Large Danish Mask Study Rejected by 3 Top Medical Journals
The researchers behind a large Danish study on the effect of wearing a mask are having great difficulty in getting their research results published. One of the participating Professors admits that the result could be perceived as ‘controversial’.
The study was initiated at the end of April, following a grant of DKK 5m [£600,000] from the Salling Foundations [owner of the Salling Group, Denmark’s largest retailer]. It involved as many as 6,000 Danes, half of whom had to wear face masks in public over a long period of time. The other half was selected as the control group.
A large proportion of the test participants were employees of the Salling Group’s supermarkets: Bilka, Føtex and Netto.
The study and its size are unique, and the purpose was once and for all to try to clarify the extent to which the use of face masks in public spaces provides protection against coronavirus infections.
For weeks, the media and researchers around the world have been waiting with increasing impatience for the publication of the study. Now one of the researchers who has been involved in the study has said that the finished research result has been rejected by at least 3 of the world’s leading medical journals.
These include the Lancet, the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Medical Association’s journal JAMA.
“They all said no,” says the Chief Physician in the Research Department at North Zealand Hospital, Professor Christian Torp-Pedersen.
However, the Professor does not wish to disclose the journals’ reasoning.
Alex Berenson a former reporter for The New York Times tweeted this out.
Well we now have an update there appears to be 1 medical journal that was brave enough to publish the study.
The DANMASK-19 trial, is now throwing a giant question mark upon restrictive mask mandates that have been implemented in so many countries.
According to the study, the unmasked control group had a 2.1% infection rate, while those who were told to wear a mask when not at home — only suffered a 1.8% infection rate. The difference is negligible — less than half of a percentage point separates the two extremes of mask-wearers and those who did not don the face coverings
Dr. Henning Bundgaard, a Cardiologist at the University of Copenhagen, the study’s lead author, put it bluntly. Our study gives an indication of how much you gain from wearing a mask,” he told The New York Times “Not a lot.”
These results are narrative-shattering and clearly do not show the results that pro-maskers would have wished for.
Analysis
I have previously reported upon the numerous health issues surrounding mask wearing, yet we are constantly told by the politicians, their scientific advisors and the mainstream commentariat that masks are “safe and effective” and those refusing to comply are selfish, uncaring and putting lives at risk. https://unitynewsnetwork.co.uk/medical-doctor-warns-that-bacterial-pneumonias-are-on-the-rise-from-mask-wearing/
Will that narrative change now that the results are in? Or will this report be wilfully supressed as the outcome does not fit the mainstream narrative?
Given the collective decision taken by these Medical Journals, I think we can safely assume the latter.
Sadly, this is not the first time the Lancet’s integrity has been called into question during the course of this “pandemic”.
Have these “respected medical journals” become “politically infected”?
I will leave that up to you to decide.
http://tapnewswire.com/2020/10/medical-journals-refuse-to-publish-landmark-danish-mask-study/
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/lancet-retracts-large-study-hydroxychloroquine-n1225091
I fell into politics quite by accident in 2014 and all because my local County Council brought in a policy switching off street lighting overnight my elderly neighbours felt vulnerable – this spurred me into action and the Right to Light Campaign was born.
I started the Right to Light Petition which garnered over 11,000 signatures enough to trigger a debate at Kent County Council. I delivered a speech in front of 88 Councillors and journalists but they refused to listen to the people and kept the lights off.
I worked closely with a local journalist who followed the campaign from start to finish, publishing articles on an almost weekly basis.
Word spread about the campaign and the Council’s refusal to listen – my phone became a hotline, I was invited onto BBC Breakfast and live radio something I would never have contemplated happening in a million years. Following a fierce 2 year battle and against all the odds streetlighting was restored throughout Kent.
Spurred on by success and having witnessed how badly represented people were at local level I joined UKIP standing as a candidate in Borough and County elections narrowly missing out on a seat by 22 votes on one occasion.
The run-up to the EU Referendum was an exciting time I joined the Grassroots Out Campaign and ran weekly street stalls delivering thousands of leaflets and meeting hundreds of people including Nigel Farage and Gerard Batten. I loved the buzz and the fun was infectious. I have been hooked ever since.
I became a prolific poster on Facebook building up relationships in many groups, I was approached by the owner of a Website/FB page called Fortis est Veritas asking if I would like to write articles to post on his platform. I have to date written 22 articles and really enjoy documenting the twists and turns of Brexit a very exciting time – we are writing history and it is essential that is fully documented.
I am very excited to now be given the opportunity to join the UNN family as a Political Analyst – the next chapter in a very exciting 5 years of my life.