Dear Reader,
The wearing of a face mask to protect against a respiratory virus is an act of grand deceit. It is a behavior that defies research on the topic. Wearing a face mask, as this article (one of many) points to — is unsafe to do and is ineffective.
Until the narrative around mandatory masking has changed, each day by 6am Eastern, I will both post here and send out a science-based reason why no one should wear a face mask.
I ask that you help me circulate these pieces to those around you who you believe could most benefit from them. It is important not to remain silent on this topic. These are important discussions to be having with friends, family members, business owners, healthcare practitioners, public servants, and others in the community.
-Allan
The ills of 2020 and beyond were a long time coming. Little of what took place was new. In fact, it was more of the same dishonesty from once trusted institutions. The case of Vioxx illustrates this well.
Vioxx was a painkiller introduced in the late 1990’s by the American Pharmaceutical giant Merck. It was marketed as an improvement over other prescription painkillers based on a better safety profile and reduced side effects in general. It was approved for the treatment of conditions ranging from rheumatoid arthritis to migraines and quickly became a popular drug around the world. It was later withdrawn from the market due to a large number of deaths associated with its use.
By 2005, virtually every trusted pharmaceutical and medical institution had been proven a total, unrepentant sham, unwilling to engage in the most basic meaningful ethics to save lives, as long as they knew there was across-the-board cooperation. Fifteen years later, no one should be shocked when society-wide, that same behavior occurred from the Ides of March 2020 forward.
The pharmaceutical establishment, medical establishment, doctors, media, government, politicians, and other institutions had long been cooperating to do exactly that. The true shocker should be that anyone in the general public continues to trust such corrupt institutions, even going so far as extending more power to them to rule the lives of average people, despite being proven irredeemably corrupt.
I do not expect you to change the world or to change these institutions, but I do expect you to remove these institutions from positions of influence in your own life. I’m going to use the example of Vioxx to illustrate why you should do exactly that.
On September 30, 2004, Merck announced a worldwide recall of their painkiller Vioxx.
This came a full five years after Merck knew that Vioxx killed people. Millions took it. Billions in profit were earned for Merck. Thousands predictably died who would not have if they would have just kept their previous painkiller, which Merck claimed Vioxx to be safer than.
Not only was this information known, but influence peddlers at Merck got The New England Journal of Medicine and the United States Food and Drug Administration to assist in releasing their killer drug and selling it to the public as safe and effective. Silence from these institutions would have been more ethical than their cooperation in this mass murder.
The drama of the story hinges on the hiding of three heart attacks, in order to hide a concerning trend. This made it possible to make a false claim in November 1999 about the heart attack risk related to Vioxx, and to continue to repeat that claim: “While the trends are disconcerting, the number of events are small.” This is familiar verbiage to anyone following public health officials as they talk about the one-size-fits-all health mandates: safe and effective is the frontline defense of these mandates. When that defense is pierced “disconcerting but small” is the backup defense.
The lie that a treatment is “safe and effective,” always seems to be replaced by the claim that horrifying side effects are “disconcerting but small” in frequency. Ultimately, the truth prevails, but only after many are killed and injured by the treatment. Only those who wrongly put their trust in liars are ever the victim, which carries some poetic justice and a lesson to be cautious around untrustworthy serpents. Trusting a serpent is a fatal mistake in its own.
Those who dare reveal such information publicly are lifesavers, for they speak truth to those who will listen. They are also labelled pariahs and risk career, wealth, and wellbeing. There is a cost to standing against corruption. In all eras there has been a cost. If there were not, corruption would never exist, for the remedy to corruption would come so cheaply.
In their timeline coverage of the events around Vioxx, National Public Radio (NPR) reports: “As of November 1, 1999, 79 patients out of 4,000 taking Vioxx have had serious heart problems or have died, compared with 41 patients taking naproxen.”11
Taking the experimental Vioxx is nearly twice as dangerous for the heart as taking naproxen. Naproxen is available in generic form. Vioxx was marketed as a safer though more expensive replacement.
It was not safer, but it was more expensive.
The fact that this reporting came from NPR is quite significant. NPR has long been derided for its extreme political bias. Much of its coverage of politicians came with a strong liberal bias. NPR could often be found attacking the enemies of their favorite politicians, while leaving their favorite politicians untouched. At the time of the Vioxx scandal however, NPR was, at least, still doing critical reporting on pharmaceutical companies — a true public service.
Prakash S, Valentine V. Timeline: The Rise and Fall of Vioxx. NPR. 2007. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/
2007/11/10/5470430/timeline-the-rise-and-fall-of-vioxx
The bestselling book "Face Masks In One Lesson" by Allan Stevo describes how to never wear a face mask again. The follow-up to the book, "Face Masks Hurt Kids," describes why to never wear a face mask again. We must defeat the awful, narrative around the mandates.
Examples of how face masks hurt kids will be posted to the Lockdown Land Substack each morning by 6am Eastern until the narrative around this ineffective and harmful medical intervention has shifted. Face masks are, in fact, not just harmful to children. Face masks are harmful to everyone. Thank you so much for helping me circulate this research.
This is outstanding - I wholeheartedly agree with every word of it. I’ve repeatedly said out loud (for years) so many of the comments you make here - why on earth won’t ppl see what is right in front of them? Why does any thinking person place an ounce of trust in ppl who have revealed their evil character over and over and over again?
Thank you, Allan!