Study in Top British Medical Journal Trashes Cloth Mask Use!
An important but so far overlooked study published by the British Medical Journal draws a devastating conclusion against the use of face masks. They are not recommended as protection against any respiratory infection. This would certainly also include COVID-19.
The study titled ‘A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers’ (2015) compared the safety of cloth masks versus medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers (HCWs).
The study’s authors pulled no punches in finding that:
“We have provided the first clinical efficacy data of cloth masks, which suggest HCWs [health care workers] should not use cloth masks as protection against respiratory infection. Cloth masks resulted in significantly higher rates of infection than medical masks, [emphasis added] and also performed worse than the control arm. The controls were HCWs who observed standard practice, which involved mask use in the majority, albeit with lower compliance than in the intervention arms. The control HCWs also used medical masks more often than cloth masks. When we analysed all mask-wearers including controls, the higher risk of cloth masks was seen for laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infection.” [1]
The significance of this key medical finding by the BMJ cannot be overstated. The BMJ is a weekly peer-reviewed medical journal. It is one of the world’s oldest general medical journals. It began publishing in 1840 and quickly attracted the attention of physicians around the world for high-impact original research articles and unique case reports.
Moreover, this compelling study ties in well with the claims of medical professionals who argue that misguided governments should not rely on cloth face masks as part of any strategy to combat the coronavirus pandemic.
“cloth coverings are essentially worthless” [2]
Among outspoken critics of the mask obsession is Dr Sherri Tenpenny who has been at pains to advise that masks are little more than a symbol of staying together, of “doing something” to protect someone from getting sick with this generally mild infection. [3]
Indeed, there are no studies in existence that show a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public. A comprehensive list of scientific articles examining the pros and cons of mask use is found here. [4]
[1] ‘A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers’. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4): e006577. Published online 2015 Apr 22. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006577
[2] https://vaxxter.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Masks-Final.pdf
[3] https://principia-scientific.com/dr-sherri-tenpenny-masks-dont-protect/
[4] https://principia-scientific.com/?s=masks
About the author: John O’Sullivan John is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘. O’Sullivan is credited as the visionary who formed the original ‘Slayers’ group of scientists in 2010 who then collaborated in creating the world’s first full-volume debunk of the greenhouse gas theory plus their new follow-up book.
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.