With the mask delusion in full force in the US, other countries have also been assessing the potential benefit of widespread community mask-wearing. Use varies widely across the globe, and as we have shown, there is no apparent correlation between mask-wearing rates and cases or deaths. The Government of Norway conducted an official review of the evidence in regard to the benefits, or harms, of community mask-wearing. (Norway Study) Everyone is looking at the same studies, so it isn’t surprising that they all come to the same conclusion. Please note too that this review again doesn’t even bother to consider the pathetically inadequate research referenced by the Dictator to justify his mask mandate. That kind of “study” is not actual research that supports anything. The review concludes that while there may be some evidence of benefit from face masks, the evidence base is very limited and uncertain, any effect is likely to be small, and is limited to use of actual medical masks. The review also finds that there are potential harms from face mask use and that with a low prevalence the number of people experience undesirable effects is likely higher than those who may benefit. The agency concludes that general wearing of masks is not recommended.
Norway Does a Mask-Wearing Review, Guess What the Result Was
By Kevin RocheJuly 28, 2020Commentary
✅ Subscribe via Email
About this Blog
The Healthy Skeptic is a website about the health care system, and is written by Kevin Roche, who has many years of experience working in the health industry. Mr. Roche is available to assist health care companies through consulting arrangements through Roche Consulting, LLC and may be reached at [email protected].
Healthy Skeptic Podcast
This is an outstanding report on total global drug spending and trends, with projections out to 2025. It helps you understand this important area of health care, which does much...
June 1, 2021
MedPAC 2019 Report to Congress
June 18, 2019
Another example of over-priced companies trying to find some way to survive in the post-epidemic financial world. Transcarent, which does something, somehow to “access high quality, affordable care” is buying...
March 6, 2023
In an attempt to swiftly revive two floundering health care companies, a PE firm has announced the merger and recapitalization of Revive Health and SwiftMD. You know they are...
January 30, 2023
Investors have not yet learned their lesson, as Pearl Health gathers a new round of $75 million in capital for its business of supporting physicians who want to participate in...
January 30, 2023
Access ACO Care Management Chronic Disease Comparative Effectiveness Consumer Directed Health Consumers Devices Disease Management Drugs EHRs Elder Care End-of-Life Care FDA Financings Genomics Government Health Care Costs Health Care Quality Health Care Reform Health Insurance Health Insurance Exchange HIT HomeCare Hospital Hospital Readmissions Legislation M&A Malpractice Meaningful Use Medicaid Medical Care Medicare Medicare Advantage Mobile Pay For Performance Pharmaceutical Physicians Providers Regulation Repealing Reform Telehealth Telemedicine Wellness and Prevention Workplace
March 27, 2023
Why You Can’t Trust People Who Make Up Stuff About Vax Safety
A couple of studies offer a far better explanation for heart issues in athletes and…
March 25, 2023
Coronamonomania Lives Forever, Part 201
Tired of March Madness? A boringly refreshing dip into some CV-19 research summaries is recommended.
March 24, 2023
The CDC Is a Font of Methodological and Statistical Error
Several times in the last three years I and others have pointed out serious flaws…
Join the discussion 2 Comments
I believe this has been Denmark’s position all along as well, but not sure if they’ve shifted at all. On the other end of the continuum, things that appear to have growing supportive evidence and at the same time growing censorship and skewering by MSM. Curious your review of the current landscape around HCQ, and study collection sites such as c19study.com cited by AAPS.