Making sense of the world through data
The focus of this blog is #data #bigdata #dataanalytics #privacy #digitalmarketing #AI #artificialintelligence #ML #GIS #datavisualization and many other aspects, fields and applications of data
You can follow the link below to see the video which in itself is very interesting.
The problem about Money is that it is very complicated. If you studied economics and learned money theory at University, what you learned about related to the late 19th Century when the markets were infinitely simpler than today. Things have change drastically since.
It was a slow motion at first, creation of the US Central Bank in 1913, getting rid of the restraint of gold in 1971, then emancipating the financial markets in the late 1980s with the Big Bang in London. But it's only in the early 21th Century that speed has been picking up with the grand unification of financial markets and the flood of Fiduciary money.
We now live in a completely artificial market which is almost completely under control. This would all be fine if it was sustainable. But it is not and we are approaching the end of the system. Historically, ALL financial systems in history have crashed one way or the other. The milder ways were through jubilees, erasure of debt, but there were also much more violent ways usually ending with destructive wars.
This time will be different. The economy has become far more complex and the elites have a plan with their CBDC "money". A plan were "You will own nothing and will be happy!" To implement this plan, they must take control of all the assets and control ALL the transactions with NO exception.
This is why all dissenting countries from Libya to Iraq were destroyed in the past. And also why Russia and Iran are mortal enemies. Their sin is not military or ideological, it is financial. They are roadblocks on the way of a global takeover.
Well, we'll see how it goes in 2024 since it is the year when the conundrum will be resolved one way or another. (The video explains very well how we got there, especially the last few years which are key to understand what will happen in 2024.)
In “The Great Taking” documentary now airing on CHD.TV, former
hedge fund manager David Webb takes the audience step by step through
his forensic investigation into the legal, financial and regulatory
changes that have set up “the greatest crime ever contemplated … the
planned confiscation of everyone’s global securities assets.”
In “The Great Taking,” a new documentary airing on CHD.TV,
former hedge fund manager David Webb takes the audience step by step
through his forensic investigation into the legal, financial and
regulatory changes that have set up “the greatest crime ever
contemplated … the planned confiscation of everyone’s global securities
assets.”
You would expect that by now we have a rather good idea and until recently most scientists would have answered 13.6 billion years.
Then things started to go wrong.
Already with the Hubble Space Telescope we were seeing galaxies fully formed a few hundred million years after the birth of the Universe. Strange but not impossible.
Then we sent the James Webb Telescope into orbit. A more powerful machine working in the infrared light specter. And what we were afraid of happened. We are now seeing objects born "before" the official beginning of the place.
Something's wrong but what is it?
In fact as for almost everything in science, the closer you look the more you realize that we do not understand as much as we think.
When we looked at galaxies we could see that they were rotating. Then we measured the rotation and horror, the exterior of galaxies is rotating almost as fast as the center. According to the Newton laws, this should not be. So we invented Dark matter. We do not know what it is but it has to be there otherwise Newton was wrong!
When Hubble observed what at the time was called nebulas, he discovered that they were much farther away than we thought and consequently could not belong to our galaxy. They were themselves galaxies. An infinity of them! The way he calculated the distance was by observing the red-shift and by doing so found that the Universe was expanding according to what we latter called the Hubble constant. But horror, the speed of expansion was much faster than justified by what we could see and compute. So we invented Dark Energy. We do not know what it is but it must be there otherwise Einstein made a mistake somewhere!
Then we found the cosmic background which somehow justified our Big Bang theory. Victory was close... but the radiation was strangely flat so we invented inflation. A time in the early Universe when the expansion of the Universe was much faster than the speed of light, almost infinitely faster. "How could this be?" You may ask. Well don't! We really don't know... but it must be otherwise our models of the Universe do not work.
And now finally this news that in fact could have been predicted a few years ago. We are seeing structures which are older than the Universe. Now "Houston, we have a problem!" What are they, we don't know. But either our calculations are wrong or they should not be there. (My personal guess is that the calculations based on red-shift are wrong 30% or the Universe is much older than we believe 70%)
Why do I give a higher probability to the second option? Well, we have another problem with age and a much, much bigger one. We can calculate relatively accurately the age of stars based on their composition. We have done this for almost 50 years and the science here is rather accurate. And slowly we started seeing very old stars, red dwarves in the range of over 10 billion years of age. They could just fit within the range of our expectations. That is until we found the Methuselah star. A star, located about 200 light-years away in our galaxy which is at least 1 billion years older than the Universe!
So here you go: An object which is at least 13.8 billion years at the edge of the Universe and a star which is over 14 billion years. Both uncomfortably wobbling in a 13.6 billion years old Universe. Many others will follow in short order. However you look at it, our science must change. (And I think it is a good thing because as you may remember, the "old" science belonged to the European Union technocrats. Hopefully the new science won't! 😀)
Tucker Carlson announcing the birth of his independent news channel. This alone should be news but he adds two scoops.
1 - The deep state will not allow the election of Donald Trump. (Unsaid: Something will happen in 2024 to prevent this election?) No one knows of course but this is also what I believe.
2 - UFO are real but the reason they are not made public is that there is a dark truth hiding behind the phenomenon. (Unsaid: Then, what is it?) Tucker Carlson only tells us that the truth is truly frightening!
Is the deep state planning a major crash of the Internet in 2024, attributed to Iran of course, to implement a digital ID by force?
It is indeed quite likely since this would kill many birds with one stone. As I have been warning, the financial system WILL crash in 2024. It is unavoidable. I know it and of course ALL Central Banks are aware of this too. The question is What will they do about it? In such a context, a major Internet attack would justify the necessary Bank Holiday and reset they want to implement.
Attributing the attack to Iran would give Netanyahu the war he wants and the digital ID would give the WEF the control it was planning for 2030 early. Something for everybody in other words!
Listen to the video, I find it quite convincing. She knows what she is talking about.
Will it happen? Not sure of course, these people are flexible. But under one form or another we will be treated with a shock doctrine event in 2024. It is guaranteed.
PS: You might want to download the video. I can easily see it cancelled within a few weeks!
Unfortunately, I share this belief. Not out of religious fervor but because our financial system has reached the end of the road and needs a reset.
The size of the real, accumulated debt is anybody's guess but much larger than 100 billion dollars. That's a lot of money however you look at it. It isn't in itself very important except as a number on someone's book since that someone is bankrupt. And that someone includes all the Western countries with few exceptions.
Reality is more complicated since countries cannot go bankrupt (they can always tax more, in theory...) In reality, a financial system is based on confidence in the money. And confidence in the dollar is gone.
Step by step, then suddenly. We are about to enter the suddenly part of the curve...
World War III, cyber attacks, economic meltdowns
could change life forever; all three scenarios are simmering and ready
to explode
Chanukah is underway and Christmas is just a couple of weeks off. Another year will go by the wayside.
As we approach December 31, you will hear people chirping on social
media that they are glad such a bad year is fading into the rearview
mirror and how much they are looking forward to brighter times in 2024.
These people are not awake. Don’t get lulled into their fantasyland.
It’s more likely that we will look back on 2023 as perhaps the last
year in which we enjoyed a somewhat normal life here in America, still
perched atop the global order and enjoying all the benefits of that
status. Our dollars still buy food for our Christmas table and energy to
heat our homes, even if it’s more expensive than in previous years.
With the world’s superpowers remaining at loggerheads as to how we
move forward into a new era marked by artificial intelligence and
digital currencies, we can count on being moved closer to World War III
next year, if not fully embroiled in it. And living through war and
economic upheaval is never easy.
The Luciferian globalist elites have done their best to lay hints of
what they plan to hit us with next in their list of conjured-up crises.
They talk a lot about cyber attacks.
Jeremy Jurgens, the managing director of the World Economic Forum,
stated at the WEF’s annual summit in January 2023 that a major cyber
attack would likely take place before 2025. Well, 2023 has come and gone
and we have not seen any debilitating cyber event. If Jurgens indeed
has access to insider globalist information and knew what he was talking
about when he made that comment at the outset of 2023, then that would
leave 2024 as the year for this horrific event to go down, because it would have to happen before 2025.
Klaus Schwab himself, the top dog at the WEF, warned in 2020 of a
coming major cyber attack that will make the Covid pandemic look like “a
small disturbance.”
We know that something catastrophic needs to happen in order for the
globalists to be able to fully implement their plans for a “Great Reset”
of the world order.
It could be an EMP or nuclear war. But a series of major cyber
attacks shutting down the banking and communications infrastructure
seems like a more likely scenario because it would allow the globalists
to shut down online truthtellers and use the chaos and confusion to
round up their enemies. Then, when their mission is accomplished, they
simply turn the infrastructure back on and continue on the road to total
dictatorship, minus the annoying truthtellers like myself and so many
others.
An EMP attack, on the other hand, would take 10 years or more to
recover from and set the globalist surveillance state back decades.
We have been warning about the death of the petrodollar for many
months, and while the movement in that direction has been very slow, it
doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening.
There have been some developments that perhaps keep the normies of
the world fast asleep and unaware of where we are heading economically.
Take, for example, the U.S. stock market, which has continued on an upward trend in recent months.
The price of gold spiked upward for a brief few days last week, then ticked back down.
But don’t be fooled. The U.S. dollar is doomed.
And a huge news story basically ignored by the corporate media and
little noticed even by the conservative media took place at the end of
November.
Wall Street seemed not even to notice.
A major global oil producer, the United Arab Emirates, abruptly stopped selling its oil in U.S. dollars
and is joining forces with the BRICS nations, of Brazil, Russia, India,
China and South Africa to forge ahead into a de-dollarized world. BRICS
recently expanded its membership to include the UAE, along with Saudi
Arabia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and Argentina.
What this means is the U.S. will no longer be able to benefit from a
situation in which it continuously increases its military budgets and
runs up huge debts financed by China, Saudi Arabia and other sovereign
states. In fact, China and Saudi Arabia, two of the biggest financiers
of U.S. debt, have already started unloading U.S. treasuries like
hot potatoes. The two BRICS members have offloaded hundreds of billions
of dollars worth of U.S. treasuries in recent months. This is the
beginning of the end for global dollar dominance and, unless the U.S.
wins World War III and is able dictate the terms of the peace, it will
mean the end of U.S. geopolitical dominance.
Changes of this magnitude in the world economic order do not happen
without a fight on the battlefield. That’s the real reason why we are
heading to World War III. It has nothing to do with Ukraine’s or
Israel’s difficulty in protecting their borders, or even the
confrontation between Taiwan and China or mounting tensions between the
two Koreas. The fact that all of these flashpoints are showing signs of
exploding is simply a symptom, not a cause, of the economic upheaval
enveloping the world. As the world shifts from fiat currencies to
digital currencies it remains to be seen who or what will be in control
of this new digital system. The fiat paper system was dominated by the
United States, but we see myriad countries forming a coalition that
believes perhaps the new digitized system should not be so weighted
toward the benefit of one Western country and its closest allies. We
will only find out which dog in this fight ends up on top after World
War III has been fought and we end up with a clear winner and loser, and
who knows how long that will take.
The plan to upend the world order by ditching the petrodollar could
still backfire on the BRICS. But at the moment, things seem to be moving
ahead, albeit slowly, in their favor.
As noted by the site QTR Fringe Finance,
the BRICS nations now control most of the world’s nuclear arsenals,
oil, precious metals, diamonds and rare-earth minerals. It’s time to
wake up, folks, and take note of what’s happening. This transition to
local currencies being used in global transactions will bring down the
fiat currency known as the petrodollar and usher in a new global order.
This is likely the reason why the U.S. and NATO are reacting so
aggressively to put down Putin because in order to preserve what’s left
of the post-World War II liberal rules-based order, led by the United
States, it’s paramount that the U.S. separate Russia from the other
global power backing BRICS, which is China.
As long as China, Russia and the major oil-producing states are
allied, there is no future for U.S. hegemony in global affairs. The days
of the U.S. browbeating and blackmailing the leaders of nations around
the world will be over — its foreign policy would actually be forced to
treat foreign heads of state as equals, rather than vassals. That would
mean the end of the U.S. military-industrial complex, which would also
bring an end to the endless wars the U.S. military has been forced to
fight since the end of World War II. So while it will come with much
economic pain, perhaps there will be a silver lining?
Of course, the globalists will be seeking to exploit the downfall of
American military power for their nefarious purposes. They will attempt
to use the pain and suffering brought on by World War III, which may be
fought with cyber attacks and/or EMPs as much as tanks and missiles, to
further their agenda of transhumanism and digitized control of
everything and everyone.
But once wars break out and chaos ensues, it’s also possible that the
globalists could lose control of things. Now is the time to be
preparing to ride out the storm, so we can survive what’s coming and try
to rebuild on the other side.
This, of course, assumes that there will be another side. If we truly
are living in the last of the last days, then we won’t have to worry
about any of that.
I definitively should start this post with a Mea Culpa as I perfectly realize the danger I represent for "democracy" the way Al Gore understands the word.
This said, I do not believe in the junk science that he fly the world promoting in his private jet. And he can also stick his Hockey stick where you know since this is bogus statistics based on no data whatsoever.
The Earth climate is an incredibly complex machinery which as far as we know evolved and behaves like an organism, hence the theory of Gaia - Wikipediafrom James Lovelock (Still unproved but a very interesting one nevertheless). CO2 is an infinitesimal trace gas with almost no effect on warming, at least compared to water vapor which accounts for 98% of the warming effect (This is known science.) The real effect of the sun is unknown too (The energy we receive from the Sun varies by a few 10th of a % and still we can see it in statistics. What is the mechanism of transmission? No one knows.) As for clouds, they are likewise very hard for modeling. etc... etc... The more you get into the details the more you realize how little we know.
Which is exactly why the science should NOT be discussed. Otherwise you confuse people and the message. They may even learn that if you look at ice cores, it seems that historically, the CO2 curve trails the warming curve. Which in plain English would indicate that warming is causing CO2 to rise not the other way around. Imagine!
Clearly this kind of message should be banned. And it will be, have no doubt about it! Facebook and YouTube are already diligently erasing that kind of heretical science. The rest will have to be dealt with sooner than later.
Eventually they'll get rid of inconvenient statistics too! Why bother with reality when you know the truth and reality doesn't bend the knee? As Groucho Marx used to say: "Who are you gonna believe? Me of your own lying eyes?"
Al Gore says that people having access to information outside
of mainstream media sources is a threat to “democracy” and that social
media algorithms “ought to be banned.”
Yes, really.
Gore made the comments during an appearance at the Cop28 climate change hysteria conference in Dubai.
Gore whined that social media had “disrupted the balances that used to exist that made representative democracy work much better.”
The former Vice President said that functioning democracy relied on a
“shared base of knowledge that serves as a basis for reasoning together
collectively” but that “social media that is dominated by algorithms”
upsets this balance.
According to Gore, people are being pulled down “rabbit holes” by algorithms that are “the digital equivalent of AR-15s – they ought to be banned, they really ought to be banned!”
Gore claimed, “It’s an abuse of the public forum” and that people were being sucked into echo chambers.
“If you spend too much time in the echo chamber, what’s weaponized is another form of AI, not artificial intelligence, artificial insanity! I’m serious!” he added.
Apparently, the only echo chamber that should be allowed to exist is
Gore’s own rabbit hole, wherein the earth is constantly on the brink of
destruction thanks to people not obeying his technocratic mandates.
Perhaps Gore is unhappy at his own misinformation being fact checked
by individuals who have access to information not produced by corporate
media sources that are friendly to him.
Gore infamously predicted that the north polar ice cap would be “ice free” within 5 to 7 years.
It never happened.
As Thomas Cartenacci documents, Gore has a storied history of making climate change predictions that turn out to be spectacularly wrong.
I also believe that the EV push is to control people. From mundane and benign like road pricing to far more nefarious purposes like where you can and cannot go.
The good thing is that it won't happen. It is just not technically possible to transform the world fleet of automobiles into EVs in less than 10 years. To some extent, EVs will remain a luxury in the 2020s. We are already seeing a large percentage of the population moving back away from EVs due to their lack of range and cost.
Now of course it all depends on what actually happens next year which will be far more important than what cars we drive.
Here is my take:
I fully agree with Andrew Bustamante, (an interview I posted last week) that we are already in WW3! Just not the type of good old wars we used to know. This is a war by proxy. NATO against Russia through Ukraine, The West against Arab countries through Gaza. etc... These wars will expand further although we can expect the protagonists to carefully avoid a direct confrontation.
But eventually, a confrontation WILL happen. This is unavoidable. War through trade as the one currently taking place with China are always historically replaced by direct confrontations. My best guess is sometimes later in 2024.
So what happens then? We will almost immediately enter a war economy with restrictions, rationing and other limitations enabled by electronic means.
In such an economy, your QR code and car GPS will take a far more ominous place in your life. And once these are introduced, they'll stay with us forever. (It is much easier to imagine that only EVs are allowed to move in such a world.)
Here is what I believe was the alternative: Accept the absurd "War to save the planet" and get all these things "light" or refuse them as we did and get them anyway but the reason being a real war. Now of course they would prefer a real war where you do not blow up everything, otherwise what's the point? But how can you be sure of this?
The “climate crisis” stuff is the excuse, of course. But what is the reason?
Well, it’s fundamentally the same reason behind the failed push to get
everyone “vaccinated” – which was really a push to set a precedent that
would inevitably be expanded, as always happens when precedents are set
(as for example when the precedent was set that forcing the car
companies to install seat belts in cars led to the government forcing
people to wear them).
All buckled in for saaaaaaafety!
If the government had been able to establish the precedent that it had the legitimate authority to force everyone to take a drug then it could – and inevitably would – force everyone to take other
drugs. And – via this method – exert total control over people’s
increasingly defunct right to engage in commerce, move about freely and
even freely associate with others. (The latter right has been largely
defunct since the “civil rights” legislation of the 1960s set the
precedent that people must associate with one another; a subject for another time.)
And how did the government plan to exert this control?
If you remember, it was to be via electronic means. People
were to be QR-coded, like bipedal cattle. The code would be stored on
the phone they have already succeeded in getting most of us to carry
around all the time.
In order to be allowed into a store or restaurant (or to buy food at a
supermarket) the bipedal cattle would have had to show their code
scanned.
Via this method the government (and its complicit corporate tools)
would control the populace more finely than the greatest authoritarian
villains in history. No one could do anything (just about) without the
government-corporate nexus knowing about it before you were allowed to do it – and thereby controlling whether you were allowed to do.
This brings us to the why of this push to get everyone into an electric vehicle:
If successful, it will achieve what they failed to accomplish with
the “vaccines” – and the attendant QR coding of the population.
Your driving will be under their control. You will only be allowed to drive as they say. You will be immediately punished if you don’t. And you will not be allowed to drive anything else.
Via the insurance mafia – which has long been in partnership with the
government, which it uses to force you to buy what it sells (and
thereby can force you to pay whatever it demands that you pay).
Electric vehicles are electronically tethered vehicles – and
not just to their power cords. The reason they’re being pushed so hard
is because they are so easy to control – remotely. As an example, a
Tesla’s range can be increased (or decreased) by Tesla and irrespective of the owner’s wishes. Tesla also sells its own in-house insurance,
which “adjusts” what the victim is obliged to pay as the victim drives,
according to how he drives. Too fast – and he pays more.
As a matter of technological capability, every aspect of his driving is under Tesla’s control.
All EVs have this capability embedded – as well as being tethered to a
power cord, at the other end of which is the government (which has
operational control over the grid – and the utilities – that produce and
distribute the electricity without which an EV is a very heavy and very
expensive paperweight).
This power can – and will be – metered.
Just the same as bread was rationed in the old Soviet Union. You got just as much as the government decided to allow you to buy.
But the citizen of the Soviet Union was never micromanaged to the
extent the micromanagers of the technocratic world state have in mind
for us.
Key to the success of this operation is the de facto banning of cars that are not electric and cars that are not electronic.
That is to say, older cars that do not have the embedded capability to
receive “updates” and that cannot be remotely controlled.
But how will this be done?
Via the mafia refusing to “cover” cars that are disconnected.
A report
has been making the rounds about this and it ought not to be dismissed
as “conspiracy” because it is an elaborating fact. People are being pushed into EVs. Vehicles that aren’t EVs are being pushed off the market. The government has been pushing the embedding of electronica in all new vehicles that is marketed as “assistance”
technology – and “technology” that will prevent “impaired” drivers from
driving. By which is meant drivers whose “performance” is outside of allowable parameters.
And electric vehicles are tethered vehicles – both via their power cords and via their “connectedness.”
These are the only vehicles the mafia will “cover” – the “coverage”
the government says you have to have, else you may not legally drive.
Thereby forcing you out of your disconnected, untethered older vehicle
and into an EV. A vehicle they control that you’re allowed to use, but
only as they say you may – enforced by the tether of “connectedness.”
Now you understand why they’re pushing EVs – and how they intend to push us out of anything that isn’t.
They kept telling us "Follow the Science!" all over the world, almost unanimously, although of course there was no science.
The real virologists, Dr Malone in the US, Dr Montagnier in France and many, many others were silenced while the ones paid by laboratories were non stop on television.
That was then. You would think people have learned since? You would be wrong. The next pandemic will prove this although now it will of course be much harder to convince most people. We don't even know the name of the latest variant!
But the science about the consequences of the Covid madness is much less kind and starting to show up. A generation of children has been badly damaged, individually, in their ability to learn but more ominously socially, in their ability to live with others.
Does it matter? Hard to tell. The social, economic, technological and military problems are piling up so fast that in the end, maybe not!
Still, you would believe that elected governments in democratic countries would have the interest of their citizens at heart but that would be very "last century" as a concept. Today's governments are promoted jet-set applicants working on behalf of their corporate sponsors. The wet dream of Mussolini and his fascist colleagues with their vision of the fusion of government and large corporations.
They did it, Benito! Although of course the future will look nothing like the futuristic one you were dreaming about. Democracy is messy but free people are happier on their own than even the kindest tyranny can achieve, because they find solutions that the most well intended political systems from communist to fascist never seen to be able to stumble on in their technocratic pursuit of social perfection. And still the machine marches on, ignoring its mistakes, blinded by the light of salvation which always seems to be far ahead at the end of an endless tunnel. Burning bodies to save souls in the Middle Ages, now they are burning souls to save bodies. Is that what we call progress?
A new systematic review has been published in Archives of Disease in Childhood, one of the journals of the British Medical Journal, by Sandlund et al. titled ‘Child mask mandates for COVID-19: a systematic review‘.
Since
no randomised controlled trials have even been conducted on child
mask-wearing or mask mandates, the authors systematically reviewed
observational studies and included 22 in the final analysis: six found child mask mandates were associated with lower rates of infection; the other 16 didn’t.
But the studies that found they didn’t weren’t just greater in quantity; they were higher quality too.
Of
the six studies reporting a significant negative correlation between
masking and COVID-19 cases, five had critical and one had serious ROB [risk of bias].
Of
the 16 studies failing to find a significant correlation, one (6.3%)
had critical, 10 (62.5%) had serious, five (31.3%) had moderate and none
had low ROB. [emphasis added here and below]
In short, almost all studies with critical ROB had pro-mask results, while all studies with moderate ROB did not.
Table
2 below gives a breakdown of the various types of bias the reviewers
found. The six studies with pro-mask results are listed first.
All
six studies reporting a negative association were potentially
confounded by crucial differences between masked and unmasked groups,
including the number of instructional school days, differences
in school size, systematic baseline differences in case rates in all
phases of the pandemic, testing policies, contact-tracing policy
differences and teacher vaccination rates.
Almost all these confounds seem to apply to the worst of the bunch, Jehn et al., who found “the odds of a school-associated COVID-19 outbreak in schools without a mask requirement were 3.5 timeshigher than those in schools with an early mask requirement”. Unfortunately, this study was so bad even pro-maskers interviewed by the Atlanticsaid
it was embarrassing. Among its many problems was that even though the
study period was July 15th to August 31st 2021, “Some [schools] didn’t
begin class until August 10th; others were open from July 19th or July
21st. That means students in the latter group of schools had
twice as much time — six weeks instead of three weeks — in which to
develop a Covid outbreak.” No wonder the researchers didn’t want to share the raw data.
That study was published in the U.S. CDC’s in-house propaganda rag Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, but even prestigious peer-review journals like the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)
have published similar rubbish by pro-mask scientists who gerrymandered
results through a conveniently selected study design, as Sandlund et al. explain.
The Boston observational study [Cowger et al.]
stated they could infer causality between lifting school mask mandates
and increases in student and staff cases by using a
difference-in-differences technique. However, a subsequent reanalysis
called the methodology and results of this study into question and failed
to find the same association when expanding the population to include
the entire state or using different statistical analysis and also found
the initial study’s results were likely confounded by differences in
prior infection rates.
Interestingly,
whereas as all pro-mask studies with critical risk of bias were done in
North America (five in the U.S.; one in Canada), most of the studies
with the lowest risk of bias were done in Europe.
In a
Spanish study of almost 600 000 children, the researchers did not find a
significant difference in cases between unmasked five-year-olds and
masked six-year-olds; instead, case rates correlated closely with the
age of children, which was also observed in another Spanish study. … A
lack of significant association between masking children and risk of
COVID-19 was also reported by the U.K. Department of Education. … A
Finnish study compared case rates in children with and without mask
mandates in 10-12 year-olds, and the authors found no reduction in
COVID-19 case rates when mask recommendations were extended to include
10-12 year olds.
All this means that Sandlund et al. come to the inevitable conclusion that
“real-world effectiveness of child mask mandates against SARS-CoV-2
transmission or infection has not been demonstrated with high-quality
evidence”.
But the issue of child mask mandates
isn’t just about mask effectiveness; it’s about potential harms too,
such as negative effects on language learning and communication.
Mask wearing causes reduced word identificationand impedes the ability to teach and evaluate speech. There
is a link between observation of the mouth and language processing, and
people of all ages continue to focus on the mouth when listening to
non-native speech.
Masks may also have negative psychological effects on children too.
There is also evidence that masks hinder social-emotional learning and language/literacy development in young children. Children
with special-education needs and autism may be disproportionately
impacted by mask requirements as they rely heavily on facial expressions
to pick up social cues. Misinterpretation of facial expressions
increases anxiety and depression in individuals. School environments
with mask mandates were also found to have increased anxiety levels
compared to those without mandates.
Additionally, the physiological effects of masks may be worse for children than adults.
In addition, mask wearing has been associated with physiological harm — many of which are more frequently reported in children than in adults —
which may have multiple negative downstream effects, including reduced
time and intensity of exercise, additional sick days, reduced learning
capacity, and increased anxiety. Masking has also been found to lead to rapid increase in CO2 content in inhaled air — higher in children than in adults — and to levels above acceptable safety standards for healthy adult workers, which may rise further with physical exertion.
This leads to a simple cost-benefit analysis of child mask mandates.
Costs: potentially language learning and communication issues, worse psychological well-being and negative physiological effects.
Benefits: None
In conclusion, Sandlund et al. recommend that “Adults who work with children should be educated about the lack of clear benefits and the potential harms of masking children”.
Even
though it would be too little too late, it’d be nice if some of the
various governments around the world that forced kids to mask followed
this recommendation. It’s a shame they won’t.
When you talk to normal people nowadays, do you notice that something has gone very wrong?
Dr. Michael Nehls argues that the Covid operation is actually a mind
control program that involves the coordinated use of media and
neurotoxic substances against billions of people.
I’ve struggled for years to determine the real motivations behind the Covid operation.
Profits, kill off and power… These are all obvious. Of course, it’s
all of those, but they seem insufficient when considering the audacity
and scale of Covid.
Covid is much bigger than all of these things, which have been going
on, quietly, mentioned on little Internet backwaters like Cryptogon for
decades.
With Covid, they came for billions of us all at once.
This is planned. This is on purpose. This is not a coincidence.
