Nose Only Covid Mask. Source Youtube

New Nose Only Covid Masks

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

h/t Breitbart; Advocates claim wearing a nose only mask under your regular mask allows you to stay protected when eating at restaurants. But I’m not sure having a contaminated surface just above your mouth while eating really solves anything.

Researchers create nose-only COVID-19 masks to wear while eating

By Natalie O’Neill
March 24, 2021 | 9:13pm

Researchers in Mexico have sniffed out a new COVID-19 mask designed for people to wear only over their schnozzes while they eat, according to a report Wednesday.

The nose masks — worn under a full mask with similar behind-the-ears straps — were unveiled in a demonstration video where a man and woman sit down for lunch, according to Reuters.

In the video, the pair takes off their normal masks to reveal their nose-only gear before chowing down at an outdoor table.

Some observers cheered the idea on Twitter, saying it would “reduce transmission,” while others poked fun at its goofy look.

Read more:

A video of the nose only mask;

Maybe it helps – I haven’t personally conducted any tests. But I have my doubts.

Think about how masks are supposed to work – the virus particles and aerosols allegedly get trapped by the fabric of the mask, so the outside of the mask is potentially highly contaminated.

In the video, both the male and female researcher’s fingers appeared to brush the potentially contaminated outer fabric of the nose mask while they were eating finger food. The female researcher managed to avoid dipping her mask nosepiece into her drink, but only just, by taking a small sip from just the top of the cup.

Any slight mishap like this, while eating your food or drink, and you suddenly have a mouthful of whatever the surface of your mask just captured.

Or if the nose mask gets sweaty after you re-attach your outer mask, the sweat will start dripping contaminants washed from the surface of the nose mask straight into your mouth.

There is a far simpler solution. if you are worried enough about viruses to want to wear a mask outdoors, order takeaway. And pray that the suspiciously unhealthy looking kitchen staff washed their hands before preparing your food.

4.6 10 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
a happy little debunker
March 26, 2021 6:15 pm

If effective, masks discourage people from touching the soft openings on the face.
This is pointless

Reply to  a happy little debunker
March 26, 2021 6:45 pm

But if you wear two you never know 🤓

Reply to  a happy little debunker
March 26, 2021 6:51 pm

Viral collectors – watch the filter – and petri dish accessories.

Reply to  n.n
March 27, 2021 1:54 am

SNOT collectors. !!

Reply to  a happy little debunker
March 26, 2021 7:15 pm

non-fitted masks (which are at least 99% of all the face diapers being worn by sheeple – I have not seen even 1 n95-like mask in public this entire maskerade that’s now 1 year old) are pointless in containing or stopping the spread of this virus. Stop spreading the lie they work.

Reply to  goracle
March 26, 2021 10:16 pm

N95 mask are design for dust, not viruses. To a virus the N95 mask are what a chain link fence is to a mosquito.

Reply to  MAL
March 26, 2021 11:21 pm

There are medical grade N95 masks. The efficacy curve starts at 80% for 0.1 micron particles forms a U shape with the bottom of U at 60% for 0.3 micron particles and climbs to 95% for P2.5 (2.5 microns) particles and above. So they will stop some of the aerosols that contain viruses. They are marginally better than the cloth coverings most people use.

The real issue is that N95 masks used in contaminated environments should be discarded after a max of 8 hours. They are financially unaffordable for the ordinary person.

I discourage mask wearing because of the strong possibility of bacterial pneumonia as a result of poorly maintained face coverings.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  chemman
March 27, 2021 6:15 am

“The real issue is that N95 masks used in contaminated environments should be discarded after a max of 8 hours.”

There might be a solution to that problem:

“The team found the metal foams had excellent filtration efficiency for particles within the 0.1-1.6 µm size range, which is relevant for filtering out SARS-CoV-2. Their most effective material was a 2.5 mm-thick version, with copper taking up 15% of the volume.

This foam had a large surface area and trapped 97% of 0.1-0.4 µm aerosolized salt particles, which are commonly used in facemask tests.

According to the team’s calculations, the breathability of their foams was generally comparable to that of commercially available polypropylene N95 facemasks.

Because the new material is copper-based, the filters should be resistant to cleaning agents, allowing for many disinfection options, and its antimicrobial properties will help kill trapped bacteria and viruses, say the researchers. In addition, they are recyclable.

The researchers estimate that the materials would cost around $2 per mask at present, and disinfection and reuse would extend their lifetime, making them economically competitive with current products”

end excerpt

We need good masks for the future. The Wuhan virus may not be the only biological problem we face in the future. I read yesterday where 40 people in the United States were being monitored for Ebola virus, after they returned recently from Africa.

The Wuhan virus has taught us quite a lot. Some good, some not so good.

One good thing is medical research has been turned up to 11, and progress is being made on many diseases, and ways to treat them, as a result.

I saw numbers yesterday showing that deaths from the normal flu virus were about 1,800 this year verses a normal year where about 300,000 would be expected to die from the flu.

Is this the result of more people wearing masks or is it an accounting error?

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 27, 2021 10:31 am

There seems to be a lot of development going on with masks.

One idea I read about today was a device that is worn on the hip and is connected to a face mask, and it purifies the air you breath before you breath it.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 27, 2021 3:12 pm

If the air you breathe in and out can be brought in contact with a good strong UV-C light source, the virus will be controlled. it won’t be killed, per se but prevented from replicating and made relatively harmless. The light DOES kill any bacteria in it’s path. The trick is to make sure the light does NOT shine in your eyes. These systems would be of HUGE benefit in the air ventilation system of any home, business or hospital.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 27, 2021 3:55 pm

So what we need to do is perfect a mask to prevent our immune system from exposure to the normal challenges that make it function properly. That way every piddling virus can be declared a pandemic and great profits will ensue. Good plan!

Tom Abbott
Reply to  BCBill
March 28, 2021 4:33 am

What’s your plan if a new virus with 10 percent lethality pops up in the human population? Are you just going to take your chances, or are you going to try to prevent yourself from contracting the virus? I know what I’m going to do. I’m going to get hold of the best protective gear I can find. You are free to practice your theory.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
March 28, 2021 9:56 am

So what you are saying is that while there is no evidence that masks are medically effective, you are adamant about wearing one for its unproven health benefits. This makes the mask a talisman against deadly miasmas.

And to think that for thousands of years in every land and culture, not one person ever found that they can remain disease free by wrapping their head in cloth – but today, any cloth will do!

Reply to  AWG
March 29, 2021 7:46 am

So what you are saying is that because there is evidence that masks are medically effective” There, I fixed your typo!

Reply to  BCBill
March 29, 2021 7:45 am

And you wear your mask 24 hours a day, including at home and in bed? Right…

Charles Higley
Reply to  chemman
March 27, 2021 7:37 am

However, masks accumulate the larger viral-containing particles and then, if you sneeze, cough, or talk loudly, you can aerosolize the accumulation into particles small enough to enter other masks, improving transmission. Also a hard inhale could move a lot of this mess into you, giving you a higher viral load and even greater chance of being infected by another virus in the mess. Masks are useless for infectious viruses regardless of particle size.

Reply to  Charles Higley
March 29, 2021 7:47 am

Long ago, before Covid, most of us have learned to cover our mouth/ nose when we cough or sneeze. I guess you weren’t listening.

Reply to  MAL
March 28, 2021 8:05 pm

I dont know Mal, I’ve read that n95 masks filter down to .3 microns and that covid is generally larger than 1 micron… i
believe your analogy applies much more accurately to surgical and cloth masks, which make them useless…

surgical masks offer some protection to the wearer from large droplets and are not intended to protect others from the wearer…

Last edited 1 year ago by goracle
Reply to  a happy little debunker
March 26, 2021 7:22 pm

Doubly good to wear for that anal swab.

Richard Hill
Reply to  Scissor
March 27, 2021 12:48 am

Smokers win again. After smoking down their filter cigarette (mouth air intake is filtered, they can break up the cigarette and shove the filter up a nostril. After 2 cigs they are completely covid safe.

Reply to  Richard Hill
March 27, 2021 3:54 am

we win anyway mate
remember all the now suspiciously absent data that UK smokers were quite a lot less likely to get covid ..
when they did they didnt fare all that well but still not that bad considering.
of course with the now known budes whatsit inhalers and Ivermectin Id say their chances are pretty good for survival

March 26, 2021 6:21 pm

It’s the Yellow star of David but for cretins.

March 26, 2021 6:33 pm

If only there was a mask that prevents the transmission of stupid!

Reply to  Enthalpy
March 26, 2021 9:46 pm

I knew there was a reason for so many people’s politics!

Bill Powers
Reply to  Enthalpy
March 27, 2021 12:19 pm

There is so little sciencing going on here that it is cartoonish. Allow me to articulate the transmission methodology of which you speak..

For decades our public schools have been graduating chillun from High School with, on average, an 8th grade reading proficiency and 4th grade math skills. Then they enroll them in college to get meaningless degrees in nonsense subjects like gender studies and urban studies in order to teach them how to read. They use federally backed student loans that they will never have to pay back and then they send them forth and employ these people as public school administrators.

It is the circle of stupid and explains why masks cannot prevent the transmission.

Reply to  Enthalpy
March 27, 2021 1:52 pm

I believe two layers of plastic wrap, and properly sealed of course with duct tape. Works like a charm…

Russ Wood
Reply to  chickenhawk
April 6, 2021 2:48 am


Granum Salis
March 26, 2021 6:35 pm

More stylish and more effective;

The Bridge of the nose mask.

W-0774.jpg (800×800) (

Comparable protection against covid but much better against lockdown fines.

Reply to  Granum Salis
March 27, 2021 3:55 am

damn that Silver was a pretty horse!

March 26, 2021 6:48 pm

A magic talisman, debunked by controlled trials. A liability waiver, shared, shifted responsibility. That said, don’t forget the goggles. The eyes are a window to social and viral contagion. And don’t forget to wash your hands to mitigate fecal transmission, a good idea always.

Doug Huffman
Reply to  n.n
March 27, 2021 2:55 am

I am a CoViD denier, but have always washed hands frequently and thoroughly, buying chlorhexidine gallon annually.

March 26, 2021 7:06 pm

That’s hilarious….years ago I had a Bloom County comic book that had a fake newspaper insert in it. One of the fake advertisements on it was for a ‘nose bra’…this. Berke Breathed is quite an oracle….. Sure wish I still had that.

March 26, 2021 7:09 pm

This has to be a POE.

March 26, 2021 7:15 pm

Found it! from the 80s, way before it’s time – the ‘Nose Bra’!

Reply to  Rick
March 27, 2021 7:04 pm

Thanks. I remembered it too and was going to go looking for it. Ya saved me the trip.

Jon Salmi
March 26, 2021 7:18 pm

A too early April Fools joke, right?

March 26, 2021 7:27 pm

Nothing original. People used to wear those during the 1918 flu.

Reply to  icisil
March 26, 2021 7:37 pm

Preferred style for mouth breathers and cocaine users


Climate believer
Reply to  icisil
March 27, 2021 1:01 am

That’s not a mask….. this is a mask 😉 (Dundee style)

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  Climate believer
March 31, 2021 4:31 am

If you have to wear one of these stupid things at least have a little fun with it. I have considered cobbling up something like this that will appear to cover my nose and mouth but actually leave my nose free for normal breathing.

Reply to  icisil
March 27, 2021 1:57 am

comment image

Stephen W
March 26, 2021 7:46 pm

That’s interesting, because when I flew (you only need a mask in airports and plans where I live), the nose is exacy the part I didn’t cover.. so I could actually breathe.
This nose mask would just make me breathe through my mouth instead.

Joel O'Bryan
March 26, 2021 7:57 pm

More evidence the Progressive mindset is the result of a mental disorder.

Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
March 27, 2021 6:18 am

This is more true than you think. Political left leaning aka progressives have a significant larger incidence of metal disorders. Mind you this is self reported.
The political left confesses: we are mentally ill.

Personally I feel leftleaning politics should be banned for their atrocious bloodstained past.

March 26, 2021 8:01 pm

Stupidity is more creative than I ever imagined.

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
March 27, 2021 7:06 pm

“Only two things are infinite. The universe and human stupidity and I’m not sure about the former.” – Famous Jewish guy, Albert something or other 🙂

March 26, 2021 8:04 pm

If there was any doubt left that science is dead, the nose mask will snuff it out.

March 26, 2021 8:59 pm

Native Americans: “If only we were exposed to a little bit of small pox earlier on”

These mask geniuses are ruining their immune system, while overpopulationists and cult of death cheer on the stupidity.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Zoe Phin
March 26, 2021 10:18 pm

Spot on as usual, Zoe. Doctors can be the worst purveyors of this nonsense, because most know much about their own specialty and little about other disciplines. They’ll spread bad science with false credibility. Once an idea takes hold, people will believe it’s true regardless of any amount of contrary evidence.

Reply to  Zoe Phin
March 27, 2021 2:37 am

Look up the term “mask mouth” on googoo !

Chris Hanley
March 26, 2021 9:03 pm

Add heavy frames, bushy eyebrows and a mustache and you have a Groucho mask, it could catch on.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
March 26, 2021 9:57 pm

Looks like the nose mask could also serve as an eyepatch for a pirate!

Rory Forbes
March 26, 2021 9:10 pm

Isn’t the idea of herd immunity to receive many micro-contacts of the offending pathogen, each boosting the immune system and building overall immunity? I suggest a carrier wearing any sort face covering is likely to accumulate deadly quantities of the virus in short order. I suggest that improperly used masks ( at least 95%) have actually exacerbated the spread by concentrating the virions to an infectious dose.

Those nose “masks” would be better painted red and sold as clown noses for all the use they are.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 26, 2021 10:47 pm

The times they are a’changin!

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 26, 2021 10:51 pm

Interesting conjecture but that isn’t how the immune system or herd immunity works.

We are awash in viruses. Every breath we take is chock full of some sort of viral particle, most of them non-human viruses. If our immune system reacted to every virus (antigen) it would be overwhelmed. There is a threshold effect. It takes a certain amount of infectious organism to mount an immune response and to get sick (ex. 1 or 2 for shigella and about a million for salmonella). So micro contacts of pathogens do not recruit or boost the immune system.

As far as herd immunity, that really a simple concept. If enough people are immune to a virus (natural immunity or vaccine induced immunity) then there are few available hosts for the pathogen (virus, bacteria, etc) and transmission stalls and the virus burns itself out. The question comes down to where herd immunity begins. Some people want to suggest 80% immunity is necessary, which for a variety of reasons is just stupid. It is much lower than that. It is also an analog mechanism. As the immunity rises and approaches the threshold for a particular disease and place (every disease and place is different) the case rate starts dropping. The closer to absolute herd immunity the lower the case rate.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  StevenF
March 27, 2021 12:19 am

OK, that accounts for the mechanism triggering herd immunity for any specific pathogen and the requirement of differing numbers of virions depending on their toxicity. Thanks for the mini tutorial. I was taught that three potential factors determine the spread of a disease, potency (or toxic load), proximity and frequency of contact.

My question is; is it possible to be only slightly infected but insufficient to produce a full blown onset of the disease, or does it only mean that your body already has the proper antibodies? I can’t believe that a “strong immune system” means your body can simply do more pushups (metaphorically). I’m either missing something or your explanation has left something out.

Either way, from what I have observed, masks serve only as a placebo and haven’t enough prophylactic effect to offset their obvious negatives.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 27, 2021 6:24 am

Proximity is BS. If you think about it for a few seconds and realise what virusses and virus particles actually are in physical form, yoy will realise that.

Social distancing is nonsense:

What happend in this world that we started paying attention to the dillusion ideas of schoolgirls. Either this one or Greta who technically isn’t in school BTW.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  huls
March 27, 2021 10:21 am

Proximity is BS. If you think about it for a few seconds and realise what virusses and virus particles actually are in physical form, yoy will realise that.

I have thought about it a great deal and don’t see how “proximity is BS”. What other “form” could a virion be but “physical”? One must be in the vicinity of a source of infection (proximity) to become infected.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 27, 2021 11:51 am

Nope. A virus particle needs to enter your body. Thereś a quazillion ways that can happen. The source can be at the other side of the world, doesn matter.
How long and it what way and form do virus paricles exist outside of hosts? Thatś the real question. No proximity in there

Rory Forbes
Reply to  huls
March 27, 2021 1:11 pm

Please describe how you can become infected by a virus on “the other side of the world”.

Before contact, the native Americans were unfamiliar with many serious infections common to Europeans and had no immunity. After contact they suffered tremendously from these diseases, dying in thousands. That is the effect of proximity. No proximity, no infection.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 27, 2021 8:14 pm

Correct. Only point of contention it was “dying by the tens of millions”. The wipe out was heavy especially in the Caribbean and Central America. Definitely not thousands.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  TRM
March 27, 2021 8:40 pm

Yes, over time it did add up to the millions, world wide. I remember reading James Michener’s Hawaii and he describes the measles epidemic of 1848 with a terrible death toll (possibly 30%). But it is estimated that diseases like common cold, flu and others had already killed about 75-80% of the pure Hawaiian population by 1819.

Globalism has taken its pound of flesh, for sure. Populating the world hasn’t come without cost.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 28, 2021 1:31 pm

I wrote: the source can be at the other side of the world. That is why social distancing is B.S. Virus and virus particles can exist outside a host for months, yes multiple. For instance ebola:

With the source of the virus at the other side of the world and a qazillion ways of transporting the virus outside of a host, anythting is possible.

That is also why 1.5 meters of distance is nonsense. The average person walks at a speed of 5 km/h. The time needed to walk 1.5 meter is about 1 s. Right into that big cloud of virus particles left behind by the previous occupant of that space.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  huls
March 28, 2021 2:46 pm

You’re talking utter nonsense. Active Ebola exists somewhere in the world right now. I’m not in the least bit concerned I will become infected. If there was a case of Ebola in the house next door (the proximal source) I would be concerned. You’re conflating the original source with the source of an outbreak. How the Ebola got to the house next door is another issue altogether.

Social distancing and lockdowns are pointless, but not because of what you wrote. It’s pointless because of how few people are infected. We’re locking up healthy people and wearing useless face diapers so that unhealthy people can walk around unrestricted.

Right into that big cloud of virus particles left behind by the previous occupant of that space.

Except there is an almost nonexistent statistical likelihood that the people we pass daily will be carrying an infectious version of the virus. However if you do get close to an infected person (proximity) the odds improve that you could become infected.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 29, 2021 1:12 am

Quote: “How the Ebola got to the house next door is another issue altogether.”

So your neighbour has a different risk profile just because he is not you?

The virus doesn’t care wether it is you or your neighbour, all other things being equal.
Again in our modern world, distance means nothing because the time needed to cross that distance is very short in relation to a virus’ lifespan outside a host.
Social distancing is total nonsense because there is virtually no time needed to get to a virus being ejected from a host compared to the time the virus will be hovering in the air.

Reply to  huls
March 29, 2021 8:00 am

You might have missed the word “if” in Ray’s post. Go back and look, it’s there. (His neighbor might have just come back from a trip to west Africa, as has apparently happened recently–see the news.)

Reply to  mcswelll
March 30, 2021 9:54 am

You might have missed the “all other things being equal”. Go back and look it’s there.
Point is you do not have to be near a known source of infection. Because of modern life where distance have no real meaning anymore everything is a possible source of infection.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  huls
March 29, 2021 10:50 am

So your neighbour has a different risk profile just because he is not you?

Of course he does. Perhaps he went to a location in Africa wear he was in the proximity of an active strain of the virus. Perhaps he had a house guest from there. Proximity to an active virus is paramount to infection. No one is exposed all the time to all active virions, regardless of location.

Again in our modern world, distance means nothing because the time needed to cross that distance is very short in relation to a virus’ lifespan outside a host.

Nonsense! You’re suggesting viruses are magic … in all places at all times.

The virus doesn’t care wether it is you or your neighbour, all other things being equal.

Except “all things” are NOT equal. Everything is subject to its own variables.

You’ve made so many hasty generalization fallacies it’s hard to keep up.

Reply to  huls
March 29, 2021 7:58 am

There are NOT a quazillion ways of transporting virus in the air. As for walking, most of the need for distancing is based on the situation where people are sitting or standing in one place, like a restaurant or a crowd. But even if you are walking, the virus has already dispersed some during that second, and the air the walker displaces is also serving to disperse the virus. And finally, you walk through that other person’s cloud pretty quickly–quickly enough that you may not even be inhaling at the time.

Reply to  mcswelll
March 30, 2021 9:59 am

The “in the air” claim is yours, not mine.
You do not have to be inhaling to become infected, what a strange idea. Apart from that dispersion is a statistics game, not relevant here. It takes only 1 virus particle to infect you.
All of this is not hard to understand.

Reply to  huls
March 28, 2021 8:18 am

Actually, there are only a few ways that a virus can enter one’s body. Furthermore, almost all viruses, even those that are encapsulated tend to break down in the environment. Hepatitis B will last months while COVID breaks down in a matter of hours at best.

Reply to  huls
March 29, 2021 7:54 am

Of course there’s proximity. For one, viruses don’t last long outside the body; UV and other things get them. For another, dispersal, particularly as the droplets bearing the virus sink to the ground, but also just diffusion. That takes time and distance, aka proximity.

Granum Salis
Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 27, 2021 8:19 am

I don’t agree with StevenF’s characterization of an immune response, and yes, many viral exposures result in infection of a small number of cells, without a person being particularly aware of it.

When a virus is taken into a host cell, it replicates quickly and triggers the death of that cell, whereby the viral copies are released. Before the host cell is destroyed, however, it is able to break apart some of the virus and push viral fragments out to the membrane surface, “presenting” them to motile cells nearby; macrophages and dendritic cells, for example.

The dendritic cell then collects one of these presented antigens and proceeds to a lymph node or the spleen to show it to the naive T cells that are hanging out there.

Of the hundreds of thousands of different T cells, only very few will recognize this viral fragment as an antigen, but they will be triggered to massively reproduce and attack the invader by, unfortunately, bullying the host cell into self-destruction; along the lines of “we had to destroy the village to save it”.

The more confined the initial infection, the quicker it is dealt with and the less noticeable it is to the human host, but the guard is now alerted and memory B cells are now present and can respond more promptly in the future.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Granum Salis
March 27, 2021 10:15 am

Many thanks to you as well for expanding (refreshing) my education. I’ve learned a great deal on this thread and you’ve forced me to dredge up some long forgotten memories from over 50 years ago.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
March 29, 2021 7:52 am

I suggest a carrier wearing any sort face covering is likely to accumulate deadly quantities of the virus in short order.” Let’s see… if the face covering accumulates a virus load, then it’s because the person behind the mask is breathing in, right? Which means they would have breathed in the virus if they didn’t have the mask, right? And in the same time period. (Except of course for the virus load that remains trapped in the mask until it’s cleaned.)

Rory Forbes
Reply to  mcswelll
March 29, 2021 10:23 am

Which means they would have breathed in the virus if they didn’t have the mask, right?

That hardly matters if they already have the virus. Not only will their mask be infectious but so will their clothing and everything else. Most people are not wearing medical grade masks. Many are just wearing bandanas. Nearly all are not following any of the protocols for effective PPE.

Last edited 1 year ago by Rory Forbes
mario lento
March 26, 2021 9:37 pm

I was looking for the sarc/ tag somewhere in the article. Did I miss it?

March 26, 2021 9:48 pm

Well, it is just as effective as the face diapers morons (and those who are forced) are wearing already…

March 26, 2021 10:30 pm

OT.. The ultra-left human-haters show once again that..


William Haas
March 26, 2021 10:47 pm

I often have allergy problems and end up having to breathe through my mouth. So for me the nose mask is pointless.

March 26, 2021 10:52 pm

It is proven that dogs and cats get Covid 19 infections. But no one anywhere puts facemasks on their dogs and cats. It is also proven that Covid 19 is airborne and is more likely to infect people who are inside together. But no one wears a facemask while sleeping. Go figure.

Reply to  Doonman
March 27, 2021 4:06 am

uk vets are trying to imply canine covid cases have heart issues..from around 11 or 15 dogs
age history obesity not mentioned

Reply to  Doonman
March 27, 2021 6:30 am

An Austrian MP tested Coca Cola for a Covid-19 infection. Guess what? The whole bottle had to go in quarantine.
So let me see: There is no isolated virus. There is no specific test. There is no vaccin apart from gene therapy. The IFR is equal to the flu. There are zero reported flu case for the 20-21 winter.
Geez Louise if it walks like a duck .. why don we call it a f-ing scam and get on with our lives

March 26, 2021 11:25 pm

Shear silliness. You breathe is a larger volume of air through the mouth than the nose. The mask on the nose will encourage mouth breathing.

A larger volume of air through the mouth increases the risk of breathing in enough virons to constitute a Minimum Infectious Dose.

Ed Zuiderwijk
March 27, 2021 12:15 am

It beats the soup-strainer anytime.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
March 27, 2021 1:21 am

Somebody should tell John Bolton.

Ben Vorlich
March 27, 2021 1:19 am

When I was about 9 I had a fall and landed on my face and caused serious damage to my nose. As a result I do most of my breathing through my mouth. A nose only mask wouldn’t be anything other than an inconvenience. As an aside for the next 10 years, perhaps longer I’d get nose bleeds quite frequently causing panic to those around me.

On the whole they seem a waste of time, a bit like having a common cold when you breathe through your mouth anyway, damaged nose or not

March 27, 2021 3:00 am

You’ll never ever ever see me wearing one of those. And I will be pointing a laughing at anyone that does.

One has to wonder. Does a man alone in a car wearing a mask go to bed alone wearing a condom?

March 27, 2021 3:02 am

Mermaid man

March 27, 2021 3:51 am

worthy of babylon bee or the onion lol

Bruce Cobb
March 27, 2021 4:05 am

Just when you thought we had reached Peak Stupid….

March 27, 2021 4:10 am

Ive been personally concerned that without our yearly or more dose of colds/flu our immune responses will be weaker or slower
well seems i was right
as well as the fact a cold appears to be a GOOD thing.
russian vax is based on rinoviruses too btw
Just when you thought the Covid madness couldn’t take any more twists, here comes another one but you’d better brace yourself. The BBC’s Science Correspondent James Gallagher has a startling revelation that the common cold (the rhinovirus) can suppress COVID-19 because it’s so tough the SARS-CoV-2 virus gets pushed out of the way to make room for it. The news comes from the Journal of Infectious Diseases.

Here’s the summary:

Human rhinovirus triggers an innate immune response that blocks SARS-CoV-2 replication within the human respiratory epithelium. Given the high prevalence of human rhinovirus, this interference effect might cause a population-wide reduction in the number of new COVID-19 infections.

From a host’s perspective, HRV [Human Rhinovirus] infections, which are usually associated with mild disease, stimulate an antiviral response that prevents infections by more severe (and sometimes lethal) viruses such as SARS-CoV-2.

Fancy that? So, by suppressing COVID-19 we might have successfully suppressed the very virus that might have helped protect against it. Brilliant. Not only that, but also by suppressing all these viruses it’s apparently become far harder to work out where SARS-CoV-2 virus sits in the ruthless world of virus hierarchies. That’s why it’s taken so long for this revelation to emerge.

Tom in Florida
March 27, 2021 4:41 am

Even worse than this is those who handle food thinking wearing gloves means they don’t have to adhere to proper protocols.

March 27, 2021 4:43 am

That ‘nose mask’ looks absolutely ridiculous. Do they come in different sizes depending on the size of your schnauzer? Did their meal come covered in tinfoil to be used as a hat?

Last edited 1 year ago by eyesonu
March 27, 2021 5:43 am

I’m not retarded enough to wear those.

March 27, 2021 5:54 am
March 27, 2021 6:02 am

Next step, nasal plugs.
But then, there is no easy indication of who has failed to embrace woke religion.

March 27, 2021 6:06 am

The Diamond Princess Told Us About Pre-Existing Immunity, Asymptomatic Infection and the Infection Fatality Rate. Why Were Those Lessons Ignored? – Lockdown Sceptics

I thought to bring your attention to a paper published in MedRxiv by Russell et al from the London school of hygiene and tropical medicine on the 9th March 2020. They were looking at data from the Diamond Princess to try and establish case fatality rates. They got it wrong, but they did give the original data they used.

3,711 passengers and crew were on the Diamond Princess. Median age 58.

The virus had circulated undetected for 2 weeks, so given that masked-up health officials had caught COVID on board (The Maritime Executive 12.2.2020), it’s probably safe to assume everyone on the ship (or possibly only almost everyone) had been exposed.

Everyone on board had a PCR test (eventually)

619 out of 3,711 tested positive (17%)

Of which:

Symptomatic: 301

A symptomatic: 318

Observed deaths:

(70 – 79 age bracket): 6

(80 – 89 age bracket: 1

So, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that 83% of passengers and crew may have had prior immunity.

Of positive cases, half were asymptomatic.

Of those that were symptomatic, 0.2% died. No one died under the age of 70.

In the light of all the data collected in the last year as this pandemic has ranged across the world, it’s startling to think that the broad outline of what we could expect were already known, just no-one wanted to see.”

March 27, 2021 6:11 am

Pretty steep measures for a “virus” that has not been isolated. Ever. Really. Show me the publication. There is not one.

very old white guy
March 27, 2021 7:33 am

Everyday another absurdity while people are actually dying form the untested gene therapy “vaccine”.

Charles Higley
March 27, 2021 7:33 am

It’s called the flu season, which they renamed Covid-19. This is just stupid to pretend that the group of viruses from the last flu season are still around. It’s new flu season with the usual new strains that we get every year. It’s insane to pretend we need to wear masks at all, let alone nose masks while we eat. All are unhealthy and make the population sicker.

March 27, 2021 8:45 am

This seems a bit early for April Fool’s Day. 😉

March 27, 2021 9:27 am

A less humorous look at masks:

Potentially toxic and lung-damaging masks distributed to children and staff in daycares, schools

“In a preliminary risk assessment, Health Canada found that the SNN200642 masks made by Métallifer, which are widely distributed in schools and daycares in Quebec, may contain graphene particles. When inhaled, the particles can cause damage to the lungs.”

Admittedly, this rather brief article includes liberal amounts of “may” and “can” but it points to the manufacturing issues with these things.

March 27, 2021 12:41 pm

This comes from The Onion – surely!

March 27, 2021 1:10 pm

Perhaps it is about time to ask Dt. Fauci and the politicians he serves a question.

If COVID 19 was and is as deadly as you have claimed and masks are a truly effective preventative measure then why aren’t people dying in droves in Florida, Mississippi, etc where the mask mandate has been lifted?

Reply to  rah
March 28, 2021 10:49 am

The answers I’ve seen for that are a small part “It’s different there” and a large part “The governors are suppressing information and deliberately under-reporting the actual numbers”

Craig W
March 27, 2021 1:11 pm

Why not just use a clothespin?
That’s what Monty Python would do.

March 27, 2021 1:52 pm

If this doesn’t tell you the whole Covid thing is a hoax, then no one can help you out of your fantasy world. If you buy this – you’re really, really stupid.

March 27, 2021 6:50 pm

How much stupid stuff can we do to the plebes before they say no? Let’s try a nose mask because that dog “cone of shame” wasn’t stupid enough.

And people go along with this? I’m rapidly losing what little faith I had in humanity.

Reply to  TRM
March 27, 2021 6:50 pm

Present company excluded from that last line of course. You rock. 🙂

March 28, 2021 10:02 am

“The report didn’t note the name of the Mexican researchers, their company or when the nose masks could become available to the public.”

Nor did it provide a link to a study or evidence, so it’s an unsubstantiated claim.

March 30, 2021 9:50 am
%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights