Wearing masks has become a part of the culture; not just here in America, but around the world. When will this end? Will it ever end?

Those questions are increasingly on the minds of everyone who dares to think beyond the CDC guidelines. Scott Gottlieb, former FDA commissioner, says it’s time to stop wearing masks outdoors. I would question whether there was ever a reason to wear masks outdoors.

The theory on wearing masks is they stop the spread of the virus and protect the wearer from contracting the virus. Since the virus is known to spread by droplets, and not aerosols, the only reason to wear a mask is to prevent people from coughing or spitting in others’ faces. Good airflow outdoors makes this nearly impossible. Other data tells us the spread of the virus requires contact with an infected person for up to 15 minutes. This is more likely indoors and has always contradicted regulations that limited outdoor activities.

Dr. Gottlieb says it’s time to revisit rules on masking and distancing in low-risk outdoor settings like parks and sports venues. Easing these rules would move more activity outdoors, which reduces viral transmission. States are beginning to lift restrictions on the size of outdoor gatherings. Texas, New Hampshire, and Florida governors have led the way; Rhode Island and others plan to follow in May.

But the CDC is lagging behind. They still prescribe social limits while outside. Many governors are reluctant to get ahead of the CDC for fear of a political backlash. About half of states still require people to wear face coverings in all public settings.

We hear the phrase “follow the science” when it suits the political agenda, but not when it doesn’t. Consider a well-known study conducted in China last spring. Researchers traced 318 outbreaks to figure out the chains of transmission. In only one of 318 outbreaks did the initial cases come from contact while outside. The rest originated inside homes or on mass transit.

Another study found that the risk of transmission indoors was about 19 times as high as in open-air environments. Yet the CDC’s guidance says only that “masks may not be necessary when you are outside by yourself away from others.” Another CDC document advises people outside to “stay at least six feet apart from people who don’t live with you” and “limit your time around others.” This is particularly strange since the “six feet social distancing” guideline was revised to three feet weeks ago when studies showed there is no significant difference in the spread of the virus between three and six feet.

I have written in earlier posts that the credibility of the CDC has been lost (see CDC Credibility Gone). They are not even following their own Covid-19 studies because the White House wants to keep us in a state of fear.

When are masks really needed?

It’s time to talk plainly about the wearing of masks. Masks are for the vulnerable. If you’re not among the vulnerable, you don’t need to wear a mask. Who are the vulnerable? Here is a list of the vulnerable:

• Elderly people who have not been vaccinated
• Middle age to young adults who have health conditions such as obesity, diabetes, heart disease, pulmonary disease, or immunocompromised conditions such as active treatment of cancer – who have not been vaccinated

If you have been fully vaccinated – received both shots of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines and have waited at least 14 days – you have full protection. If you have received the one Johnson & Johnson vaccine shot and have waited 14 days – you are fully protected. If you have contracted the Covid-19 virus infection and survived – you have natural immunity. If you are a child under the age of 16 – you have essentially no risk from Covid-19. (see Masking Children While Censoring Covid Information) If you are in one of the above categories, there is virtually no risk to you from Covid-19. In the extreme unlikelihood that you contract the virus, the course of your disease is sure to be mild.

It’s time to stop wearing masks unless you are vulnerable. People who continue to wear masks outdoors are simply displaying their fear, ignorance, or utter obedience to liberal politicians and ideology. Wearing masks indoors will continue to be necessary as long as businesses and public buildings demand it, but pushing back against this orthodoxy is needed if we are ever to regain our freedom.

In my office, I began by not wearing a mask even while patients wore theirs. I wasn’t afraid since I knew how the virus was transmitted and I was careful not to touch my face. Later, I began wearing a mask to make patients more comfortable. But since I’ve been vaccinated, I’ve chosen to stop wearing a mask again, telling patients they need not fear me. I hope my example will give others the freedom to stop wearing their masks if they, too, have been vaccinated.

At a time when the government is pleading for more Americans to get vaccinated, it makes sense to demonstrate the freedom that vaccination brings. Of course, that might mean giving up the political leverage of spreading fear. Maybe that’s just what these mask mandates are all about.

The Johnson & Johnson vaccine has just been released for use again. It was temporarily taken off the market when a “pause” was called for by the Biden administration after some rare cases of blood clots were discovered. The CDC now reports a total of 15 cases were found, all in women and mostly under the age of 50 years, out of over 8 million people vaccinated. Three of these women died.

To put this in perspective, the risk of blood clots is much higher from Covid-19 disease than from the vaccines associated with these complications. Blood clotting all over the body is one complication of severe forms of the disease. About 15% to 20% of Covid-19 patients who are admitted to intensive care units develop blood clots, according to Dr. Jean Connors, a hematologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

Nevertheless, anxiety about vaccination is growing. It now appears that the supply of vaccines will soon outpace the demand. The Kaiser Family Foundation said this week that the country will likely reach a tipping point on vaccine enthusiasm by Mid-May, when supply outstrips demand. The Wall Street Journal reports the U.S. weekly average of vaccine doses administered, which has been generally rising since mid-December, ticked downward last week. The number of people receiving their first dose fell sharply, from a 7-day average of 1.9 million April 11 to 1.4 million April 17.

Enthusiasm for the Covid-19 vaccines has waxed and waned. When vaccines began to be rolled out, about a third of the population wanted to receive one as soon as possible and about 40% were unsure or wanted to wait and see. After successful rollout of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, many of those who were initially reluctant wanted to be vaccinated. However, the proportion who definitely didn’t want vaccination remained roughly about 20%.

Below is a chart depicting the percentage of state residents who have been vaccinated. Overall, 28% of the population is fully vaccinated, while 52% have received at least one dose of vaccine.

What percentage of the U.S. population needs to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity?

I addressed this question in an earlier post (Herd Immunity is Near) but it remains controversial. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the chief medical expert for the Biden administration, says we must have 70 – 85% of the population vaccinated. But inexplicably, this ignores the impact of natural immunity, which is achieved when someone contracts the Covid-19 virus and survives.

Dr. Marty Makary, professor at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, estimates over half the population of California has natural immunity today. This is based on data from the California Department of Public Health that found at least 38.5% had antibodies against Covid-19 as early as February. Extrapolating this data two months later suggests over half of Californians have natural immunity. If this is representative of the nation, herd immunity may be achieved very soon.

The next phase of the vaccination effort will center on making it easier for people to get vaccinated, according to Jeffrey Zients, the White House Covid-19 response coordinator. The government will also double down on vaccine education and measures to strengthen confidence in the vaccine.

The release of the J & J vaccine is an important step in vaccinating more Americans, especially those who are homebound or homeless. If you’re nervous about the J & J vaccine, find a site that will give you the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, although I believe the J & J vaccine benefits far outweigh the risks. But above all, get vaccinated – unless you have a health condition that prohibits it or your doctor has advised against it.

Do children need to wear masks? That’s an important question that millions of parents want answered. Yet big tech is censoring those answers they don’t agree with.

Jay Bhattacharya, Stanford University physician and economist, writes in The Wall Street Journal his experience with both issues. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis hosted a roundtable of scientists to discuss the state’s Covid policies. Don’t look for this kind of transparency from some governors, like New York’s Andrew Cuomo. DeSantis brought together Dr. Bhattacharya, Dr. Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University, Dr. Martin Kulldorff of Harvard University, and Dr. Scott Atlas of Stanford University. This distinguished panel of experts discussed the effectiveness of Florida’s Covid policies in the past year including restrictions of the lives of children.

One of the topics was the wisdom of children wearing masks. The press was allowed to ask questions and a video of the event was posted on YouTube by local media. But last week YouTube removed a recording of this routine policy discussion from its website. The company claimed the panel members and Dr. Bhattacharya were trafficking in misinformation.  The company said it removed the video “because it included content that contradicts the consensus of local and global health authorities regarding the efficacy of masks to prevent the spread of Covid-19.”

One has to wonder who are the experts YouTube considers more authoritative? This panel are all experts from the world’s most prestigious academic institutions. It seems clear they are not considered experts because they don’t agree with the Biden administration. It has been clear from the beginning of this administration that science would take a back seat to political agendas. (see CDC Director Caves to Politics) Big tech, like YouTube, is certainly in sync with this White House.

Dr. Bhattacharya says his reasoning regarding children wearing masks is a cost-benefit analysis. The benefits of masking children are small to none; the costs are much higher. He cites a study from Iceland conducted early in the pandemic when masking was uncommon. The study used a representative sample to track the source of Covid infections. The authors used contact-tracing methods paired with genetic sequencing analysis to establish precisely how the disease spread. Senior author of the study, Kari Stefansson, later told reporters that “even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.”

This study is consistent with others in the scientific literature. They all reach the same conclusion: Even unmasked children pose less of a risk for disease spread than adults.

The New England Journal of Medicine published a study from Sweden in February where primary schools have been open for in-person instruction throughout the pandemic. No masks were required, even when cases were increasing. Of more than 1.8 million children in school, in spring 2020 ages 1 through 15, not one died from Covid-19. This study also showed that teachers were at low risk for Covid-19; they contracted the disease at rates lower than the average of other Swedish essential workers.

More importantly, the evidence is overwhelming that masking can harm children’s developmental progress. Even the World Health Organization’s guidance document on child masking says that up to age 5 masking children may harm the achievement of childhood developmental milestones. For children between 6 and 11, the same document says that mask guidance should consider the “potential impact of mask-wearing on learning and psychosocial development.” They also go on to warn that mask-wearing during exercise may impair breathing.

Dr. Bhattacharya and the panel recommends against masking of children up to age eleven. Many other doctors and scientists agree. This is important information for parents, teachers, education administrators and politicians who are making mask-wearing decisions for children. It is unconscionable that YouTube would censor such vital information.