RE: Likely Death Blow to Masks (and Distancing) & Numerical Proof COVID Pandemic Did Not Exist (UK)

Did nobody even check the link??? You're citing an article that was retracted for being misleading. Click on the doi link provided: 10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110411 and you can see that the article was retracted since the author claimed to work for Stanford when he has not been affiliated with them since 2016, he misquoted his references, and the data provided is all unverifiable and could very well be made up. Very misleading post.

The text reads:
"This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief.

Medical Hypotheses serves as a forum for innovative and often disruptive ideas in medicine and related biomedical sciences. However, our strict editorial policy is that we do not publish misleading or inaccurate citations to advance any hypotheses.

The Editorial Committee concluded that the author’s hypothesis is misleading on the following basis:

1. A broader review of existing scientific evidence clearly shows that approved masks with correct certification, and worn in compliance with guidelines, are an effective prevention of COVID-19 transmission.

2. The manuscript misquotes and selectively cites published papers. References #16, 17, 25 and 26 are all misquoted.

3. Table 1. Physiological and Psychological Effects of Wearing Facemask and Their Potential Health Consequences, generated by the author. All data in the table is unverified, and there are several speculative statements.

4. The author submitted that he is currently affiliated to Stanford University, and VA Palo Alto Health Care System. However, both institutions have confirmed that Dr Vainshelboim ended his connection with them in 2016.

A subsequent internal investigation by the Editor-in-Chief and the Publisher have determined that this article was externally peer reviewed but not with our customary standards of rigor prior to publication. The journal has re-designed its editorial and review workflow to ensure that this will not happen again in future.

The Editor-in-Chief and the Publisher would like to apologize to the readers of The Journal for difficulties this issue has caused."