Our Mask Policy

Our mask policy is this: as long as it does not contravene the law, we do not require or recommend the wearing of face coverings at any time. We encourage communication by smiles, facial expression and un-muffled conversation as this is much more important than any unprovable benefit afforded by the use of face coverings.

Our mask policy is based on discerning consideration of all the following headings. Under each heading there are a few selected links, however, it would be overwhelming to use all the available links that point in the same direction. These are links from a wide variety of well-respected sources and should be considered in concert.

The Reality

A retrospective study on the use of face masks to control Covid since 2020 highlights the things we've learned over decades and the mistakes of current politicians. This study provides many graphs showing globally just how ineffective mask mandates have been in reducing the spread of infection. It could be a standalone source for our policy but we have assembled our own reasons below.

"The Science"

Being a professional in the field of science requires difficult decisions. Not all scientists make progress by honest hard work.

Scientifically proven results can be false:

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

US Library of Medicine - published in 2005

Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?

British Medical Journal (BMJ) - published in 2021

Photoshopping, fraud and circular logic in research

It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgement of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.

Scientifically proven results can be bought:

...funding may introduce biases — for example, when the backer has a stake in the study's outcome. A pharmaceutical company paying for a study of a new depression medication, for example, might influence the study's design or interpretation in ways that subtly favor the drug that they'd like to market.

Who pays for science?

The Politics

Mandating of masks by the WHO is admitted as a consequence of political pressure WHO officials do not recommend mask wearing for healthy members of the general population. Notice the FACT CHECK on that page that asserts COVID-19 is NOT airborne and compare that "fact" to current knowledge.

There are plenty of other examples of masks being a "political" requirement. In fact almost every time you see a request to wear a mask it's based on echoing someone else's "policy" — not based on any critical research or knowledge.

The Politicians

Do you believe our politicians? Boris Johnson for instance, who John Bercow described as someone with a nodding acquaintance with the truth. Just Google for boris accused of lying. This result will, of course, change as time passes.

fullfact.org is often biased but on a matter where bias is probably not applicable you can see how much we trust our politicians to tell the truth.

The Money and Power

Money and power have huge influence on politicians. If there's big money to be made you can be sure that truth is squashed. That's not difficult to illustrate: just consider how long the tobacco giants managed to prevent smoking being related to cancer. Money/power is a driving force that's impossible to resist. Money/power has a huge influence on what you're led to believe and how you live.

The Media and Propaganda

Propaganda is information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view. The advertisements in British media telling how Covid-19 spreads must have been seen by the whole population by now. The government has spent over half a billion pounds on advertising so far.

Top media people acknowledge deceit:

As a former ITV & Sky News Boss, Mark Sharman explains to former BBC & ITV reporter Anna Brees how the mainstream media has lost its moral compass - through focusing so heavily on the government narrative it has failed in its public duty to investigate and report fairly on all sides of the unfolding Covid story. He issues a stark warning as to how journalists and news staff will be implicated through their silence; and in their failure to ask penetrating questions and invite open debate at this most important time in our history.
Watch it on YouTube

The Censorship

Broadcast media and published media are controlled by Ofcom, which is beholden to government, and IPSO which dares not to challenge health policy. Google, Facebook, Twitter etc. all have their own censorship which disallows free speech if it disagrees with policy. Everything you see on TV or read in a newspaper or discover on social media is controlled. Perhaps it's a good thing that information that is broadcast or published is controlled, but the obvious questions to ask are: "who is controlling and what is their policy? - what is allowed and what is not allowed, and why?"

The Psychology

The Behavioural Insights Team (BIT)

People might not believe that they're being manipulated but they should be aware that since 2010, when the Conservatives came to power, they set up the Behavioural Insights Team to help them manipulate the beliefs of the public. It is quite possible that this group also affects the beliefs of the politicians as they're all under the same influence.

Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviours (SPI-B)

When the "pandemic" arrived the government set up the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviours (SPI-B)

Quoting The Telegraph, May 14, 2021:
"Scientists on a committee that encouraged the use of fear to control people’s behavior during the COVID pandemic have admitted its work was 'unethical' and 'totalitarian.' Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behavior (SPI-B) expressed regret about the tactics in a new book about the role of psychology in the Government’s COVID-19 response.

SPI-B warned in March last year that ministers needed to increase ‘the perceived level of personal threat’ from COVID-19 because 'a substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened.'

Gavin Morgan, a psychologist on the team, said: 'Clearly, using fear as a means of control is not ethical. Using fear smacks of totalitarianism. It’s not an ethical stance for any modern government. By nature I am an optimistic person, but all this has given me a more pessimistic view of people.' "

Psychological 'nudges'

In an open letter to the Chair of the Public Administration & Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) [Mr William Wragg, MP], a group of psychological specialists and health professionals highlight their major ethical concerns about the deployment of covert behavioural-science techniques (commonly referred to as 'nudges') in the Government’s COVID-19 communications strategy. Re: Ethical concerns arising from the Government’s use of covert psychological 'nudges' in their COVID-19 communications strategy.

Video demos showing how masks leak

masks do not stop aerosols As an example of how aerosols escape from mask and drift around you can watch this video. It's presented by Dr Ted Noel and demonstrates how various masks have negligible effect on passage of aerosols, which are now believed to be the major vector in the transmission of Covid-19. Take heed, others wearing masks are NOT protecting you, even if they believe they are.



masks definitely do not stop aerosolsTo be fair, there are a lot of articles on YouTube and the Internet that insist masks are effective — many these are based on anecdote and reference to other diseases and the more honest articles suggest that masks MIGHT help, but "might" is not good enough, especially if you're relying on it. The video on the right is from a guy who is definitely pro-mask, but even his demo falters when his "best" mask needs a second attempt. If you're relying on "MIGHT help" you're a long way from proof or a guarantee.

The possibility that masks "might" help needs to be weighed against possibility of the opposite. And then weighed against the psychological effect of having half your face removed when you should be engaging with other people with smiles and facial expression.

If you have the virus and you think you're protecting others by wearing a mask, bear in mind:

More Evidence

There have been many studies and reports about the efficacy of masks, both before Covid struck and since. A well respected study about mask use in dental care indicated that masks were useless in controlling infection. The original publication in October 2016 was at https://www.oralhealthgroup.com/features/face-masks-dont-work-revealing-review/. This study was deemed irrelevant in a time of Covid but no explanation given. You can read the original article here https://old-normal.org/pdf/why-masks-dont-work.pdf. Remember, this was published in 2016, long before politicians decided it was "wrong".

Life Site news presents an article gathering many studies on the efficacy of masks. 47 studies confirm ineffectiveness of masks for COVID and 32 more confirm their negative health effects

For further evidence you could visit smilefree.org.

The Public

The public has been bombarded with all sorts of fear-mongering since the start of this Covid thing. As long as official guidance "suggests" masks, the general population believes mask-wearing to be:
   a) virtuous
   b) effective
   c) harmless

Many follow the mask-wearing belief because they have been convinced that wearing a mask is for the benefit of others and to make others feel safe. For those folk it must be reassuring that if they don't feel well they are nonetheless safe to mix with others because they are wearing a mask.

Many believe that wearing a mask protects themselves against anyone not wearing a mask.

Many wear a mask for a whole mixture of reasons. It's unlikely that they understand the psychological damage being done to themselvers and others.


"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." This quote is often attributed to Mark Twain. It's a simple truth. When you know how useless masks are, it's sad to see people still believing the lie.