Why Won’t Anyone Publish the Danish Mask Study?
A study of 6,000 Danes was set to reveal whether wearing a face mask actually reduces the risk of COVID-19. The only problem is leading medical journals are refusing to publish the data, and the study’s lead author hinted it’s because they’re not “brave enough” to do it.
Does a mask work? It’s a question recently posed by the Danish newspaper Berlingske,[i] and one that would seem to demand an answer from scientists and public health officials alike. Yet, despite mask mandates existing in 34 U.S. states and the District of Columbia,[ii] there’s shockingly little hard data about whether or not they slow the spread of infectious disease.
Researchers from Denmark wanted to change that, conducting what may be the only randomized trial[iii] to determine if masks actually protect against COVID-19,[iv] but multiple medical journals have refused to publish the findings.
Thomas Benfield, a researcher at the University of Copenhagen and one of the study’s lead authors,[v] was asked when it would be published. Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson published Benfield’s emailed response on Twitter, which is simply: “As soon as a journal is brave enough …”[vi]
What Does the Danish Mask Study Reveal?
Speaking to Nature in October 2020, Benfield said his team wasn’t yet ready to share the study’s results.[vii] In truth, three medical journals — The Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association — have refused to publish the study, leading to speculation that it reveals a message that goes against the status quo.
Berlingske, which is the oldest daily newspaper in Denmark, suggests this is so, stating (loosely translated), “The researchers behind a large and unique Danish study on the effect of wearing a mask even have great difficulty in getting their research results published. One of the participating professors in the study admits that the still secret research result can be perceived as ‘controversial.'”[viii],[ix]
The study included 6,000 participants who were randomly assigned to wear a face mask or not for a 30-day period. Participants were confirmed to not have COVID-19 or symptoms of it at the start of the study, and they were required to spend more than three hours per day outside of the home with exposure to other people during the study period.[x]
Described as an “outstanding sample,” the Berlingske article, which was written by Lars Henrik Aagaard, praised the study, noting, “The study and its size are unique in the world, and the purpose was once and for all to try to clarify the extent to which the use of masks in public space provides protection against corona infection.”[xi]
While the results were originally expected to be published in August 2020, Benfield later said that his comment was taken “a bit out of context” and, “The article is being reviewed by a respected journal. We have decided not to publish data until the article has been accepted.”[xii]
Study Co-Author Hints at Controversial Results
Aagaard interviewed another of the study’s researchers, Christian Torp-Pedersen, a chief physician at North Zealand Hospital’s research department, who similarly said, “We cannot start discussing what they (the medical journals) are dissatisfied with because, in that case, we must also explain what the study showed, and we do not want to discuss that until it is published.”[xiii]
He then went on to say that he “might also have dared to go as far as Benfield,” had he been asked why the results haven’t been published, referring to his “brave enough” comment. Aagaard asks, “Does this mean that your research results may be perceived as controversial in the eyes of some?” to which Torp-Pedersen replies, “That’s how I want to interpret it, too.”
Aagaard then states, “Can one interpret a controversial research result in the sense that no significant effect of mask use is demonstrated in your study?” Torp-Pedersen says, “I think that’s a very relevant question you are asking.”[xiv]
Dr. Henning Bundgaard with Denmark’s Rigshospitalet is another of the study’s authors. In speaking with Bloomberg in July 2020 — when he still expected the study’s results to become public the next month — he said, “All these countries recommending face masks haven’t made their decisions based on new studies.”[xv]
Denmark was one of the latest countries to institute a mask mandate, which took effect October 29, 2020 for all public indoor spaces.[xvi] In July, however, Bundgaard told Bloomberg he worried mask mandates may offer a “false sense of security” and make people “sloppy” when following other guidelines like handwashing, self-isolating if you’re sick and social distancing. Also revealing is Bloomberg’s last paragraph:
“Bundgaard’s study on masks is due to be published next month. In the meantime, he says he hopes they don’t become mandatory in Denmark.”[xvii]
Masks have become a contentious topic in the U.S., dividing neighbors, colleagues and families over whether or not they slow the spread of infectious disease. The controversy continues to grow, particularly since public health officials have been giving conflicting information from the start,[xviii] and solid data, such as what may be revealed via the Danish study, is sorely lacking.
References:
[i] Washington Examiner October 22, 2020 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/top-scientific-journals-reject-controversial-danish-study-on-effectiveness-of-face-masks-against-coronavirus-report
[ii] Axios August 4, 2020 https://www.axios.com/states-face-coverings-mandatory-a0e2fe35-5b7b-458e-9d28-3f6cdb1032fb.html
[iii] Twitter October 18, 2020 https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1317875526997102594
[iv] ClinicalTrials.gov, Reduction in COVID-19 Infection Using Surgical Facial Masks Outside the Healthcare System https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04337541
[v] Nature October 6, 2020 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
[vi] Twitter October 18, 2020 https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1317875526997102594
[vii] Nature October 6, 2020 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
[viii] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected
[ix] Berlingske October 19, 2020 https://www.berlingske.dk/videnskab/professor-stort-dansk-maskestudie-afvist-af-tre-top-tidsskrifter
[x] Washington Examiner October 22, 2020 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/top-scientific-journals-reject-controversial-danish-study-on-effectiveness-of-face-masks-against-coronavirus-report
[xi] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected
[xii] Washington Examiner October 22, 2020 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/top-scientific-journals-reject-controversial-danish-study-on-effectiveness-of-face-masks-against-coronavirus-report
[xiii] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected
[xiv] The Blaze October 22, 2020 https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-danish-newspaper-reveals-largest-study-masks-rejected
[xv] Bloomberg July 26, 2020 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-26/face-mask-photo-op-adds-to-bewilderment-over-non-use-in-denmark
[xvi] The Local October 29, 2020 https://www.thelocal.dk/20201029/denmarks-extended-face-mask-requirement-takes-effect-these-are-the-rules-you-need-to-know
[xvii] Bloomberg July 26, 2020 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-26/face-mask-photo-op-adds-to-bewilderment-over-non-use-in-denmark
[xviii] Twitter February 29, 2020 https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/1233725785283932160
The GMI Research Group (GMIRG) is dedicated to investigating the most important health and environmental issues of the day. Special emphasis will be placed on environmental health. Our focused and deep research will explore the many ways in which the present condition of the human body directly reflects the true state of the ambient environment.
Read more at www.greenmedinfo.com
****
Please DONATE to HELP support our ongoing battle to expose the COVID-19 FRAUD!
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.
Betty Boop
| #
BREAKING: “COVID-19” measures are ridiculous. “COVID” is just a “bad flu” and all PCR testing should cease immediately.
THIS is a Meeting Privately Recorded in EDMONTON Alberta Canada last week!
Dr. Roger Hodkinson is the CEO of Western Medical Assessments, and has been the Company’s Medical Director for over 20 years. He received his general medical degrees from Cambridge University in the UK, and then became a Royal College certified pathologist in Canada (FRCPC) following a residency in Vancouver, BC.
https://westernmedical.ca/employees/roger-g-hodkinson/
Reply
Roger Higgs
| #
Thank you Betty, and John. That Edmonton recording, uploaded to YouTube yesterday, is dynamite. Let’s hope it gets out quickly (70,000 viewings so far). John, are you able to give it stand-alone coverage? Regards from Roger
Reply
Betty Boop
| #
I was shocked when I read Neil Orr’s study, published in 1981 in the Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. Dr. Orr was a surgeon in the Severalls Surgical Unit in Colchester. And for six months, from March through August 1980, the surgeons and staff in that unit decided to see what would happen if they did not wear masks during surgeries.
Their conclusion: “It would appear that minimum contamination can best be achieved by not wearing a mask at all” and that wearing a mask during surgery “is a standard procedure that could be abandoned.”
https://www.thetruthbarrier.com/2020/08/12/arthur-firstenbergs-findings-about-masks-probing-the-microbial-cosmos-invoking-the-work-of-lynn-margulis/
There are many other published studies referenced via the link to: Arthur Firstenberg’s Findings About Masks.
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
The paper was not published because it probably showed that masks wearer were more likely to catch the disease, which would be expected when you hold germs against the mouth and nose. Since making people sick and killing them would appear to be the intended consequence of every action they’ve taken do not expect the study to be released.
Reply
Alan
| #
Two separate trial are required. It is claimed that masks prevent people with the virus passing it on, so the first study will require infectious people go out with masks but ignoring social distancing, otherwise we will not know if it is mask wearing or social distancing that is being observed and it will require other people not to wear a mask. . That goes against all the rules that are being imposed on us and so will never be done, and if people have other than mild symptoms, they will not be fit enough to go out anyway. The other claim is that masks prevent us getting the virus so a test will require people with masks who do not have the virus mixing with people who have the virus but are not wearing masks and social distancing must be ignored.
No trials will be done on this basis and therefore it is impossible to find the evidence that masks offer any kind of protection.
Reply
JaKo
| #
Based on a common knowledge from times prior to this Scamdemic, any widespread reduction of exposure to any, even potentially harmful pathogens, will reduce herd immunity. Mandatory lock-downs (no Sun exposure), masks, social distancing and paranoid disinfecting are all, as if by design, promoting susceptibility of masses to a novel infection and a real pandemic to come.
Is there any other logical explanation?
Well, except the very first to be considered — boundless stupidity!
However, I don’t know how would this, rather relieving, argument hold against the coming “vaccines” and their effect on human immune system or even on humanity itself…
Cheers? I think not. JaKo
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Folks,
If you listened to the audio that Betty Boop brought to our attention you heard about vitamin D.
My brother-in-law, a retired medical technologist explained why this is the ‘flu season’.in the northern hemisphere. Most people do not suntan during the winter. But he also explained how a sudden changes in the sudden administration of too many units of vitamin D could cause other problems like pneumonia. Which fits the observation that people do not die of the flu but of other complications. And by the flu is ordinary flu.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Folks,
Less I mislead, the doctor’s prescription of vitamin D was to be used as a preventative and not a treatment. About which I have no information that D is used as a treatment for the flu.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Brian Steere
| #
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/08/20/swiss-protocol-for-covid-quercetin-and-zinc.aspx
This link also includes Vit D as preventative or mitigator and high dose active Vit D now being shown in a published study to successfully treat. But read up – as Vit D takes some days to naturally be synthesised to the form that is active – and it was this latter form that was used IV for sever clinical cases.
Reply
Brian Steere
| #
should have been
https://swprs.org/on-the-treatment-of-covid-19/
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
An extremely simple study/experiment can be conducted to establish validity of the claims about the mask use. However, no one will dare to consider such a study because for it virus has to exist and be available. So, not only such study cannot be conducted but will also expose the big fat lie about the virus existence,its associate disease and the pandemic. http://www.drug-dissolution-testing.com/?p=3488
Reply
JaKo
| #
Dr. Qureshi,
I think no experimentation is necessary to prove that whether the masks are completely useless in slowing down spreading of this purported virus, or the RT-PCR isn’t appropriate tool for its diagnosis, or, if they were to insist on both being valid, then the virus just isn’t there and positives, aka cases, are just as random as a wheel-of-fortune!
Cheers, JaKo
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
I agree with your view which has been my view too from the start. However, if someone does not agree then let them check it out themselves with a very simple experiment I noted above.
Reply
Dean Michael Jackson
| #
Why Face Masks Don’t Work: A Revealing Review
October 18, 2016
by John Hardie, BDS, MSc, PhD, FRCDC
….
Conclusions
The primary reason for mandating the wearing of face masks is to protect dental personnel from airborne pathogens. This review has established that face masks are incapable of providing such a level of protection. Unless the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, national and provincial dental associations and regulatory agencies publically admit this fact, they will be guilty of perpetuating a myth which will be a disservice to the dental profession and its patients. It would be beneficial if, as a consequence of the review, all present infection control recommendations were subjected to the same rigorous testing as any new clinical intervention. Professional associations and governing bodies must ensure the clinical efficacy of quality improvement procedures prior to them being mandated. It is heartening to know that such a trend is gaining a momentum which might reveal the inadequacies of other long held dental infection control assumptions. Surely, the hallmark of a mature profession is one which permits new evidence to trump established beliefs. In 1910, Dr. C. Chapin, a public health pioneer, summarized this idea by stating, “We should not be ashamed to change our methods; rather, we should be ashamed not to do so.” 36 Until this occurs, as this review has revealed, dentists have nothing to fear by unmasking. OH
Oral Health welcomes this original article.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170512002228/https://www.oralhealthgroup.com/features/face-masks-dont-work-revealing-review/
At my blog, read the articles…
‘House of Cards: The Collapse of the ‘Collapse’ of the USSR’
‘Playing Hide And Seek In Yugoslavia’
Then read the article, ‘The Marxist Co-Option Of History And The Use Of The Scissors Strategy To Manipulate History Towards The Goal Of Marxist Liberation’
Solution
The West will form new political parties where candidates are vetted for Marxist ideology/blackmail, the use of the polygraph to be an important tool for such vetting. Then the West can finally liberate the globe of vanguard Communism.
My blog…
https://djdnotice.blogspot.com/2018/09/d-notice-articles-article-55-7418.html
Reply
Brian Steere
| #
The study is now published
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817
Reply
Brian Steere
| #
Synopsis on Swiss Doctor site
https://swprs.org/danish-mask-study-no-benefit/
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Brian,
Thank you for bring the published study to my (our) attention(s).
While I do not claim to have read all the words of the study, but I considered the stated data could be briefly, but completely summarized by “The data completely supports the idea that the masks have no influence.” About this there can be no argument (doubt).
Yes, this comment is only to empathize the result of this experiment because it so quickly disappears on the list of current comments. Hence, the primary purpose of this comment is to alert new PSI readers who did read your comment when it was made.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply