds me to keep praying for the people of California and yes, we are to pray for the governor of California. Just as we’ve seen in scripture time and time again, God can change the hearts of people in an instant.
Martha’s desperate and urgent prayer was for her brother to be healed. I believe there is a deep desire in every one of us for “something” to happen in our lives. We all have an urgent prayer. If not now, we will soon. What is your urgent and perhaps desperate prayer? What I want to encourage you to do today, is write down your urgent prayer. Put words to the raw emotions you’re experiencing. I’d even love to be praying with you if you feel comfortable filling out a prayer request online.
Know this … even when we’re in our darkest time, there’s a light that shines. God will bring good out of a bad situation (Romans 8:28). We can believe and trust that God cares. We must not get tired of doing good (Galatians 6:9).
National Surveys show that only 20% of church attendees VOTE. Too many Christians just sit back and say, “whatever” when it comes to voting. THAT.MUST.STOP. As a Believer, it is of utmost importance that we obey the Bible and “show honor where honor is due.” Voting is one of the primary ways we can honor those who serve our country. Too many men and women have died for our freedom for 80% of the church to be so flippant and careless about exercising our freedom to vote.
If you are as disturbed as I am by the direction of our country, state, and county you have an opportunity to let your voice be heard, VOTE because Enough is Enough.
I shared on Sunday about the upcoming vote to Recall Governor Gavin Newsom here in California; click here, We Must Vote (it’s in the first part of the video). The frustration in our country and state is at an all-time high. The President continues to hurt this country with his lack of leadership and his constant acquiescing to foreign terrorists like the Taliban and bioterrorists and human rights criminals like China.
In California specifically, we have a leader who has completely trampled on the Constitution of both the United States of America and the Constitution of the State of California. It is mind blowing to think of the number of crimes (that’s right, crimes) that he has committed based primarily on his use of the executive order privilege he refuses to give up. Enough is Enough.
In California, we have a chance to change the leadership that has been continuously running, not walking, toward all out socialism. Make no mistake, this vote is about the Elites versus the People, it is about Freedom versus Fascism. Remember the French Laundry Restaurant Scandal ? That’s just one example of the Governor actually getting caught. He sees you and I as mere peasants in his kingdom. It’s time to show him that he works for the people not the other way around.
Remember when he promised to take a 10% pay cut because so many people had lost their jobs? Yet, he did not take that cut. However, he made sure every other Governmental worker did take at least a 10% cut.
I could go on and on about the hypocrisy coming from Sacramento but let’s make sure our voices are heard on September 14th because Enough is Enough.
The choice is simple; if you are fine with mask mandates, closed schools, closed gyms, closed playgrounds, closed small businesses (except for Strip Clubs), silencing of voices, no debate allowed, no voice of your own, no opinion of your own and no real actual science allowed to back any claim you may have, then Newsom should stay in office. If you value faith, freedom, your family and the right to question, debate, and peaceable assemble among many other reasons, then their needs to be a new voice leading this state.
The Governor forced lockdowns, mask mandates, and overall hopelessness spread faster than the virus and caused the suicide rates to climb. Suicide ideation skyrocketed to a 600% increase and suicide hotline calls ballooned to an 8,000% increase (see my previous blogs with citations on this subject or do a simple duck duck go search). Violent crime, homelessness, drug and alcohol abuse is at an all-time high in California. Overdose deaths outpaced Covid deaths throughout California but especially in Newsom’s hometown of San Francisco. Enough is Enough.
We must do our research, pray, and VOTE. Too many men and women have died for our freedom for us to not take the time to do our research and vote. If we do not, we are liable for the leadership of our state and eventually our country.
With so many concerns about election integrity, we are receiving ballots at church this Sunday (Sept. 12, 2021) to deliver for you. Our Salt and Light team will be available to answer your questions and receive your ballots.
Remember, there are two issues you are voting on. 1. Should the Governor be recalled. 2. Who do you vote for to replace him. If you’d like information on the various candidates please visit www.biblicalvoter.com to learn more.
Inconsistency is one of the most frustrating things about people and life in general. I was driving on the freeway the other day and I was behind a car in the fast lane (surprisingly it was not a Prius) that had no one in front of them and was going 75mph or so. This was great until they slowed down to 60 then sped up to 70, then down to 55, then up to 75, then down, and this continued for several minutes as I was boxed in with cars behind me and on my right. I could do nothing about the inconsistent vehicle in front of me.
It became frustrating not because the person was driving 75 in the fast lane or even 70, the frustration came when they would slow down and then all of the sudden speed up and the line of cars behind them would get up to speed only to have to put on the brakes again because of the sudden slow down. As a driver in the fast lane or a person in general, we value consistency. We need some element of predictability to get where we’re going in life.
Inconsistency is what we’ve been dealing with as people, especially in California, since 15 Days to Slow the Spread has become 15 months to keep the people under the thumb of an increasingly socialistic governmental rule. Let’s take a look at just some of the many inconsistencies that have cropped up over the past 15 months or so. This is by no means an exhaustive list. Links are provided for all articles mentioned.
Respirator Shortages
When we first started hearing about Covid there was news that if it becomes a national emergency we would be short of the needed resources to effectively manage the virus. It all started with the alarming news that Americans would not have enough respirators. You may recall that in March of 2020 we were told we must shut everything down because there is a dire respirator shortage in America. It was predicted that hundreds of thousands of people would flood the hospitals with Covid and not survive due to the respirator shortage. See article here from April of 2020.
The inconsistency baffled us as the ventilator shortage never materialized. Rather quickly we were told we were actually in good shape with ventilators. We expected the shutdown to be over and things would begin to get back to normal. But hold on, it wasn’t ventilators, it was hospital’s becoming overwhelmed. Cue the Mercy Ship and Comfort Ship arriving in New York and Los Angeles and Christian organization Samaritan’s Purse pop up hospital in Central Park, New York with the capacity to handle thousands of critical Covid patients. Hold on… neither the ships nor Samaritan’s Purse were needed.
More inconsistencies came to the surface. Frustrations mounted as more and more people were losing their jobs and businesses around what seemed, at the time, to amount to a typical flu season. Churches, schools, gyms, shopping centers, sports, and on and on were shut down. People were frustrated and confused as the predicted numbers were not materializing. Then, mandates for us “common folk” were not being followed by those who were forcing the mandates on us.
Inconsistent Messaging
The Governor stood in front of cameras and boldly proclaimed a 10% pay cut for all California State workers due to the pandemic. Stating that many people in California were out of work due to the lockdowns and that he is “just like them” and needs to show solidarity. He stated it “starts with me” and claimed he would be the first to take the pay cut. However, it turns out he did not take the pay cut. Inconsistent again. He mandated businesses be closed, yet his own business (a winery) remained open into July. Inconsistent again.
In California we were told we could not send our kids to school, yet our Governor decided it was appropriate to send his kids to school. Apparently, it was safe for his kids but not for ours. He told California parents that he was “like them” living through “Zoom school” yet he had been secretively sending his kids to in person learning for months. The inconsistency was evident.
We were told not to go to restaurants and that restaurants were closed, even to outside dining for long periods of time. Yet, the inconsistency reared its ugly head again as the Governor decided it was a good time to spend taxpayer’s money inside a restaurant with over six different family households and not even go through the exercise of wearing a mask. Inconsistent again. I think former San Diego mayor Kevin Faulconer actually said it best,
“His kids can learn in person. But yours can’t,” Faulconer tweeted. “He can celebrate birthday parties. But you can’t. He can dine on a $350 meal at one of California’s fanciest restaurants during the worst recession in generations. But you definitely can’t. Can you believe this? I can’t.”
Or, speaking of inconsistency, let’s take Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. An aunt of Newsom’s through marriage, she told everyone it was not safe for salons to be open. Yet, as the lockdowns continued, she contacted her salon and made sure they would usher her in where she could receive special treatment. Nancy’s Hair Day Apparently, it was safe for the Governor and the Speaker of the House to live in normalcy and go to restaurants and hair salons but for the rest of us, we needed to stay masked and stay home and just obey what the government tells you. The inconsistency of what was being said and what was being seen was and continues to be the cause of mounting frustration.
Inconsistent Science
We were told to “follow the science” and keep your distance and mask up. Yet, right away Dr. Fauci told America, “Masks don’t help against viral agents like Covid.” Later he flip flopped, and he continued to flip flop. As political pressure mounted on him, he changed his tune. We were initially told to social distance six feet, then three feet became the safe distance, then back to six …..Again, inconsistent.
We were told that over 2 million people would likely die from Covid. Yet, when digging into the “science” we saw that every kind of death you can imagine was being labeled “Covid.” As I’ve already written about (see blog Face the Facts here), hospitals were paid more for Covid deaths than other deaths so there was an incentive in place to name deaths “Covid.” While there are still too many deaths listed (500,000+) it has never been near 2 million thankfully. The inconsistent science was and is driving people mad.
Even with the Covid deaths listed falsely (the CDC website actually says “confirmed” or “presumed.”) How can it be presumed? It either was or was not due to Covid. They have incredibly inaccurate PCR tests for Covid. Again, this is one of the ways the numbers were and are inflated. The whole procedure for naming a Covid death was and is still wrong.
Let’s take a look at the current science. As of May 11, 2021 the United States has 596,874 Covid deaths. The US has a current population of 332,664,383 million people. That equals a death rate of less than 0.017%. The number is calculated since the beginning of data collection in 2019. So, we are nearing two years of Covid data collection. If we were to cut that number in half by years, we would see about a 0.009% death rate. To put that in perspective, according to the CDC about 655,000 Americans die from heart disease every year. That is a death rate of .0019%. that is higher than Covid…every year. While that is still tragic, it puts it in perspective of what has really been happening in our country.
We don’t shut everything down because of heart disease. We don’t stop eating, stop drinking, stop going to baseball games that serve hot dogs high in saturated fat and nitrates, we don’t stop living because heart disease is the #1 killer in America. We don’t shut everything down because people die of the flu or other viruses. We don’t lock people down because over 36,000 people die ever year in car accidents. We don’t keep people from living their lives because of a 0.009% chance (with inflated numbers) of dying from Covid…Except, that is EXACTLY what our government has done.
Included in the inconsistencies of the scientific jargon that is out there is the fact that there is prophylaxis that actually work against Covid. And, if someone is symptomatic there are proven treatments that work against Covid. Why then the vaccine? More on that later…
Churches, Pastors and Christians preach and live by faith. “God is bigger than the virus,” yet when their people tried to show up for church, they saw locked doors, Covid signs, and empty churches.
To be clear, in the beginning, it was wise to close down. Nobody knew what this Covid thing was or would be. However, it did not take long to figure out the inconsistent messaging coming from the governmental leaders to realize, this Covid thing is not what it is purported to be. A virus yes, but one that should cause churches, schools, and businesses to shut down, NO.
Now, as I talk with pastors everywhere, it is clear, those that decided to remain closed for the longest periods of time are suffering the most now. We will see how this plays out over time, but initially these are the results of my informal survey. Many churches did not open until more than a year after initially closing. On average, those that remained closed and have now just recently opened are seeing about a 30% return rate. That means if the church was running 1,000 in attendance pre-covid they are seeing about 300 people now.
Those that opened early on and remained open are seeing an incredible rate of growth, some even doubling their attendance from pre-covid numbers. Why are many of the churches that remained closed seeing such a low return rate? Because of the inconsistent messaging.
As I talk with people who have changed churches the number one reason they changed is because their church remained closed week after week and month after month. At the end of the day, they could not reconcile how some churches were open and safe and their church decided to remain closed. It was hard for many churchgoers to comprehend that for years they were taught to live in faith over fear, but when it came down to it, their church leadership decided to live in fear over faith. They just could not identify with that kind of a church any longer.
People want to be safe, yes, but they also want to see pastors and leaders living out their faith in front of them. Shepherds are to lead by example. For those that defied the governmental orders (many using the rallying cry to follow “Christ not Caesar”) they are currently reaping the benefits of that decision with record numbers of salvations, baptisms and attendance.
Vaccine
I’ve previously written about the vaccine (Vaccine Yes or No?). The inconsistent messaging coming from governmental leaders continues to confuse. Does the vaccine work or not? The answer is a resounding…possibly. However, there are also variants to the Covid virus. Not only that but people that have been vaccinated are asked to continue to wear masks and social distance. Does the vaccine work or not? … the answer continues to be … maybe. Dr. Fauci said the risk is very small of contracting Covid after being vaccinated but you should continue to wear a mask and social distance. … because the vaccine works? Or wait, because it doesn’t work? I’m confused … it’s inconsistent messaging … again.
Sounds a lot like how every year there are variants to the flu virus. They say even if you get the covid vaccine you’ll need “booster” vaccine shots or entirely different covid vaccine shots every year. Wait, don’t they suggest you get the flu shot every year because there are variant flu strains each and every year? This couldn’t possibly be an attempt to keep people vaccine dependent, could it?
To be clear, I am not against all vaccines for all reasons. There have been some beneficial vaccines over the years. Smallpox, polio and diphtheria vaccines, just to name a few, have given people the opportunity to live life over succumbing to disease.
My issue is with the mandating of the vaccine. My issue is with the talk of vaccine passports which really amount to discrimination against healthy people. Not only healthy people but people in general who do not think it is a good idea to jab experimental mRNA into their bloodstreams. This should be a choice. This should be a free will choice in America where our freedom should still matter.
There is no way an experimental vaccine, or any vaccine for that matter, should ever be mandated on the human race. You should not be forced to take a vaccine, especially not in America. I would expect this kind of rhetoric coming from China. They have plenty of medical mandates that leave their people no choice but to conform. But this is America where freedom is supposed to reign. However, the truth is our freedoms have been and continue to be reined in.
I continue to pray over more people each week at church who have had bad reactions to the vaccine and are suffering and are scared. At this point, the risks far outweigh the benefits in my opinion.
Control not Covid
But here’s the reality, it’s not about Covid, is it? The Covid virus is certainly an issue in terms of its virulence and its ramifications on society long term. However, as the lockdowns and mandates unnecessarily continue, it becomes clearer and clearer that it is and has been about control. We have an entire governmental system that has been churning toward socialism for some time now. These mandates, including the mask mandates (Un-Masked) are about controlling your home, your business, your education, your church, your movements, your money, your future, and your life. Make no mistake, as more and more people blindly conform, we will continue to lose our way as Americans. But that is a blog for another time.
Accountability
Here’s my concern moving forward. Just like there is no accountability for that car in front of me as they finally moved over and exited (they will simply do it again at the next opportunity), there will be no accountability for the way our governmental leaders inconsistently led our state and country. They will simply do it again at the next opportunity.
An over 8,000 percent increase ( 8,000% Increase) in suicide hotline calls in California due to the lockdowns should never be shoved under the rug. There must be accountability for these leaders that not only ignored the fact that there was an 8,000 percent increase but have ignored the fact that many Californians took their own lives because of the lockdown policies. We simply cannot stand by and allow politics to matter more than people.
I am glad there may be some accountability coming for the California Governor. The recall measure has passed by validating over 1.7 million signatures, which exceeds the minimum amount needed by more than 500,000. Now, we wait for a date to vote. A date to finally let our voices be heard. A day where maybe, just maybe, the inconsistencies will come to an end.
My guess is that you are even more frustrated with the inconsistencies of the last 15 months than I am following a car in the fast lane that can’t decide between 60 and 75mph. It’s time for the governmental mandates and control measures to move over into the slow lane. Better yet, they need to take the next offramp.
There are a lot of questions surrounding the various Covid Vaccines and how a person of faith should approach them. I fully realize as I speak to people in the lobby at church on Sundays that several people have gotten their vaccine already. Some greet me with a, “Hey, we’re back, we’ve got our vaccine … so we’re out in public again.”
I suppose for some people the vaccine has been a mental relief from fear of Covid. I must admit, it saddens me that fear was so propagated and still is, that people were not willing to go out except with a vaccine now. I’ve already stated my view on Covid, Mask Mandates, and other agendas forced upon us.
My goal of writing this is not to get people fired up on either side of the vaccine debate. I’m going to answer some of the frequently asked questions I’ve received about the vaccine and look at it from a couple of different angles as well as just give you my personal opinion based on my own research. So, take my opinion but check it against your own research. And please, do not go blindly by what you are told in the media. You must research both sides of the vaccine debate and draw your own conclusion based on sound research.
Fetal Cell Tissue
One of the biggest debates is over the use of fetal cell tissue in the vaccines. Of the four vaccines available to the public, two have fetal cell lines and two do not. The two that do not are Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna/NIAID. The two that utilize fetal cell lines are Astrazeneca/University of Oxford and Johnson and Johnson. The debate centers on the ethics of using an aborted or miscarried child’s cell line. The two vaccines that utilize aborted or miscarried fetal cell lines use the cell code to help produce the vaccine. The cell code is replicated as many times as needed year after year. These cell lines were taken from an aborted or miscarried fetus in 1973 and in 1985. See this illustration for more information on fetal cell line usage in vaccines. I do not agree with the use of fetal cell tissue period.
Is the vaccine the Mark of the Beast? The answer is NO. This is not a secret way to inject the Mark of the Beast into your system. Let me give you some clear biblical reasons why it is not the Mark. You can also read Revelation 13 for more information or go to my sermon series from last Summer and Fall on The End Times. Click here: The End Times Series.
1. The Mark of the Beast will be required when the Beast shows up. The Beast is not on the scene leading anything at this point (although I understand that is debatable based on our current circumstances). The Beast as scripture describes him has not revealed himself as of yet. 2. The timing of The Mark will be deep into the Tribulation period. 3. The Mark will be on the forehead or right hand and not injected into your system. 4. The Mark is a token of worship. People will have to pledge allegiance to the Beast in order to receive the Mark. People will literally be lining up to pledge allegiance to the Anti-Christ (the Beast). A person will not accidentally take the Mark of the Beast nor will a person be tricked into taking the Mark. 5. As Christians, we will not be here when the Beast arrives on the scene. As I taught in the End Times series, the overwhelming evidence in Scripture favors a Pre-Tribulational Rapture of the Church (Christians). That means we will be with Jesus in Heaven BEFORE the Rule of the Anti-Christ takes shape and the Tribulation is unleashed on the earth.
Vaccine Side Effects
There have been widely reported side effects of the Covid vaccine. Of course a regular google search will not produce these reports except on page 12 or 13 of the search. They have absolutely buried the statistics. A better search is by using a browser like duckduckgo which puts the most relevant research at the top of the page regardless of political affiliation.
According to investigative reporter James Grundvig when describing comments from one expert and advocate for the vaccines said, The author neglects to explain that mRNA vaccines are only “authorized for emergency use” and not approved by either the US FDA or the UK’s NHS. She further downplays the 929 deaths and the nearly 16,000 adverse events that have been reported to VAERS in the first few months of administering the experimental vaccines.
We also know that recently the Johnson and Johnson version of the Covid vaccine was withdrawn from use after reports of deaths from blood clotting associated with the vaccine. I believe it is back in circulation now.
Is Your Job Requiring You to Take It?
Some have reached out and said their place of employment is requiring employees to be vaccinated in order to come to work. First of all, this is illegal. The vaccine is only approved for emergency use and it is NOT FDA approved. You would have a very strong lawsuit if they force you to take it. I was thinking about this today, imagine that … in America, we are being threatened with our jobs, our entertainment (sports stadiums requiring vaccines) etc … and on and on, and if we don’t take the vaccine we are on the outside of society. This is wrong in so many ways. I was glad to see someone finally take a stand and say we are not requiring vaccinations…. And that was … NASCAR … which just might be my new favorite sport.
If you’re being required to take the vaccine, have a serious sit down conversation with your boss and tell him/her you are a person of faith and you cannot take it based on the fact that it contains fetal cell tissue from an aborted baby. Perhaps you can use a religious exemption. Or, tell them your concern over the possible side effects. If they still force you, speak to legal counsel. This puts you in a tough spot no doubt. Pray and ask the Lord to lead you.
My Personal View
In my research, I see the Covid vaccine as an unproven experiment. We have no idea what the long-term effects could be. We truly do not even know if it is effective. Yet, it is being pushed on us as a MUST. Not only is it a problem for me ethically (especially considering the two vaccines that used aborted fetal cell lines), it is a problem for me as a person who does not like being told what to do by someone I do not trust. The very fact that they are saying, “You must take it” causes me to automatically push back and say, “Oh yeah, watch me NOT take it just because you are forcing it down my throat as if I live in China!”
Furthermore, censoring on social media continues. Facebook, Instagram, and other social platforms take the liberty of adding links when buzzwords are recognized. These links are not synonymous with the views of posts such as my last blog, “Un-Masked.” When our voices are silenced, it raises questions and violates our trust in the mandates being enforced.
Covid is not and was not what it was reported to be, then as soon as Biden is in office the PCR tests are changed (see above link on vaxxter) and the numbers are reduced as vaccines are rolled out and championed as the savior. Even though there are two vaccines that do not have the fetal cell line, I still will not be taking those. As a healthy individual who exercises and eats right (most of the time) there is no need to inject my body with an experimental cocktail of mRNA.
Vaccine Anti-Faith?
Taking the vaccine is not necessarily anti-faith. I would discourage anyone from just blindly going and getting the vaccine just because they can. Sometimes vaccines are required in places to move the gospel forward. There are vaccines that missionaries have to take in order to bring the gospel to disease-infected parts of the world. I know many missionaries that are full of faith and they take these vaccines so they can bring the good news to the “least of these.”
At the end of the day, I do not know of many vaccines that are good at all. I believe they have done a lot of harm to kids especially. Each year the list of required vaccines for a child to go to school continues to grow.
I believe this is a personal decision that you must make based on your own research. I have given you my research and my opinion on the matter. But, I do not think a person is of lesser faith if they have taken the vaccine. I am just of the opinion that it is not necessary based on the evidence and the limited time the vaccine had to come to market and the limited proof of effectiveness among other reasons.
For more information read https://www.drtenpenny.com/ who does a good job of laying out vaccine information that you will not get in the MSM.
I would love to hear your comments and get your thoughts (your measured, researched thoughts) don’t be a jerk. Did you take the vaccine? Did you have any side effects? Are you going to take the vaccine? Are you not going to take the vaccine?
There is a reality to what has been going on folks…. the good old plain truth is hard to find these days. We’ve said it ever since the “15 Days to Slow the Spread” turned into “15 Months to Keep it Going.”
We’ve been lied to, coerced, manipulated, and worst of all no one’s been held accountable nor has anyone even repented. Despite the facts, the charade continues. That’s just the reality. You may disagree and you are entitled to your opinion but let’s ACTUALLY do what they have been telling us to do since the beginning and “Follow the Science…”
As you follow the science you realize what has been said from legitimate scientists from early studies until now remains the same, Covid is very much like influenza (see below). This is not opinion, this is scientific fact. If you disagree I challenge you to read the Stanford University study below… notice… Stanford, not a Christian University, nor a Conservative University… (some say this is not a Stanford funded study, rather it has Stanford doctors and researchers who participated in the research). One thing we know is that the Main Stream Media is attempting to discredit it. Yet, Stanford is a world renowned University known for its undeniable pedigree in research and science. You must do your research and not blindly follow a political narrative no matter how adamant it is constantly pushed.
The fact that masks do not work against Covid and the lockdowns have done more harm than good is not a useful narrative in California politics nor in Washington D.C. right now. Click the link below to see the facts of more overdose and suicide deaths than Covid deaths…and it’s not even close.
Again, this is not the narrative that the current administration wants accessible to the public. So, this post along with many others who have linked the scientific studies are being blocked by Big Tech. This post will more than likely be blocked sooner than later. Even major renowned doctors are being threatened by Twitter and Facebook to remove their posts about this or they will be permanently banned! Welcome to Big Tech Chinamerica.
Understand, this study was also posted by NIH (National Institute of Health)…a governmental agency. It was not picked up by any of the Main Stream Media and it has been buried on the NIH website…. you have to ask yourself WHY? Why are they so afraid of actual science? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7680614/
We’ve said it from the beginning, the reason is clear, it has not been about health it has been about control. It has been about Politics over People and enough is enough. We said enough is enough back in June when we opened Skyline Church and we have remained open. We did not require masks (though some chose to wear one, many did not). We are a healthier church community because of it. 99% of people on Sundays at Skyline did not wear a mask and now we have another scientific study to prove our decision was correct. We are healthier because we did not wear a diaper…err…mask on our face. We had NO outbreaks this ENTIRE TIME. How is that possible? Because we followed the actual science!
I want to encourage you as we move into this more magnified era of governmental overreach and control… push back. Never allow this to happen again. Never allow the government to seize your freedoms, dignity, and sense of peace among many other things. We must say NO. No I won’t wear a mask, no I won’t close my church, no I won’t close my business, no I won’t close my school….the science does not support it!
Let me encourage you, when you vote for a political candidate in the future, make sure you know where they stand on these most basic of American freedoms. What did they do during the 2020 year of Covid? What was their stance? Where do they stand today? Make sure you know before you vote or it won’t be long before double mask mandates and egregious lockdowns return.
Due to Big Tech censorship I have little confidence this link will remain working. I have also copied and pasted the study below in case that works better. If you want to know the truth about Covid and the efficacy of masks, read below.
It is a well-researched study and it is lengthy. If you want to see a synopsis, scroll down to Table 1.
What you need to know from me as your pastor and from your church leadership is that no matter the issue, no matter the consequences, we will always fight for the truth to be Un-Masked.
Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis
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.
Introduction
Facemasks are part of non-pharmaceutical interventions providing some breathing barrier to the mouth and nose that have been utilized for reducing the transmission of respiratory pathogens [1]. Facemasks can be medical and non-medical, where two types of the medical masks primarily used by healthcare workers [1], [2]. The first type is National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-certified N95 mask, a filtering face-piece respirator, and the second type is a surgical mask [1]. The designed and intended uses of N95 and surgical masks are different in the type of protection they potentially provide. The N95s are typically composed of electret filter media and seal tightly to the face of the wearer, whereas surgical masks are generally loose fitting and may or may not contain electret-filtering media. The N95s are designed to reduce the wearer’s inhalation exposure to infectious and harmful particles from the environment such as during extermination of insects. In contrast, surgical masks are designed to provide a barrier protection against splash, spittle and other body fluids to spray from the wearer (such as surgeon) to the sterile environment (patient during operation) for reducing the risk of contamination [1].
The third type of facemasks are the non-medical cloth or fabric masks. The non-medical facemasks are made from a variety of woven and non-woven materials such as Polypropylene, Cotton, Polyester, Cellulose, Gauze and Silk. Although non-medical cloth or fabric facemasks are neither a medical device nor personal protective equipment, some standards have been developed by the French Standardization Association (AFNOR Group) to define a minimum performance for filtration and breathability capacity [2]. The current article reviews the scientific evidences with respect to safety and efficacy of wearing facemasks, describing the physiological and psychological effects and the potential long-term consequences on health.
Hypothesis
On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced a global public health emergency of severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) causing illness of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) [3]. As of October 1, 2020, worldwide 34,166,633 cases were reported and 1,018,876 have died with virus diagnosis. Interestingly, 99% of the detected cases with SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic or have mild condition, which contradicts with the virus name (severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2) [4]. Although infection fatality rate (number of death cases divided by number of reported cases) initially seems quite high 0.029 (2.9%) [4], this overestimation related to limited number of COVID-19 tests performed which biases towards higher rates. Given the fact that asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic cases is several times higher than the number of reported cases, the case fatality rate is considerably less than 1% [5]. This was confirmed by the head of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases from US stating, “the overall clinical consequences of COVID-19 are similar to those of severe seasonal influenza” [5], having a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1% [5], [6], [7], [8]. In addition, data from hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and general public indicate that the majority of deaths were among older and chronically ill individuals, supporting the possibility that the virus may exacerbates existing conditions but rarely causes death by itself [9], [10]. SARS-CoV-2 primarily affects respiratory system and can cause complications such as acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), respiratory failure and death [3], [9]. It is not clear however, what the scientific and clinical basis for wearing facemasks as protective strategy, given the fact that facemasks restrict breathing, causing hypoxemia and hypercapnia and increase the risk for respiratory complications, self-contamination and exacerbation of existing chronic conditions [2], [11], [12], [13], [14].
Of note, hyperoxia or oxygen supplementation (breathing air with high partial O2 pressures that above the sea levels) has been well established as therapeutic and curative practice for variety acute and chronic conditions including respiratory complications [11], [15]. It fact, the current standard of care practice for treating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 is breathing 100% oxygen [16], [17], [18]. Although several countries mandated wearing facemask in health care settings and public areas, scientific evidences are lacking supporting their efficacy for reducing morbidity or mortality associated with infectious or viral diseases [2], [14], [19]. Therefore, it has been hypothesized: 1) the practice of wearing facemasks has compromised safety and efficacy profile, 2) Both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to reduce human-to-human transmission and infectivity of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, 3) Wearing facemasks has adverse physiological and psychological effects, 4) Long-term consequences of wearing facemasks on health are detrimental.
EVOLUTION OF HYPOTHESIS
Breathing Physiology
Breathing is one of the most important physiological functions to sustain life and health. Human body requires a continuous and adequate oxygen (O2) supply to all organs and cells for normal function and survival. Breathing is also an essential process for removing metabolic byproducts [carbon dioxide (CO2)] occurring during cell respiration [12], [13]. It is well established that acute significant deficit in O2 (hypoxemia) and increased levels of CO2 (hypercapnia) even for few minutes can be severely harmful and lethal, while chronic hypoxemia and hypercapnia cause health deterioration, exacerbation of existing conditions, morbidity and ultimately mortality [11], [20], [21], [22]. Emergency medicine demonstrates that 5–6 min of severe hypoxemia during cardiac arrest will cause brain death with extremely poor survival rates [20], [21], [22], [23]. On the other hand, chronic mild or moderate hypoxemia and hypercapnia such as from wearing facemasks resulting in shifting to higher contribution of anaerobic energy metabolism, decrease in pH levels and increase in cells and blood acidity, toxicity, oxidative stress, chronic inflammation, immunosuppression and health deterioration [24], [11], [12], [13].
Efficacy of facemasks
The physical properties of medical and non-medical facemasks suggest that facemasks are ineffective to block viral particles due to their difference in scales [16], [17], [25]. According to the current knowledge, the virus SARS-CoV-2 has a diameter of 60 nm to 140 nm [nanometers (billionth of a meter)] [16], [17], while medical and non-medical facemasks’ thread diameter ranges from 55 µm to 440 µm [micrometers (one millionth of a meter), which is more than 1000 times larger [25]. Due to the difference in sizes between SARS-CoV-2 diameter and facemasks thread diameter (the virus is 1000 times smaller), SARS-CoV-2 can easily pass through any facemask [25]. In addition, the efficiency filtration rate of facemasks is poor, ranging from 0.7% in non-surgical, cotton-gauze woven mask to 26% in cotton sweeter material [2]. With respect to surgical and N95 medical facemasks, the efficiency filtration rate falls to 15% and 58%, respectively when even small gap between the mask and the face exists [25].
Clinical scientific evidence challenges further the efficacy of facemasks to block human-to-human transmission or infectivity. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 246 participants [123 (50%) symptomatic)] who were allocated to either wearing or not wearing surgical facemask, assessing viruses transmission including coronavirus [26]. The results of this study showed that among symptomatic individuals (those with fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose ect…) there was no difference between wearing and not wearing facemask for coronavirus droplets transmission of particles of >5 µm. Among asymptomatic individuals, there was no droplets or aerosols coronavirus detected from any participant with or without the mask, suggesting that asymptomatic individuals do not transmit or infect other people [26]. This was further supported by a study on infectivity where 445 asymptomatic individuals were exposed to asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carrier (been positive for SARS-CoV-2) using close contact (shared quarantine space) for a median of 4 to 5 days. The study found that none of the 445 individuals was infected with SARS-CoV-2 confirmed by real-time reverse transcription polymerase [27].
A meta-analysis among health care workers found that compared to no masks, surgical mask and N95 respirators were not effective against transmission of viral infections or influenza-like illness based on six RCTs [28]. Using separate analysis of 23 observational studies, this meta-analysis found no protective effect of medical mask or N95 respirators against SARS virus [28]. A recent systematic review of 39 studies including 33,867 participants in community settings (self-report illness), found no difference between N95 respirators versus surgical masks and surgical mask versus no masks in the risk for developing influenza or influenza-like illness, suggesting their ineffectiveness of blocking viral transmissions in community settings [29].
Another meta-analysis of 44 non-RCT studies (n = 25,697 participants) examining the potential risk reduction of facemasks against SARS, middle east respiratory syndrome (MERS) and COVID-19 transmissions [30]. The meta-analysis included four specific studies on COVID-19 transmission (5,929 participants, primarily health-care workers used N95 masks). Although the overall findings showed reduced risk of virus transmission with facemasks, the analysis had severe limitations to draw conclusions. One of the four COVID-19 studies had zero infected cases in both arms, and was excluded from meta-analytic calculation. Other two COVID-19 studies had unadjusted models, and were also excluded from the overall analysis. The meta-analytic results were based on only one COVID-19, one MERS and 8 SARS studies, resulting in high selection bias of the studies and contamination of the results between different viruses. Based on four COVID-19 studies, the meta-analysis failed to demonstrate risk reduction of facemasks for COVID-19 transmission, where the authors reported that the results of meta-analysis have low certainty and are inconclusive [30].
In early publication the WHO stated that “facemasks are not required, as no evidence is available on its usefulness to protect non-sick persons” [14]. In the same publication, the WHO declared that “cloth (e.g. cotton or gauze) masks are not recommended under any circumstance” [14]. Conversely, in later publication the WHO stated that the usage of fabric-made facemasks (Polypropylene, Cotton, Polyester, Cellulose, Gauze and Silk) is a general community practice for “preventing the infected wearer transmitting the virus to others and/or to offer protection to the healthy wearer against infection (prevention)” [2]. The same publication further conflicted itself by stating that due to the lower filtration, breathability and overall performance of fabric facemasks, the usage of woven fabric mask such as cloth, and/or non-woven fabrics, should only be considered for infected persons and not for prevention practice in asymptomatic individuals [2]. The Central for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) made similar recommendation, stating that only symptomatic persons should consider wearing facemask, while for asymptomatic individuals this practice is not recommended [31]. Consistent with the CDC, clinical scientists from Departments of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology in Australia counsel against facemasks usage for health-care workers, arguing that there is no justification for such practice while normal caring relationship between patients and medical staff could be compromised [32]. Moreover, the WHO repeatedly announced that “at present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19) on the effectiveness face masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection of respiratory viruses, including COVID-19”[2]. Despite these controversies, the potential harms and risks of wearing facemasks were clearly acknowledged. These including self-contamination due to hand practice or non-replaced when the mask is wet, soiled or damaged, development of facial skin lesions, irritant dermatitis or worsening acne and psychological discomfort. Vulnerable populations such as people with mental health disorders, developmental disabilities, hearing problems, those living in hot and humid environments, children and patients with respiratory conditions are at significant health risk for complications and harm [2].
Physiological effects of wearing facemasks
Wearing facemask mechanically restricts breathing by increasing the resistance of air movement during both inhalation and exhalation process [12], [13]. Although, intermittent (several times a week) and repetitive (10–15 breaths for 2–4 sets) increase in respiration resistance may be adaptive for strengthening respiratory muscles [33], [34], prolonged and continues effect of wearing facemask is maladaptive and could be detrimental for health [11], [12], [13]. In normal conditions at the sea level, air contains 20.93% O2 and 0.03% CO2, providing partial pressures of 100 mmHg and 40 mmHg for these gases in the arterial blood, respectively. These gas concentrations significantly altered when breathing occurs through facemask. A trapped air remaining between the mouth, nose and the facemask is rebreathed repeatedly in and out of the body, containing low O2 and high CO2 concentrations, causing hypoxemia and hypercapnia [35], [36], [11], [12], [13]. Severe hypoxemia may also provoke cardiopulmonary and neurological complications and is considered an important clinical sign in cardiopulmonary medicine [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42]. Low oxygen content in the arterial blood can cause myocardial ischemia, serious arrhythmias, right or left ventricular dysfunction, dizziness, hypotension, syncope and pulmonary hypertension [43]. Chronic low-grade hypoxemia and hypercapnia as result of using facemask can cause exacerbation of existing cardiopulmonary, metabolic, vascular and neurological conditions [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42]. Table 1 summarizes the physiological, psychological effects of wearing facemask and their potential long-term consequences for health
Table 1. Physiological and Psychological Effects of Wearing Facemask and Their Potential Health Consequences.
In addition to hypoxia and hypercapnia, breathing through facemask residues bacterial and germs components on the inner and outside layer of the facemask. These toxic components are repeatedly rebreathed back into the body, causing self-contamination. Breathing through facemasks also increases temperature and humidity in the space between the mouth and the mask, resulting a release of toxic particles from the mask’s materials [1], [2], [19], [26], [35], [36]. A systematic literature review estimated that aerosol contamination levels of facemasks including 13 to 202,549 different viruses [1]. Rebreathing contaminated air with high bacterial and toxic particle concentrations along with low O2 and high CO2 levels continuously challenge the body homeostasis, causing self-toxicity and immunosuppression [1], [2], [19], [26], [35], [36].
A study on 39 patients with renal disease found that wearing N95 facemask during hemodialysis significantly reduced arterial partial oxygen pressure (from PaO2 101.7 to 92.7 mm Hg), increased respiratory rate (from 16.8 to 18.8 breaths/min), and increased the occurrence of chest discomfort and respiratory distress [35]. Respiratory Protection Standards from Occupational Safety and Health Administration, US Department of Labor states that breathing air with O2 concentration below 19.5% is considered oxygen-deficiency, causing physiological and health adverse effects. These include increased breathing frequency, accelerated heartrate and cognitive impairments related to thinking and coordination [36]. A chronic state of mild hypoxia and hypercapnia has been shown as primarily mechanism for developing cognitive dysfunction based on animal studies and studies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [44].
The adverse physiological effects were confirmed in a study of 53 surgeons where surgical facemask were used during a major operation. After 60 min of facemask wearing the oxygen saturation dropped by more than 1% and heart rate increased by approximately five beats/min [45]. Another study among 158 health-care workers using protective personal equipment primarily N95 facemasks reported that 81% (128 workers) developed new headaches during their work shifts as these become mandatory due to COVID-19 outbreak. For those who used the N95 facemask greater than 4 h per day, the likelihood for developing a headache during the work shift was approximately four times higher [Odds ratio = 3.91, 95% CI (1.35–11.31) p = 0.012], while 82.2% of the N95 wearers developed the headache already within ≤10 to 50 min [46].
With respect to cloth facemask, a RCT using four weeks follow up compared the effect of cloth facemask to medical masks and to no masks on the incidence of clinical respiratory illness, influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections among 1607 participants from 14 hospitals [19]. The results showed that there were no difference between wearing cloth masks, medical masks and no masks for incidence of clinical respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections. However, a large harmful effect with more than 13 times higher risk [Relative Risk = 13.25 95% CI (1.74 to 100.97) was observed for influenza-like illness among those who were wearing cloth masks [19]. The study concluded that cloth masks have significant health and safety issues including moisture retention, reuse, poor filtration and increased risk for infection, providing recommendation against the use of cloth masks [19].
Psychological effects of wearing facemasks
Psychologically, wearing facemask fundamentally has negative effects on the wearer and the nearby person. Basic human-to-human connectivity through face expression is compromised and self-identity is somewhat eliminated [47], [48], [49]. These dehumanizing movements partially delete the uniqueness and individuality of person who wearing the facemask as well as the connected person [49]. Social connections and relationships are basic human needs, which innately inherited in all people, whereas reduced human-to-human connections are associated with poor mental and physical health [50], [51]. Despite escalation in technology and globalization that would presumably foster social connections, scientific findings show that people are becoming increasingly more socially isolated, and the prevalence of loneliness is increasing in last few decades [50], [52]. Poor social connections are closely related to isolation and loneliness, considered significant health related risk factors [50], [51], [52], [53].
A meta-analysis of 91 studies of about 400,000 people showed a 13% increased morality risk among people with low compare to high contact frequency [53]. Another meta-analysis of 148 prospective studies (308,849 participants) found that poor social relationships was associated with 50% increased mortality risk. People who were socially isolated or fell lonely had 45% and 40% increased mortality risk, respectively. These findings were consistent across ages, sex, initial health status, cause of death and follow-up periods [52]. Importantly, the increased risk for mortality was found comparable to smoking and exceeding well-established risk factors such as obesity and physical inactivity [52]. An umbrella review of 40 systematic reviews including 10 meta-analyses demonstrated that compromised social relationships were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, depression, anxiety suicide, cancer and overall physical illness [51].
As described earlier, wearing facemasks causing hypoxic and hypercapnic state that constantly challenges the normal homeostasis, and activates “fight or flight” stress response, an important survival mechanism in the human body [11], [12], [13]. The acute stress response includes activation of nervous, endocrine, cardiovascular, and the immune systems [47], [54], [55], [56]. These include activation of the limbic part of the brain, release stress hormones (adrenalin, neuro-adrenalin and cortisol), changes in blood flow distribution (vasodilation of peripheral blood vessels and vasoconstriction of visceral blood vessels) and activation of the immune system response (secretion of macrophages and natural killer cells) [47], [48]. Encountering people who wearing facemasks activates innate stress-fear emotion, which is fundamental to all humans in danger or life threating situations, such as death or unknown, unpredictable outcome. While acute stress response (seconds to minutes) is adaptive reaction to challenges and part of the survival mechanism, chronic and prolonged state of stress-fear is maladaptive and has detrimental effects on physical and mental health. The repeatedly or continuously activated stress-fear response causes the body to operate on survival mode, having sustain increase in blood pressure, pro-inflammatory state and immunosuppression [47], [48].
Long-Term health consequences of wearing facemasks
Long-term practice of wearing facemasks has strong potential for devastating health consequences. Prolonged hypoxic-hypercapnic state compromises normal physiological and psychological balance, deteriorating health and promotes the developing and progression of existing chronic diseases [23], [38], [39], [43], [47], [48], [57], [11], [12], [13]. For instance, ischemic heart disease caused by hypoxic damage to the myocardium is the most common form of cardiovascular disease and is a number one cause of death worldwide (44% of all non-communicable diseases) with 17.9 million deaths occurred in 2016 [57]. Hypoxia also playing an important role in cancer burden [58]. Cellular hypoxia has strong mechanistic feature in promoting cancer initiation, progression, metastasis, predicting clinical outcomes and usually presents a poorer survival in patients with cancer. Most solid tumors present some degree of hypoxia, which is independent predictor of more aggressive disease, resistance to cancer therapies and poorer clinical outcomes [59], [60]. Worth note, cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, with an estimate of more than 18 million new diagnosed cases and 9.6 million cancer-related deaths occurred in 2018 [61].
With respect to mental health, global estimates showing that COVID-19 will cause a catastrophe due to collateral psychological damage such as quarantine, lockdowns, unemployment, economic collapse, social isolation, violence and suicides [62], [63], [64]. Chronic stress along with hypoxic and hypercapnic conditions knocks the body out of balance, and can cause headaches, fatigue, stomach issues, muscle tension, mood disturbances, insomnia and accelerated aging [47], [48], [65], [66], [67]. This state suppressing the immune system to protect the body from viruses and bacteria, decreasing cognitive function, promoting the developing and exacerbating the major health issues including hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer disease, rising anxiety and depression states, causes social isolation and loneliness and increasing the risk for prematurely mortality [47], [48], [51], [56], [66].
Conclusion
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.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Baruch Vainshelboim: Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing – original draft.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] E.M. Fisher, J.D. Noti, W.G. Lindsley, F.M. Blachere, R.E. Shaffer Validation and application of models to predict facemask influenza contamination in healthcare settings Risk Anal, 34 (2014), pp. 1423-1434
[2] World Health Organization. Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19. Geneva, Switzerland; 2020.
[3] C. Sohrabi, Z. Alsafi, N. O’Neill, M. Khan, A. Kerwan, A. Al-Jabir, et al. World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) Int J Surg, 76 (2020), pp. 71-76
[5] A.S. Fauci, H.C. Lane, R.R. Redfield Covid-19 – Navigating the Uncharted N Engl J Med, 382 (2020), pp. 1268-1269
[6] S.S. Shrestha, D.L. Swerdlow, R.H. Borse, V.S. Prabhu, L. Finelli, C.Y. Atkins, et al. Estimating the burden of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in the United States (April 2009-April 2010) Clin Infect Dis, 52 (Suppl 1) (2011), pp. S75-S82
[7] W.W. Thompson, E. Weintraub, P. Dhankhar, P.Y. Cheng, L. Brammer, M.I. Meltzer, et al. Estimates of US influenza-associated deaths made using four different methods Influenza Other Respir Viruses, 3 (2009), pp. 37-49
[8] Centers for Disease, C., Prevention. Estimates of deaths associated with seasonal influenza — United States, 1976-2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010,59:1057-62.
[9] S. Richardson, J.S. Hirsch, M. Narasimhan, J.M. Crawford, T. McGinn, K.W. Davidson, et al. Presenting Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes Among 5700 Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the New York City Area JAMA (2020)
[10] J.P.A. Ioannidis, C. Axfors, D.G. Contopoulos-Ioannidis Population-level COVID-19 mortality risk for non-elderly individuals overall and for non-elderly individuals without underlying diseases in pandemic epicenters Environ Res, 188 (2020)
[11] American College of Sports Medicine ACSM’s Resource Manual for Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Priscription (Sixth ed.), Lippincott Wiliams & Wilkins, Baltimore (2010)
[13] W.L. Kenney, J.H. Wilmore, D.L. Costill Physiology of sport and exercise (5th ed.), Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL (2012)
[14] World Health Organization. Advice on the use of masks in the community, during home care and in health care settings in the context of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. Geneva, Switzerland; 2020.
[15] B. Sperlich, C. Zinner, A. Hauser, H.C. Holmberg, J. Wegrzyk The Impact of Hyperoxia on Human Performance and Recovery Sports Med, 47 (2017), pp. 429-438
[16] W.J. Wiersinga, A. Rhodes, A.C. Cheng, S.J. Peacock, H.C. Prescott Pathophysiology, Transmission, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Review JAMA (2020)
[17] N. Zhu, D. Zhang, W. Wang, X. Li, B. Yang, J. Song, et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019 N Engl J Med, 382 (2020), pp. 727-733
[18] J.T. Poston, B.K. Patel, A.M. Davis Management of Critically Ill Adults With COVID-19 JAMA (2020)
[19] C.R. MacIntyre, H. Seale, T.C. Dung, N.T. Hien, P.T. Nga, A.A. Chughtai, et al. A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers BMJ open, 5 (2015)
[20] K.D. Patil, H.R. Halperin, L.B. Becker Cardiac arrest: resuscitation and reperfusion Circ Res, 116 (2015), pp. 2041-2049
[21] M.F. Hazinski, J.P. Nolan, J.E. Billi, B.W. Bottiger, L. Bossaert, A.R. de Caen, et al. Part 1: Executive summary: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations Circulation, 122 (2010), pp. S250-S275
[22] M.E. Kleinman, Z.D. Goldberger, T. Rea, R.A. Swor, B.J. Bobrow, E.E. Brennan, et al. American Heart Association Focused Update on Adult Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Quality: An Update to the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Circulation, 137 (2018), pp. e7-e13
[23] K.G. Lurie, E.C. Nemergut, D. Yannopoulos, M. Sweeney The Physiology of Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Anesth Analg, 122 (2016), pp. 767-783
[24] B. Chandrasekaran, S. Fernandes “Exercise with facemask; Are we handling a devil’s sword?” – A physiological hypothesis Med Hypotheses, 144 (2020)
[25] A. Konda, A. Prakash, G.A. Moss, M. Schmoldt, G.D. Grant, S. Guha Aerosol Filtration Efficiency of Common Fabrics Used in Respiratory Cloth Masks ACS Nano, 14 (2020), pp. 6339-6347
[26] N.H.L. Leung, D.K.W. Chu, E.Y.C. Shiu, K.H. Chan, J.J. McDevitt, B.J.P. Hau, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks Nat Med, 26 (2020), pp. 676-680
[27] M. Gao, L. Yang, X. Chen, Y. Deng, S. Yang, H. Xu, et al. A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers Respir Med, 169 (2020)
[28] J.D. Smith, C.C. MacDougall, J. Johnstone, R.A. Copes, B. Schwartz, G.E. Garber Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis CMAJ, 188 (2016), pp. 567-574
[29] R. Chou, T. Dana, R. Jungbauer, C. Weeks, M.S. McDonagh Masks for Prevention of Respiratory Virus Infections, Including SARS-CoV-2, in Health Care and Community Settings: A Living Rapid Review Ann Intern Med (2020)
[30] D.K. Chu, E.A. Akl, S. Duda, K. Solo, S. Yaacoub, H.J. Schunemann, et al. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis Lancet, 395 (2020), pp. 1973-1987
[31] Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Implementation of Mitigation Strategies for Communities with Local COVID-19 Transmission. Atlanta, Georgia; 2020.
[32] D. Isaacs, P. Britton, A. Howard-Jones, A. Kesson, A. Khatami, B. Marais, et al. Do facemasks protect against COVID-19? J Paediatr Child Health, 56 (2020), pp. 976-977
[33] P. Laveneziana, A. Albuquerque, A. Aliverti, T. Babb, E. Barreiro, M. Dres, et al. ERS statement on respiratory muscle testing at rest and during exercise Eur Respir J, 53 (2019)
[34] American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory, S ATS/ERS Statement on respiratory muscle testing Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 166 (2002), pp. 518-624
[35] T.W. Kao, K.C. Huang, Y.L. Huang, T.J. Tsai, B.S. Hsieh, M.S. Wu The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease J Formos Med Assoc, 103 (2004), pp. 624-628
[36] United States Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Respiratory Protection Standard, 29 CFR 1910.134; 2007.
[37] ATS/ACCP Statement on cardiopulmonary exercise testing Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 167 (2003), pp. 211-277
[38] American College of Sports Medicine ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription (9th ed.), Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Health, Philadelphia (2014)
[39] G.J. Balady, R. Arena, K. Sietsema, J. Myers, L. Coke, G.F. Fletcher, et al. Clinician’s Guide to cardiopulmonary exercise testing in adults: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Circulation, 122 (2010), pp. 191-225
[40] A.M. Ferrazza, D. Martolini, G. Valli, P. Palange Cardiopulmonary exercise testing in the functional and prognostic evaluation of patients with pulmonary diseases Respiration, 77 (2009), pp. 3-17
[41] G.F. Fletcher, P.A. Ades, P. Kligfield, R. Arena, G.J. Balady, V.A. Bittner, et al. Exercise standards for testing and training: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Circulation, 128 (2013), pp. 873-934
[42] M. Guazzi, V. Adams, V. Conraads, M. Halle, A. Mezzani, L. Vanhees, et al. EACPR/AHA Scientific Statement. Clinical recommendations for cardiopulmonary exercise testing data assessment in specific patient populations Circulation, 126 (2012), pp. 2261-2274
[43] R. Naeije, C. Dedobbeleer Pulmonary hypertension and the right ventricle in hypoxia Exp Physiol, 98 (2013), pp. 1247-1256
[44] G.Q. Zheng, Y. Wang, X.T. Wang Chronic hypoxia-hypercapnia influences cognitive function: a possible new model of cognitive dysfunction in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Med Hypotheses, 71 (2008), pp. 111-113
[45] A. Beder, U. Buyukkocak, H. Sabuncuoglu, Z.A. Keskil, S. Keskil Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery Neurocirugia (Astur), 19 (2008), pp. 121-126
[46] J.J.Y. Ong, C. Bharatendu, Y. Goh, J.Z.Y. Tang, K.W.X. Sooi, Y.L. Tan, et al. Headaches Associated With Personal Protective Equipment – A Cross-Sectional Study Among Frontline Healthcare Workers During COVID-19 Headache, 60 (2020), pp. 864-877
[47] N. Schneiderman, G. Ironson, S.D. Siegel Stress and health: psychological, behavioral, and biological determinants Annu Rev Clin Psychol, 1 (2005), pp. 607-628
[48] P.A. Thoits Stress and health: major findings and policy implications J Health Soc Behav, 51 (Suppl) (2010), pp. S41-S53
[49] N. Haslam Dehumanization: an integrative review Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 10 (2006), pp. 252-264
[50] S. Cohen Social relationships and health Am Psychol, 59 (2004), pp. 676-684
[51] N. Leigh-Hunt, D. Bagguley, K. Bash, V. Turner, S. Turnbull, N. Valtorta, et al. An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness Public Health, 152 (2017), pp. 157-171
[52] J. Holt-Lunstad, T.B. Smith, J.B. Layton Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review PLoS Med, 7 (2010)
[53] E. Shor, D.J. Roelfs Social contact frequency and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis and meta-regression Soc Sci Med, 128 (2015), pp. 76-86
[54] B.S. McEwen Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators N Engl J Med, 338 (1998), pp. 171-179
[55] B.S. McEwen Physiology and neurobiology of stress and adaptation: central role of the brain Physiol Rev, 87 (2007), pp. 873-904
[56] G.S. Everly, J.M. Lating A Clinical Guide to the Treatment of the Human Stress Response (4th ed.), NY Springer Nature, New York (2019)
[57] World Health Organization. World health statistics 2018: monitoring health for the SDGs, sustainable development goals Geneva, Switzerland; 2018.
[58] World Health Organization. World Cancer Report 2014. Lyon; 2014.
[59] J.M. Wiggins, A.B. Opoku-Acheampong, D.R. Baumfalk, D.W. Siemann, B.J. Behnke Exercise and the Tumor Microenvironment: Potential Therapeutic Implications Exerc Sport Sci Rev, 46 (2018), pp. 56-64
[60] K.A. Ashcraft, A.B. Warner, L.W. Jones, M.W. Dewhirst Exercise as Adjunct Therapy in Cancer Semin Radiat Oncol, 29 (2019), pp. 16-24
[61] F. Bray, J. Ferlay, I. Soerjomataram, R.L. Siegel, L.A. Torre, A. Jemal Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries CA Cancer J Clin (2018)
[62] S.K. Brooks, R.K. Webster, L.E. Smith, L. Woodland, S. Wessely, N. Greenberg, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence Lancet, 395 (2020), pp. 912-920
[63] S. Galea, R.M. Merchant, N. Lurie The Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 and Physical Distancing: The Need for Prevention and Early Intervention JAMA Intern Med, 180 (2020), pp. 817-818
[64] D. Izaguirre-Torres, R. Siche Covid-19 disease will cause a global catastrophe in terms of mental health: A hypothesis Med Hypotheses, 143 (2020)
[65] B.M. Kudielka, S. Wust Human models in acute and chronic stress: assessing determinants of individual hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis activity and reactivity Stress, 13 (2010), pp. 1-14
[66] J.N. Morey, I.A. Boggero, A.B. Scott, S.C. Segerstrom Current Directions in Stress and Human Immune Function Curr Opin Psychol, 5 (2015), pp. 13-17
[67] R.M. Sapolsky, L.M. Romero, A.U. Munck How do glucocorticoids influence stress responses? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actions Endocr Rev, 21 (2000), pp. 55-89
Big Tech doesn’t want you to follow the science. They simply want you to follow the narrative. As Steve Cortes learned, no highly credible source is above the ugly censorship rules set by Silicon Valley tyrants.
