Home
>
Archiv
>
KenFM International
>
English
>
With open eyes | By Vlad Georgescu

With open eyes | By Vlad Georgescu

Veröffentlicht am: 7. August 2020 | Anzahl Kommentare: noch keine

German Chancellor Angela Merkel must have been informed about the studies on the dangers of corona masks – and still decided to impose them on citizens.

By Vlad Georgescu.

Compulsory wearing of masks is responsible for severe psychological damage and weakening of the immune system. This was the conclusion of the first “Research Gap” study on the existing Mouth and Nose Protection (MNS) regulations. The head of the study, Daniela Prousa, gives the breathing mask a devastating testimony. The range of disorders associated with forced masks extends from post-traumatic stress disorders to avoiding visits to the doctor, from reduced participation in social life as a result of mask aversion and herpes. However, it is all the more serious that it now seems that those responsible have already known in advance about the dangerous nature of their actions.

Germany’s first comprehensive, representative and completed “Research Gap” study on existing oral and nasal protection (MNS) prescriptions has possibly unforeseeable legal consequences: Millions of people could file lawsuits because the burdens, complaints and consequential damages that have already occurred have been scientifically proven for the first time. The basis of the unique data collection was the specially developed questionnaire, “FPPBM”, with a total of 35 points.

For Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn (CDU), the core statement by study author Daniela Prousa might come at an inconvenient time. While Spahn is thinking about compulsory tests for people returning to Germany and strictly rejects the abolition of compulsory masks in shops, public institutions and public transport, the psychologist summarizes the results of her work in a sentence that is quite clear:

“The fact that about 60 percent of the people clearly burdened with the prescriptions are already experiencing severe psychosocial consequences, such as a greatly reduced participation in life in society due to aversion-related MNS avoidance efforts, social withdrawal, reduced health self-care, even avoiding doctor’s appointments, or the intensification of existing health problems such as post-traumatic stress disorder, herpes, and migraines, exceeded all the expectations of the researcher.“

Prousa is not alone with her opinion. Several psychologists have studied the mask problem – and most of them have come up with devastating results. According to Prousa, ignoring them would be fatal.

“Otherwise, how can any critical effects be promptly identified in the context of high-quality ‘health care for the population’,” asks the psychologist, raising another question:

“Otherwise, how can the constitutional principle of proportionality, also taking into account the benefit-damage ratio be examined at all?” In this sense, her study wants to “broaden the scientific, political and social view” by showing the damage caused by the oral and nasal protection regulations.

Unpleasant side effects

According to Prousa, psychologists have already noticed changes in the subjective self-experience and in the perception of identity of people who wear masks. According to the scientists, claustrophobia, plastic taste and discomfort are also unpleasant side effects of politically imposed coercion.

For example, the Kassel psychologist Antje Ottmers (1) reported on July 6 in the Hessische Niedersächsische Allgemeine, HNA, on her practical experiences with patients who wore masks.

“Trauma patients have also been triggered by the new compulsion. The feeling of helplessness has sometimes led to massive self-harm.”

The general corona situation makes the situation much worse, the psychologist explains:

“But since everyone has to wear a mask in certain areas, the psychological effects have increased massively.” Anyone who wants to understand the effects of mask compulsion should pay close attention to what psychologists are saying. For there is much more at stake than just fear, self-harm and depression. It’s about the mask changing our nature:

“People are no longer perceived as human beings, but as a danger – and a danger often has to be fought”, explains Ottmers, and continues: “From my point of view, the usefulness of the mask is negligible, in view of the damage it causes to the psyche”.

The role of the Federal Press Office

However, the Federal Press Office seems to ignore the fact that statements such as these are publicly accessible and have certainly been printed in the established regional media of the Republic. For the Press and Information Office of the Federal Government, as the authority is officially called, on the one hand informs citizens and media in Germany about the work of the German government – and informs the government about the news situation in Germany and around the world.

And so the assumption that Chancellor Angela Merkel or Federal Health Minister Jens Spahn had not known about the massive damage caused by the compulsory wearing of masks since July would only be credible if the Federal Press Office (BPA) did not do its job properly. There is little reason to assume that this is the case.

Because 410 employees work at the headquarters in Berlin, another 60 in Bonn. Head of the powerful supreme federal authority and at the same time spokesman of the federal government with the rank of a civil servant state secretary is the former ZDF anchorman Steffen Seibert. And because his authority reports directly to the Chancellor, the Chancellor herself will also have read Ottmer’s statements in the daily Chancellor’s folder of the BPA.

Just as the Federal Government also learns about this article from the Corona Transition site. (Corona Transition draws attention to publicly available information on the Corona crisis that is hardly noticed or ignored by decision-makers)

The only question is: Why is no one officially reacting to the scientific facts and public references about the serious negative effects of the mask compulsion?

The fact that MNS prescriptions are not only a trivial pragmatic matter but also a massive intervention becomes clear when the well-known neurobiologist Gerald Hüther states: “The general wearing of masks can, via neuropsychological processes, change our behavior in a lasting way”, Prousa quotes him.

Researchers at the University of Bamberg, in turn, found that masks “make it more difficult for the other person to perceive emotions, lead to misinterpretations and thus attack trust in one’s own perception,” as the psychologist sums up. Results such as these are not secret in Germany; they are often published via the Science Information Service funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). And that is why the question cannot be asked often enough: Why does the Federal Chancellor of the Republic, as the highest responsible person for political decisions, ignore everything that scientifically questions the mask compulsion?

Politicians’ ignorance of the findings of science contributes to another aspect, which – if it were not bitterly serious – could in a way be interpreted as an irony of fate. Wearing the mask of all things triggers stress that weakens the body’s immune system via complex biochemical cascades.

“If the stress is maintained and new attempts at avoidance are made, some of the hormonal and autonomic reactions remain elevated, even during intermission and rest periods; immunosuppression, reduced T-lymphocyte cell activity and a number of other organ damage – often caused by sustained corticosteroid activity – occur,” the current study by psychologist Daniela Prousa cites a mechanism observed as early as 1996.

However, what might be of interest to the Department 2 of the Federal Press Office, responsible for media monitoring, is the author’s assessment of the observed immunodeficiency caused by mask-induced stress: “This is of importance with regard to the duration of MNS prescriptions.“

Sources:

+++

Note on the article: The following text first appeared in “Rubikon – Magazin für die kritische Masse”, on whose advisory board Daniele Ganser and Rainer Mausfeld are active, among others. Since the publication was done under a free license (Creative Commons), KenFM takes over this text for secondary use and explicitly points out that the Rubicon also depends on donations and needs support. We need many alternative media!

+++

Thanks to the authors for the right to publish the article.

+++

Picture source: ©KenFM20

+++

KenFM strives for a broad spectrum of opinions. Opinion articles and guest contributions do not have to reflect the views of the editorial staff.

+++

KenFM now also available as a free app for Android and iOS devices! Via our homepage you can visit the stores of Apple and Google. Here is the link: https://kenfm.de/kenfm-app/ 

+++

Support us with a subscription: https://www.patreon.com/KenFMde  

+++

 You like our program? Information about further support possibilities here: https://kenfm.de/support/kenfm-unterstuetzen/  

+++

Now you can also support us with Bitcoins.