Why Do Surgeons Wear Masks?

Surgeons wear masks to prevent the spread of bacteria, which are much larger than viruses.

Viruses are too small to be effectively stopped by masks.

(PDF) Masks Don’t Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Why Do Surgeons Wear Masks?

  1. Raging Badgers says:

    Tony, are you aware of the deleted article on Oral Health Group’s website? Here’s the archive of that article: http://web.archive.org/web/20170512002228/http://www.oralhealthgroup.com/features/face-masks-dont-work-revealing-review/

    To anyone reading this: please make a PDF copy of this archive. Also, make copies of mask studies AND vaccine studies as you come across them. This is imperative. They will begin removing this information as we march forth in this totalitarian nightmare! The boiling frog is almost cooked!

    Here’s Oral Health groups update: https://www.oralhealthgroup.com/features/face-masks-dont-work-revealing-review/

    Note that they state the following: “ The content was published in 2016 and is no longer relevant in our current climate.” isn’t that quaint? Documented, scientific studies are no longer relevant in today’s climate?

    The Last American Vagabond’s latest video deals with this scientific censorship, starting at minute 33 or so. https://youtu.be/uOFwNz-JYUQ

    This should disturb EVERYONE. They are actively removing content by which we, as citizens, can use to come to our own conclusions about the mask regulations, and the eventual vaccine regulations.

    Tony, I hope that you will inform your audience about this scientific crime.

  2. Raging Badgers says:

    Additionally, Tony, the link to the PDF you posted above titled “(PDF) Masks Don’t Work: A review of science relevant to COVID-19 social policy” appears to have been DELETED. I hope someone has made a copy of this.

  3. Jeff L. says:

    I went to read the paper, but it was gone. Apparently it’s been pulled.

  4. Advocatus Diaboli says:

    Tony, Prof. Rancourt’s article seems to have been taken down. Your PDF link leads to only a general search page on the researchgate.net website, and the list of his articles (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/D_Rancourt) doesn’t show it. Hope you saved a copy.

    However, still up as of this writing are two pieces that we may find interesting: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341832637_All-cause_mortality_during_COVID-19_No_plague_and_a_likely_signature_of_mass_homicide_by_government_response and https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336851499_Radiation_physics_constraints_on_global_warming_CO2_increase_has_little_effect.

  5. Tom says:

    Tony, have you seen the minutephysics video about the N95 mask being a miracle that can block 95% of particles at 0.3 microns, but… and I say this with some incredularity… N95 masks not only stop 100% of particles above 0.3 microns in size, but also 100% of particles BELOW 0.3 microns in size.

    It’s worth a watch. No, they do not explain how molecules of O2 or CO2 get through these miracle masks.

  6. Andrew says:

    I see ResearchGate has removed this report. I have found many reference papers critical of mask use have recently been removed. Science is being manipulated and throttled on a huge scale. We are heading into dark times.
    But this paper is still available here: https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy

  7. natstyle says:

    Was the study removed from researchgate.net? I couldn’t find it following the link or searching for it.

  8. Bart says:

    “…there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.”


  9. Robert Austin says:

    Yes, but I am told that the intent of the mask is not to protect you but to protect others. How this bizarre logic makes the rounds is a mystery. I sent a paranoid friend (85 years old, so one of the vulnerable) links to studies showing that masks do not stop virus transmission. He did not disagree with the studies but came back with “protect others” non-sequitur. I give up!

  10. Scissor says:

    There seems to be some agreement that a mask acts to lower the velocity of exhaled breath, coughs and sneezes so that the energy of the cloud exiting from a mask is reduced. In effect, this lessens the diameter of the cloud so as to effectively increase distancing.

    It makes sense that this would reduce exposure to a viral load in the case of short encounters by others. It would not make much difference if encounters were of long duration.

    Clearly, research needs to be done to quantify any such effects, but there is some rationale to support mask use.

    • averros says:

      The actual research does not confirm this theorizing.

    • Robert Austin says:

      That “lowering the velocity” consensus would seem to be a grasping at straws attempt to convince the skeptical. Any masked infectious person in an indoor environment will still leave a miasma of infectious aerosols about them. And since people are not rooted to the spot, that person will move on and another will walk into the miasma. In addition, subtle air currents will drift the miasma into the personal space of others considering themselves to be social distancing. The most reliable function of the mask is in virtue signaling.

  11. Russell Cook says:

    Interesting. The Url ” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340570735_Masks_Don't_Work_A_review_of_science_relevant_to_COVID-19_social_policy ” now defaults to a generic researchgate page no matter how a person trys to force it to go straight to the page ……..

  12. Cynical Seamus says:

    Hi Tony,

    Just to let you know that the link for the PDF you give results in being directed to the /publications page. Laboriously entering the rest of the URL (3405 . . .social _policy) has the same effect. At least, it does here in the UK.

  13. Dana says:

    If I may, here is a link to an article with video clip where David Rancourt discusses Conclusive proof — Masks do not inhibit viral spread. https://www.sott.net/article/438352-Conclusive-proof-Masks-do-not-inhibit-viral-spread

    • Scissor says:

      This is a good video, however, I think that the word conclusive is used incorrectly and perhaps comprehensive would be more correct. In any case, it would appear that mask use is not significantly effective in reducing viral spread, but these things aren’t so cut and dried.

      For example, the moderator brought up the death of George Floyd and vehemently stated that he was murdered by police. I’m not so sure that his death wasn’t from a drug overdose, coupled with poor health and physical struggle. It’s for a jury to decide but to some they will get it wrong.

      This whole pandemic is full of misinformation and misdirection on multiple fronts.

  14. Tim says:

    Have they removed this? The hyperlink takes you to some landing page. I found the author’s page but I didn’t see the paper listed.

  15. Barry Malcolm says:

    Masks do work if properly fitted and “cared” for. A lot of people (most) cant sort their recyclables. I dont have a citation for that. Many south eastern nations use masks, not just to deal with urban particulates but maybe from experience with previous “virus outbreaks”. No citation. Love your work Tomy but…..just saying. WHO data collection is a travesty. Without something nearing accurate data they are whistling in the dark.

  16. averros says:

    Surgeons wear masks to prevent spittle getting into open incisions and wounds.

    Surgical masks are not filters, they are mechanical shields. They are not intended to prevent or reduce transmission of airborne viral diseases. In fact, there’s a ton of research which quite clearly shows that they don’t.

    The whole mask farce is based on cargo-cult pseudoscience (and political posturing, of course).

  17. G W Smith says:

    Too much logic. The masses won’t listen. They are loyal to the group myth. And that’s what the dems depend on.

  18. Petit_Barde says:

    Same conclusion in a 2019 WHO’s survey with respect to face masks uselessness (p. 25, 26 & 100) :


    p. 100 :

    “Ten RCTs were included in meta-analysis,
    and there was no evidence that face masks
    are effective in reducing transmission of
    laboratory-confirmed influenza. ”

    RCT: Randomized Controlled Trial

  19. Advocatus Diaboli says:

    I notice that a lot of us pointed out that Rancourt’s PDF had been pulled from researchgate.net. No replies were posted (regardless of when they were submitted) for well over a day, so there could be no back-and-forth discussion that would have cut down on this redundancy.

    Are the overlords of Tony’s website playing games with the reply function to cripple discussion here?

    • Disillusioned says:


      Tony has not replied to prior inquiries. Whatever it is, I agree, it does cripple the discussion. My thoughts are he has control over the flow, because there usually is a flood of new posts in the discussion section after he loads new posts. Then it shuts down again, sometimes 24 hrs or more.

  20. Tel says:

    The masks don’t STOP virus spread but they reduce it. Typically a virus does not turn aerosol as a single particle, but as a small water droplet, or more accurately as a whole bunch of different sized water droplets which then get filtered (partially) by the mask.

    Thus, if everyone wears a mask, there are two imperfect barriers between any infected person and an uninfected person, plus distance, plus whatever ventilation is available hopefully something vigorous. Remember, that we never intended to actually prevent anyone getting sick (that would be ridiculous … sickness has been with us since forever … you cannot beat death) but the intention was to “flatten the curve” so not too many people got sick all at once, making it easier to deal with. Eventually people will become immune, either by natural means, or possibly by vaccine (unlikely) and then some different virus will come along. Not every mask is a good as every other mask, so the actual effect will be haphazard, but better than nothing.

    Having said all that, ideas so good they should be mandatory are the sort of things best treated with suspicion. The damage government can do is much larger than what any virus can do.

    • Great awakening says:

      Reduces? Thats bs and you know it

      Its like saying that a chainlinked fence reduces the chances and volume of mosquitos from entering your backyard

      Wake up fool

  21. It’s not the size of the bacteria or viruses that matters so much as the size of the droplets and aerosols on which they travel. Stop the water droplets and you stop their passengers, for the most part–not 100%.

    There’s lots of research showing how these are contained by masks. That’s one reason people wear masks while they’re operating on you. (Also to protect them from splatter. Ick.)

    • SEAN P HENNIGAN says:

      It may be stopping water droplets, but it is not water that is the problem. It is the virus being carried by it. The carrier (water droplets) stay on the mask fine but, being stored on the mask, the virus is readily available to pass through.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.