Mask-Wearing Child Abuse

Stephen Lendman

I’ve written about the hazards of extended mask-wearing before.

They’re porous and don’t protect.

They risk infection from bacteria, fungi and viruses that can accumulate inside and be inhaled in concentrated form.

Too minuscule in size to be blocked, they can penetrate masks like water through a sieve.

Their longterm use is a scientific and medical aberration!

Mandated masking is with harming health in mind, not protecting it as falsely claimed.

Fake news claims otherwise are pseudo-scientific nonsense.

In his book, titled “Proof That Face Masks Do More Harm Than Good,” Dr. Vernon Coleman explained the following:

“When the (flu/covid) hoax (was rolled out by US/Western dark forces in Dec. 2020,) medical and scientific experts worldwide said mask wearing was pointless — that wearing them would probably do more harm than good.”

The fabricated official narrative later changed with diabolical aims in mind.

No science-based analysis supports masking.

Yet the myth of their effectiveness lingers like a bad aftertaste.

Mandating masks for children amounts to child abuse.

According to Coleman, “forcing children to wear masks (in school or elsewhere for protracted periods) is nearly as daft as hitting them over the head with a cricket bat.”

Enforcers of this policy “should be punished.”

“There will be a major epidemic of bacterial pneumonia among schoolchildren as a direct result of the stupid mask wearing.”

“(C)hildren will develop dementia in a few years’ time.”

“That’s not theory. The medical evidence is available.”

Coleman said he’s been warning about the dangers of mask-wearing “for decades,” adding:

“Who the hell are these teachers (and others) who promote masks?”

“Where did they train? Are they left over guards trained at Dachau or Auschwitz?”

Any teacher, medical professional or others with decision-making power who insist on children wearing masks “should be locked up for child abuse.”

Indisputable evidence shows that mask-wearing longterm causes physical and mental deterioration — for children, adolescents, youths and adults.

The above especially applies to children because of their developmental status.

Masks stunt it. A generation of mask-wearing children is being irreparably harmed.

Even former FDA commissioner, Pfizer board member Scott Gottlieb admitted that face masks don’t “provide a lot of protection.”

“That’s the bottom line.”

According to, study data revealed 24 health issues associated with mask-wearing, including physical, psychological and behavioral ones.

The World Health Organization admitted that alleged protection from “widespread use of masks by healthy people…is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence.”

Paul Joseph Watson explained the following about face masks days earlier:

Masking “left a generation of babies and toddlers struggling with speech and social skills, according to an official report.”

Ofsted inspectors “found that infants being surrounded by adults wearing face masks for significant periods of time over the last two years has damaged their learning and communication abilities.”

By age-two, they’ll “have been surrounded by adults wearing masks for their whole lives and have therefore been unable to see lip movements or mouth shapes as regularly.”

Masking children impairs their speech, language and communications development.

Even reading and comprehension are impeded.

Coleman dubbed “chronic maskitis”  “new disease,” stressing that it compromises the ability of children to develop language skills to communicate properly.

Their use compromises human interactions.

From my own experience during medical visits with doctors, I’ve found myself straining to understand them properly.

By the same token, do masks impede their ability to understand what’s told them by patients.

Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock earlier said the following about face masks:

“As for the scientific support for the use of face masks, a recent careful examination of the literature, in which 17 of the best studies were analyzed, concluded that:”

“None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.”

“(N)o studies have been done to demonstrate that either a cloth mask or the N95 mask has any effect on transmission of” flu/covid.

Dr. Jim Meehan explained that “(v)iral particles move through face masks with relative ease.”

“Your mask is a petri dish experiment” by permitting viral spores to penetrate, concentrate in nasal passages, “enter the olfactory nerves and travel to the brain.”

Their widespread use is “killing us slowly,” James Fetzer earlier warned.

Even the WSJ earlier argued against face masks for children, asking:

“Do masks reduce (flu/covid) transmission in children?”

“(W)e could find only a single retrospective study on the question, and its results were inconclusive.”

Myopic children “have difficulty seeing because the mask fogs their glasses.”

“This has long been a problem for medical students in the operating room.”

“Masks can cause severe acne and other skin problems.”

“(D)iscomfort of a mask distracts some children from learning.”

“By increasing airway resistance during exhalation, masks can lead to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the blood.”

“And masks can be vectors for pathogens if they become moist or are used for too long.”

“Chronic and prolonged mouth breathing can alter facial development.”

“It is well-documented that children who mouth-breathe because adenoids block their nasal airways can develop a mouth deformity and elongated face.”

“The possible psychological harm of widespread masking is an even greater worry.”

“Facial expressions are integral to human connection, particularly for young children, who are only learning how to signal fear, confusion and happiness.”

“Covering a child’s face mutes these nonverbal forms of communication and can result in robotic and emotionless interactions, anxiety and depression.”

Bottom line: Masks risk respiratory harm and don’t protect.

Mandating them is with harming health in mind, clearly not protecting it.

Forcing children to wear them is especially reprehensible.

It’s a criminal offense and should be treated as such.

Original Article: