EDITED AND HOSTED BY THE GREANVILLE POST
Cory Morningstar
Mandatory Masks in the Age of Climate Emergency & Planetary Biodiversity Crisis
“It is of utmost importance to recognise that Human Health is connected and dependent on the health of our environment and ecosystems, and if humanity does not respect such connection…
there will not exist a future.”
— August 17, 2020, Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and recommendations
“Victim” of plastic pollution, shot in Eleuthera, Bahamas – Shane Gross
On December 5, 2017, the United Nations announced that ocean plastic had come to constitute a planetary crisis: “Global Director for Ocean United Nation Environment and Sweden’s Ambassador for Oceans, Seas and Fresh Water, Dr Lisa Svensson said governments, firms and individual people must act far more quickly to halt plastic pollution: ‘This is a planetary crisis,’ she said. “In a few short decades since we discovered the convenience of plastics, we are ruining the ecosystem of the ocean. ‘The scale of the challenge is absolutely enormous.'”
On September 20, 2019, the Daily Mail ran a story on the global climate strikes. The article “Millions of people including hundreds of thousands of children take to the streets in 150 countries as the largest climate protest in history gets underway” garnered a whopping 64,000 shares.
On August 29, 2020, the Daily Mail would run another story, this one on a new genre of industrial pollution:”Billions of face masks could end up in landfill if people don’t stop using single-use coverings, experts have warned. Scientists estimate that more than 124,000 tons of unrecyclable masks – the equivalent weight of *10,000 London buses – could be dumped each year…There have already been reports of sea birds becoming tangled in the elastic cords that wrap around the ears. The single-use masks are also washing up on beaches or being dumped in the streets after becoming mandatory in certain enclosed spaces.” As of October 18, 2020, this article had received a mere 261 shares. [*Equivalent to every person in the UK using one disposable surgical mask each day for one year. In addition to this catastrophe, is 57,000 tons of plastic packaging that cannot be reused or recycled.][Source]
“‘I went to my local supermarket this week and saw discarded face masks everywhere. In ten minutes, I had picked up 12. This has every opportunity to flow into water courses, into the rivers and oceans.” [Source]
“For a month now, we’re starting – since it’s just the beginning – to see these masks. It’s a new type of pollution… [Source] ‘Soon there may be more masks than jellyfish’ in the Mediterranean sea.” [Source]
The paper COVID-19 Pandemic Repercussions on the Use and Management of Plastics published June 20, 2020 warns that a “monthly estimated use of 129 billion face masks and 65 billion gloves globally, is resulting in widespread environmental contamination.” [Prata, Joana & Patricio Silva, A.L. & Walker, Tony & Duarte, Armando & Santos, Teresa. (2020). COVID-19 Pandemic Repercussions on the Use and Management of Plastics. Environmental Science & Technology.]
It seems like only yesterday that a massive campaign against single-use plastic straws was trending. The much forgotten anti-straw trend was based on astronomical numbers; a suggested 500 million straws used each day in the US alone, with more than half a billion plastic straws being consumed and discarded, every day around the entire globe. [Source] An estimated 8.3 billion plastic straws had come to pollute the planet’s beautiful beaches. The backlash against the straws appeared to be drive by the horrific impacts on the marine environment in particular.
194 billion face masks and gloves equates to well over 6 billion face masks being consumed and discarded each and every day.
Based on the aforementioned paper, six months of face masks alone – equates to seven hundred seventy-four billion while 12 months of consumption, equates to a stunning one trillion five hundred forty-eight billion face masks.
What happened to all those who cared about our environmental crises? That of climate change, biodiversity and ocean pollution?
+++
Another layer of the mask pollution, making their way into our waterways and oceans is observed by many including Martin Dorey, founder of the 2 Minute Beach Clean project in England: ” People are also less likely to pick them up because of the perceived risk, so it’s getting left. This stuff is toxic – it will kill ocean life and end up in the food chain.” [Source]
We are told that the purpose of wearing a face mask is to prevent people who may be infected with COVID-19, but may be asymptomatic, from transmitting the virus to others. Yet, with billions of dollars being doled out by governments to municipalities and institutions, to assist in dealing with the said COVID-19 crisis, one may wonder why there are no bio-hazard bins for the disposing of used masks, which, under strict handling procedures would be carefully collected and properly disposed of (if there even is a way to “properly” dispose of plastic). The laissez faire (non)dealing with used masks, is very much at odds with the fear of transmission from what we are told is a highly contagious virus (hammered into the collective psyche).
How is it that we believe our Western governments, in servitude to a corporatocracy, suddenly care about our health? The very governments that have no qualms whatsoever in killing millions of men, women and children, across the globe in their pursuits to control resource-rich countries, or those of geopolitical importance in regard to foreign policy.
The same governments that claim to care about our health, are rolling out 5G as quickly as possible despite an urgent appeal signed by 253 EMF scientists from 44 nations. The correspondence is addressed to names that most will recognize: Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations; Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization; and Inger Andersen, Executive Director of the UNEP Environment Programme;U.N. Member Nations. The scientists warn: “5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields RF-EMF, that has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment… By not taking action, the WHO is failing to fulfill its role as the preeminent international public health agency.” [1] In a separate appeal to the EU, over 406 scientists and doctors call for a moratorium on the roll-out of 5G. “Listen to the Science – all while any science that does not further capital or further the desires of our corporate overlords is ignored and buried. After all, the 5G networks underpin all fourth industrial revolution technologies going forward under the guise of “The Great Reset”. Those that control the 5G networks will control all the fourth industrial revolution infrastructure upon which 5G technology is based (and absolutely dependent upon). The 5G-Infrastructure-PPP (5G PPP) is a 1.4 billion Euro joint initiative between the European ICT industry and the European Commission, now in its third phase. This is the largest 5G research program in the world.
“And our Digital Strategy, embedded within the wider Industrial Strategy, sets out the 7 pillars on which we can build our success. And inside that fits our 5G strategy, like a set of Russian Dolls.”
– Matt Hancock, UK Parliament, Fourth Industrial Revolution Autumn Reception, 2017 [Source]
They say “march” – the people march. They say “applause” – the people applaud. They say “look” – the people look. They say “look away” – the people look away. After decades as subjects of social engineering, behavioural change economics, indoctrination, and intense pacification, have we lost the capacity to think for ourselves? Have we become completely domesticated subjects belonging to the ruling class.
Shaming
“Under a capitalist framework, social institutions can be manipulated to doctor “facts” in serving the ruling class. An erroneous fact can unite the ruling class, while it can put people against each other, being divided, exploited and subjugates. Capitalist hierarchy curates a theater of crises in restructuring the capitalist hierarchy and its trajectory of exploitation and subjugation to overcome its inherent problem of cyclical economic downturns. In the process, capitalism continue to colonize humanity and nature.”
— Hiroyuki Hamada
Those who will not comply with wearing a mask are shamed. Yet, where is our shame in producing this amount of waste that will further harm the natural world that we allege we wish to defend?
The political correctness, the virtue signalling, in regard to wearing a mask, has successfully pitted person against person, group against group, while the criminals who have orchestrated yet another trillion dollar bail out, in addition to destroying our biosphere and ecosystems, are left unscathed. Their profits (from the theft of labour and the natural world) continue to soar in record numbers. As ruling class global power consolidates, we are subjected to dangerous discourse. A class war is averted, as factions grow between we the citizenry, who must unite against the ruling class. A ruling class hell-bent on destroying what traces of our humanity remain. Hell-bent on the capturing of, and the continued plunder of, an already devastated planet, that graciously sustains all life.
Some people and populations are genuinely anxious in response to those that do not wear a mask. This fear has been manufactured primarily by media. The media could flood us with global recovery rates – which are well over 99 per cent, instead, we are flooded minute by minute with deaths from/with COVID-19. When there are no deaths, we are flooded with “an increase in positive cases”, a term which is meaningless due to unreliable tests.
Those that identify as left, attempt to frame all of those who do not wear a mask as far right. Others identifying as left, consider those who do not wear masks posturing as radical or “woke”. Neither of the aforementioned are reasons to not wear a mask. The reason for not wearing one should be based not on political leanings, nor on fear, but a calm rationale.
Microplastics
“The use of PPE, especially of face masks, has been incentivised in some highly impacted areas (regions/municipalities), but quickly spread to the worldwide population driven by anxiety and the perceived feeling of safety.”
— August 17, 2020, Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and recommendations
Personal protective equipment (PPE) in 2020, in particular face masks, have become a new genre of pollution. The majority of face masks being purchase and disposed of are single-use surgical masks made of melt-blown fabric manufactured from polypropylene, a type of thermoplastic. [2] The vast majority of all disposable face masks being consumed have two outer layers with a filter between them (polypropylene), made from nonwoven plastic fibres.
Microplastics are tiny plastic fragments less than 5 millimeters in diameter, or about 0.2 inches. They are barely visible to the human eye. [Source]
A 2019 study showed that human microplastic consumption ranges from 39,000 to 52,000 particles per day. These estimates increase to 74,000 and 121,000 when inhalation is considered. This amounts to humans ingesting approx. 5 grams of plastic each and every week, 5 grams being the equivalent of a credit card or a US nickel. Earlier in 2019, the European commission’s chief scientific advisers stated: “The evidence [on both environmental and health risks due to microplastics] provides grounds for genuine concern and for precaution to be exercised.” [Source] More recently, on August 17, 2020, researchers analyzed 47 human tissue samples. Traces of microplastics were found in all 47 samples. [Source]
“We have detected these chemicals of plastics in every single organ that we have investigated.”
— senior researcher Rolf Halden, director of the Arizona State University (ASU) Biodesign Center for Environmental Health Engineering
This begs the question, what will be the result from applying microplastic materials, that is face masks, directly and securely over our air passages?
“Flock” is defined as inhaled microfibers of the plastic. Flock worker’s lung is an occupational lung disease caused by exposure to flock in manufacturing processes. People who work in flocking manufacturing processes inhale small pieces of the flock fibers, placing them at risk of interstitial lung disease. Workers exposed to polypropylene flocking particles have developed flock worker’s lung. [Source] The presence of microplastics in human lung tissue was outlined by in a 1998 science paper, following the research of lung tissue belonging to cancer patients who had prolonged exposure to plastic fibers.
In addition to particle pollution causing damage to lung tissue and reducing lung capacity, it worsens other respiratory health issues such as asthma. In 2013, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an instittuition belonging to the World Health Organization, concluded that particle pollution causes lung cancer.[Source]
“An informal survey of a small group of health care workers by myself found that about 50% of workers noted that their masks began to fray at the end of their shift, noting fibers that itched their face and nose.” — [Source]
In occupational flock, “the cutting process results in formation of airborne particles or fibers in the respirable range.” [Source] As facemasks undergo a continuous friction with breathing, talking, and facial movements, it seems likely, if not probable, that microscopic polypropylene microfibers, in some amount, are effectively being ingested into both the body and lungs. It is safe to assume that those wearing masks, for long periods of time, are most at risk. The vast majority of this group would be minimum wage workers, who have no choice but to comply, people of colour, who are told they are more susceptible to the virus than white populations, and children in schools, where masks have been made mandatory.
Particles that are not inhaled into the lungs (the vast majority) make their way into our waterways. To be more succinct, every single particle produced, that does not make its way into our bodies, will instead go in to our waterways. The particles are then ingested into the body by humans and non-human life (marine animals and fish), some of which is too, ingested by humans. Of course, in addition, we drink the water, as does non-human life, Is this how we protect biodiversity? Is this what we mean by protecting health?
Microfibers and Lungs
Prior to COVID-19, in 2019, at the Plastic Health Summit, Fransien van Dijk, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Groningen; Molecular Pharmacology Department, shared the initial results of her research on how exposure to plastic microfibers (from clothing) affects lung development. Here we can listen carefully to her findings, in the context of masks:
[Video running time: 11m:00s]
The risk of microfibers on lungs should be of paramount concern in relation to children, whose lungs take a long time to fully develop and mature. On June, 2020, the Children’s Sick Kids Hospital, perhaps the most prestigious hospital in Canada, advised that children, by and large almost completely unaffected by the virus, should not wear masks and added that physical interaction and play was essential for their well-being. Despite these recommendations (largely ignored by media), the government and school boards made masks and social distancing mandatory for children. The hospital further reported that 1500 asymptomatic children were tested, none tested positive. [Twitter thread] Meanwhile, “Canada alone has ordered more than 153 million N95 respirators, almost 400 million surgical masks and 18 million non-medical face masks. That doesn’t include demand from the private sector.” As a new emerging market, trees (biological communities invisible to the humancentric eye) cannot only be sacrificed on the altar of “green energy”, we can also pulverize them into face “ecofriendly” masks. [Source]
“We have suggested that masks not be required when children return to school.”
— Michelle Science MD, MSc, FRCPC, Division of Infectious Diseases, The Hospital for Sick Children, Assistant Professor, Department of Paediatrics, University of Toronto
“Close interaction such as playing and socializing is really central to child development and should not be discouraged…Overall we think it’s not realistic or in children’s best interests to completely avoid all close interaction and play.”
– Dr Daphne Korczak , Pediatrics, Psychiatry
“For children and adolescents, masks are an absolute no-no. Children and adolescents have an extremely active and adaptive immune system and they need a constant interaction with the microbiome of the Earth. Their brain is also incredibly active, as it is has so much to learn. The child’s brain, or the youth’s brain, is thirsting for oxygen. The more metabolically active the organ is, the more oxygen it requires. In children and adolescents every organ is metabolically active.”
— Dr. Margarite Griesz-Brisson MD, PhD , Consultant Neurologist and Neurophysiologist [Full transcript]
Cloth Masks
To mitigate against this latest environmental and health nightmare, people have been encouraged to wear reusable fabric face coverings comprised of three layers of fabric.
On September 25, 2020, a University of California – Davis study found that the fabric of home-made cloth face coverings release a large amount of fibers into the air. The study underscored the importance of washing them. What is not discussed are the same fibres being inhaled and ingested.
Those in the West, and those who own or have access to a clothes dryer, will know what dryer lint is. Friction causes the fabric fibres to become loose and dislodge during the washing and drying process – resulting in sometimes little, and more often lots – of lint that must be removed after each cycle.
Consider this excerpt from the article, How damaging is breathing in microplastics?:
“Microplastics washed off from synthetic clothes contribute up to 35% of the plastic particles polluting our oceans. Every time we do our laundry, an average of 9 million microfibers end up in the wastewater treatment plants that cannot filter them, and because of that, these fibers end up in the ocean. Also, just by wearing synthetic clothes, plastic fibers are constantly being released in the air.”
Up until now, all research was focused on microfiber pollution through laundry washing. However, a recent study shows how wearing polyester clothes pollutes the environment to a similar extent—wearing polyester clothes releases as many microplastic fibers in the air as through washing. [Emphasis added] [Source]
If microfibers are shedding off clothing, they are shedding off masks. Even cotton ones. In fact, cotton textiles (clothing, towels, etc.) often produce far more lint than other fabrics. Add to this, the inhalation of chemical laundry detergent and chemical fabric “softener” (liquid and sheet form) that many people continue to use in the process of washing and drying the masks.
“Cloth masks appear to do little to slow viral transmission of viruses allowing 97% viral penetration and may increase transmission according to a study by MacIntyre et al (2015) in the health care setting. [3] This finding may or may not extrapolate to the community setting, but this author could find no prospective study that showed efficacy.” [Source]
More Chemicals
In addition to yet another environmental crisis unleashed by masks, 99 per cent of alcohol gels/sanitizers contain microplastics (polymers, nanosilver/nanoparticles which are in effect pesticides), or similar chemicals. The moment they leave the bottle they end up in our environment; our waterways, seas and oceans – and our bodies. May 19, 2020:
“The London Health Sciences Centre was forced to pull its latest batch of hand sanitizer after the manufacturer moved to a type that uses technical-grade ethanol which, while approved by Health Canada, can cause cancer and be harmful to children and pregnant or lactating women.”
Rather than providing children with real nutrition, such as bushels of fresh apples (from struggling farmers), complemented with vitamin C, governments and school boards continue to award corporations millions of dollars to keep these chemicals flowing. [“P&G to produce 45,000 litres of hand sanitizer weekly”, March 23, 2020, World Economic Forum website]
Here, the real question must be asked: have we become certifiably, collectively insane?
Grandstanding – The phase out of single-use plastics
This brings us to government promises to reduce single-use plastic. Needless to say, with bricks & mortar restaurants being forced to close their doors, mandatory plexi-glass installations, the uptake in take-out food and drive-thrus (disposable packaging), etc. – in addition to mandatory mask legislations sweeping across whole countries, a plastics industry renaissance is fully underway. [Thread] While Governments provide false assurances, celebrating bans on single-use plastics, the single-use so-called “biodegradable” packaging industry accelerates.
As the Global South faces starvation, the Global North will grind the trees not used for biofuel, facemasks and toilet paper, into single use packaging for take-out food. Single-use disposable products – under the guise of green will no doubt launch yet another billion dollar certification industry to accompany it. All while trees are our best defense against climate change. All eyes on the *Trillion Tree Campaign launched by **Salesforce and World Economic Forum – while the planet’s existing trees continue to be cut down at lightning speed for corporate profits. This is storytelling that serves to insulate and expand the capitalist economic system destroying the natural world. [*Directed by Nicole Schwab, daughter of World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab][**Founded by Marc Benioff, member of the World Economic Forum Board of Trustees, inaugural Chair of World Economic Forum’s Center for the Fourth Industrial Revolution in the United States.]
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD) has projected that annual mask sales will increase 200 fold to $166 billion in 2020, while demand for Global PET (polyethylene terephthalate) packaging is expected to reach $44.1 billion in 2020. [Source]
“Scientists calculated that 275 million tonnes of plastic waste were produced by 192 countries during 2010, that’s the same as 250,000 Eiffel towers. Shockingly, 4.8 to 12.7 million tonnes of that is thought to have ended up in the ocean.” [Source]
“A new analysis finds that without immediate and sustained action, the annual flow of plastic into the ocean could nearly triple by 2040.” Undoubtedly true, This analysis (July 23, 2020, was prepared by the Pew Charitable Trusts and SYSTEMIQ. The stated expertise of of SYSTEMIQ is to unleash “viable growth” and “transform markets”. It plays a leading role in “Harnessing the Fourth Industrial Revolution for the Circular Economy”. The New Plastics Economy initiative unveiled in January 2019 at Davos. The Coca-Cola Company, Danone, MARS, Novamont, L’Oréal, PepsiCo, Unilever, Amcor, and Veolia are the initiative’s Core Partners. Other partners include Evian, Google, H&M, Intesa Sanpaolo, and Nike. Plastics Economy “Knowledge Partners” include Arup, IDEO, McKinsey, and SYSTEMIQ. “Thought Partners” include Pew Charitable Trusts. [Further reading]
Recycling superfluous plastics that harms all life is not the answer. The answer is to stop producing it.
“The reason this discussion is happening is not because of the numbers of people who are dying – but because who is dying. Because it is something that can also possibly affect white people…”
— Omali Yeshitela, Chairman of the African People’s Socialist Party USA and the African Socialist International
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]
