‘Government advisers split their opinions on benefits of masks’

July 20, 2020

MEDICALLY REQUIRED: “If a healthcare advisor hasn’t advised you to wear a face mask, it is usually quite a bad idea. People tend to leave them on, they contaminate the face mask and then wipe it over something, so it really isn’t a good idea and doesn’t help.” – Deputy chief medical advisor Dr Jenny Harries speaking to Prime Minister Johnson when he asked her about whether they should use them in a podcast on the PM’s Twitter feed in April.

CONFLICTING ADVICE: The World Health Organisation previously said wearing a mask would not stop “coronavirus” spreading but in June changed its advice to they could “provide a barrier to infections droplets passing form person to person in busy areas”. This is one the author uses at work and at supermarkets.




MANDATORY mask wearing comes into force this week for all shoppers on Government advice across Dorset, Somerset and the South West.

However this site has found footage of Prime Minister Boris Johnson asking one of his advisers whether wearing masks or face coverings was necessary earlier this year and her advice was the complete opposite.

The country has been in lockdown since 23 March of this year, and in recent weeks some of the more draconian restrictions have been lifted. Ever since then people have been doing essential shopping and observing the two-metre distancing rule, and suddenly these proposals have been brought into place now.

Johnson asks his deputy chief medical officer, Dr Jenny Harries in April of this year in a Twitter podcast: “Tell me the value of wearing face masks, you see face masks all around the place, is there any point to that?”

‘Don’t wear a mask if you’re healthy’

She replied: “If a healthcare advisor hasn’t advised you to wear a face mask, it is usually quite a bad idea. People tend to leave them on, they contaminate the face mask and then wipe it over something, so it really isn’t a good idea and doesn’t help.

“However, if you are a patient and have been diagnosed with symptoms of coronavirus then you may be provided with a face mask then that’s a good thing and you are protecting other people in your vicinity.

‘We don’t want to disrupt people’s lives

“We have expert modellers at what we think will happen with the virus and we have looked at what sorts of interventions might help manage this as we go forward, push the peak of the epidemic forward and in general, those big sorts of events and gatherings are not seen to be something which is going to have a big effect, so we don’t want to disrupt people’s lives.”

Amongst the advice it took on this issue was from the World Health Organisation, which previously said mask wearing would not stop “coronavirus” spreading but changed its advice last month claiming covering your face can help provide a barrier to “infectious droplets” passing from person to person in busy areas.

Government chief scientific adviser Dr Patrick Vallance, Dr Chris Whitty and thier colleagues it would seem should observe Article 6 Section 3 of the Nuremberg Code when advising ministers about enforcing mandatory mask wearing. Although not legally binding, the following words asks more moral questions of civil servants given their push to roll this out.

‘Masks useful in tight spaces if worn properly’

Dr Vallance said these words to The Daily Mail on 5 May prior to the outbreak of the Black Lives Matter protests: “Masks may have a role where social distancing is not possible so there may be some cases where this simply isn’t possible.

“Where there could be undue crowding or shouldn’t be crowding, there may be times when masks may be beneficial to stop the spread. It is important that those coverings are worn properly, in other words they cover the nose and mouth.”

‘Nuremberg Code advises informed consent on medical matters’

Naturopathic medical doctor Dr Coleen Huber claims bullying people to wear masks contravenes paragraphs 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Nuremburg Code listed on Circumcision Information and Resource Pages and it is a medical intervention.

Paragraph 1 states: ” The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

“This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. 

Paragraph 4 reads: ” The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury,”

‘Law will be too confusing to enforce’

Clearly lines of contradiction make enforcement of the law impossible and this is born out in certain sections of society where coronavirus rules have been regularly ignored.

A Tweet that came to my attention from an alternative news source and they were called @Magpietilidie and it read: “So if you work in a supermarket you don’t have to wear one. However, if you want to buy some groceries after your shift you do but can then take it off again if you enter the supermarket cafe before presumably putting back on in order to finally exit the building.”

‘Don’t use pandemic to suppress freedoms’

David Vance, a prominent critic of the lockdown, mask wearing and mandatory vaccines had this to say: “Stay at home, protect the NHS, save lives, has morphed into ‘Shut Up, Wear the Mask, Think of Others’. Sweet. All staged psych-ops to wear us down, divide us, makes us comply. This is not our Covid suppression, but everything about freedom suppression.”

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

Ash Bayliss July 21, 2020 at 4:07 pm

They dont work well and every one has forgotten the eyes the eyes are a fast way in to the body and hair the hair on your head act as a filter as air passed through virus and germs get attached to hairs


mark February 3, 2021 at 10:45 am

How does this stand up in employment law?
I am going through a situation at work where I’m exempt due to health reasons. My employer has “reasonably requested” I prove this.
I have been told if I can’t prove it, then I COULD be subject to disciplinary procedures.
I will be able to prove it, but what will happen if I do prove it?
Will they furlough me until further notice because the employees in the works all accept the mask wearing?
I’m unable to work from home in my job.
HSE first course of action is to remove the risk. Am I classed as the risk?
It’s a worrying time for me


Matthew Bell February 4, 2021 at 11:41 pm

I am not expert as admin for this site but I was told by a GP surgery that you do not have to prove your exemption. The surgery is not obliged to provide an exemption certificate. Have you thought about wearing a visor? Can you be referred to your company’s Occupational Health? That may be a route out of this cul-de-sac. Some of the science out there suggests mask mandates may be increasing Covid-19 figures because the lungs are being weakened by continued oxygen depletion and CO2 inhalation – carbon monoxide poisoning? Look up the conditions hypercapnia, hypoxia and tachycardia.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: