October 4, 2022





What you need to know about facemasks.

Excerpts from ScienceDirect.com Volume 146, January 2021:

Medical Hypotheses

Volume 146, January 2021, 110411 FULL ARTICLE Downloadable PDF

In early publications the World Health Organization stated that “facemasks are not required, as no evidence is available on its usefulness to protect non-sick persons” [14].

In the same publication, the WHO declared that “cloth (e.g. cotton or gauze) masks are NOT recommended under any circumstance” [14].

Conversely, in later publication the WHO stated that the usage of fabric-made facemasks (Polypropylene, Cotton, Polyester, Cellulose, Gauze and Silk) is a general community practice for “preventing the infected wearer transmitting the virus to others and/or to offer protection to the healthy wearer against infection (prevention)” [2].

The same publication further conflicted itself by stating that due to the lower filtration, breathability and overall performance of fabric facemasks, the usage of woven fabric mask such as cloth, and/or non-woven fabrics, should only be considered for infected persons and not for prevention practice in asymptomatic individuals [2].

The Central for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) made similar recommendation, stating that only symptomatic persons should consider wearing facemask, while for asymptomatic individuals this practice is not recommended [31].

Consistent with the CDC, clinical scientists from Departments of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology in Australia counsel against facemasks usage for health-care workers, arguing that there is no justification for such practice while normal caring relationship between patients and medical staff could be compromised [32].

Moreover, the WHO repeatedly announced that “at present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19) on the effectiveness face masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection of respiratory viruses, including COVID-19”[2]. Despite these controversies, the potential harms and risks of wearing facemasks were clearly acknowledged.

These including self-contamination due to hand practice or non-replaced when the mask is wet, soiled or damaged, development of facial skin lesions, irritant dermatitis or worsening acne and psychological discomfort.

Vulnerable populations such as people with mental health disorders, developmental disabilities, hearing problems, those living in hot and humid environments, children and patients with respiratory conditions are at significant health risk for complications and harm [2].

Physiological effects of wearing facemasks

Wearing facemask mechanically restricts breathing by increasing the resistance of air movement during both inhalation and exhalation process [12][13]. Although, intermittent (several times a week) and repetitive (10–15 breaths for 2–4 sets) increase in respiration resistance may be adaptive for strengthening respiratory muscles [33][34], prolonged and continues effect of wearing facemask is maladaptive and could be detrimental for health [11][12][13]. In normal conditions at the sea level, air contains 20.93% O2 and 0.03% CO2, providing partial pressures of 100 mmHg and 40 mmHg for these gases in the arterial blood, respectively.

These gas concentrations significantly altered when breathing occurs through facemask. A trapped air remaining between the mouth, nose and the facemask is rebreathed repeatedly in and out of the body, containing low O2 and high CO2 concentrations, causing hypoxemia and hypercapnia [35][36][11][12][13]. Severe hypoxemia may also provoke cardiopulmonary and neurological complications and is considered an important clinical sign in cardiopulmonary medicine [37][38][39][40][41][42].

Low oxygen content in the arterial blood can cause myocardial ischemia, serious arrhythmias, right or left ventricular dysfunction, dizziness, hypotension, syncope and pulmonary hypertension [43]. Chronic low-grade hypoxemia and hypercapnia as result of using facemask can cause exacerbation of existing cardiopulmonary, metabolic, vascular and neurological conditions [37][38][39][40][41][42]Table 1 summarizes the physiological, psychological effects of wearing facemask and their potential long-term consequences for health.

Table 1. Physiological and Psychological Effects of Wearing Facemask and Their Potential Health Consequences.

Physiological EffectsPsychological EffectHealth Consequences
•Hypoxemia•Hypercapnia•Shortness of breath•Increase lactate concentration•Decline in pH levels•Acidosis•Toxicity•Inflammation•Self-contamination•Increase in stress hormones level (adrenaline, noradrenaline and cortisol)•Increased muscle tension•Immunosuppression•Activation of “fight or flight” stress response•Chronic stress condition•Fear•Mood disturbances•Insomnia•Fatigue•Compromised cognitive performance•Increased predisposition for viral and infection illnesses•Headaches•Anxiety•Depression•Hypertension•Cardiovascular disease•Cancer•Diabetes•Alzheimer disease•Exacerbation of existing conditions and diseases•Accelerated aging process•Health deterioration•Premature mortality

In addition to hypoxia and hypercapnia, breathing through facemask residues bacterial and germs components on the inner and outside layer of the facemask. These toxic components are repeatedly rebreathed back into the body, causing self-contamination. Breathing through facemasks also increases temperature and humidity in the space between the mouth and the mask, resulting a release of toxic particles from the mask’s materials [1][2][19][26][35][36].

A systematic literature review estimated that aerosol contamination levels of facemasks including 13 to 202,549 different viruses [1]. Rebreathing contaminated air with high bacterial and toxic particle concentrations along with low O2 and high CO2 levels continuously challenge the body homeostasis, causing self-toxicity and immunosuppression [1][2][19][26][35][36].

A study on 39 patients with renal disease found that wearing N95 facemask during hemodialysis significantly reduced arterial partial oxygen pressure (from PaO2 101.7 to 92.7 mm Hg), increased respiratory rate (from 16.8 to 18.8 breaths/min), and increased the occurrence of chest discomfort and respiratory distress [35]. Respiratory Protection Standards from Occupational Safety and Health Administration, US Department of Labor states that breathing air with O2 concentration below 19.5% is considered oxygen-deficiency, causing physiological and health adverse effects. These include increased breathing frequency, accelerated heartrate and cognitive impairments related to thinking and coordination [36]. A chronic state of mild hypoxia and hypercapnia has been shown as primarily mechanism for developing cognitive dysfunction based on animal studies and studies in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [44].

The adverse physiological effects were confirmed in a study of 53 surgeons where surgical facemask were used during a major operation. After 60 min of facemask wearing the oxygen saturation dropped by more than 1% and heart rate increased by approximately five beats/min [45].

Another study among 158 health-care workers using protective personal equipment primarily N95 facemasks reported that 81% (128 workers) developed new headaches during their work shifts as these become mandatory due to COVID-19 outbreak. For those who used the N95 facemask greater than 4 h per day, the likelihood for developing a headache during the work shift was approximately four times higher [Odds ratio = 3.91, 95% CI (1.35–11.31) p = 0.012], while 82.2% of the N95 wearers developed the headache already within ≤10 to 50 min [46].

With respect to cloth facemask, a RCT using four weeks follow up compared the effect of cloth facemask to medical masks and to no masks on the incidence of clinical respiratory illness, influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections among 1607 participants from 14 hospitals [19].

The results showed that there were no difference between wearing cloth masks, medical masks and no masks for incidence of clinical respiratory illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections. However, a large harmful effect with more than 13 times higher risk [Relative Risk = 13.25 95% CI (1.74 to 100.97) was observed for influenza-like illness among those who were wearing cloth masks [19].

The study concluded that cloth masks have significant health and safety issues including moisture retention, reuse, poor filtration and increased risk for infection, providing recommendation against the use of cloth masks [19].

Psychological effects of wearing facemasks

Psychologically, wearing facemask fundamentally has negative effects on the wearer and the nearby person. Basic human-to-human connectivity through face expression is compromised and self-identity is somewhat eliminated [47][48][49]. These dehumanizing movements partially delete the uniqueness and individuality of person who wearing the facemask as well as the connected person [49]. Social connections and relationships are basic human needs, which innately inherited in all people, whereas reduced human-to-human connections are associated with poor mental and physical health [50][51].

Despite escalation in technology and globalization that would presumably foster social connections, scientific findings show that people are becoming increasingly more socially isolated, and the prevalence of loneliness is increasing in last few decades [50][52]. Poor social connections are closely related to isolation and loneliness, considered significant health related risk factors [50][51][52][53].

meta-analysis of 91 studies of about 400,000 people showed a 13% increased morality risk among people with low compare to high contact frequency [53]. Another meta-analysis of 148 prospective studies (308,849 participants) found that poor social relationships was associated with 50% increased mortality risk. People who were socially isolated or fell lonely had 45% and 40% increased mortality risk, respectively. These findings were consistent across ages, sex, initial health status, cause of death and follow-up periods [52].

Importantly, the increased risk for mortality was found comparable to smoking and exceeding well-established risk factors such as obesity and physical inactivity [52]. An umbrella review of 40 systematic reviews including 10 meta-analyses demonstrated that compromised social relationships were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, depression, anxiety suicide, cancer and overall physical illness [51].

As described earlier, wearing facemasks causing hypoxic and hypercapnic state that constantly challenges the normal homeostasis, and activates “fight or flight” stress response, an important survival mechanism in the human body [11][12][13]. The acute stress response includes activation of nervous, endocrine, cardiovascular, and the immune systems [47][54][55][56]. These include activation of the limbic part of the brain, release stress hormones (adrenalin, neuro-adrenalin and cortisol), changes in blood flow distribution (vasodilation of peripheral blood vessels and vasoconstriction of visceral blood vessels) and activation of the immune system response (secretion of macrophages and natural killer cells) [47][48].

Encountering people who wearing facemasks activates innate stress-fear emotion, which is fundamental to all humans in danger or life threating situations, such as death or unknown, unpredictable outcome. While acute stress response (seconds to minutes) is adaptive reaction to challenges and part of the survival mechanism, chronic and prolonged state of stress-fear is maladaptive and has detrimental effects on physical and mental health. The repeatedly or continuously activated stress-fear response causes the body to operate on survival mode, having sustain increase in blood pressure, pro-inflammatory state and immunosuppression. [47][48].

Long-Term health consequences of wearing facemasks

Long-term practice of wearing facemasks has strong potential for devastating health consequences. Prolonged hypoxic-hypercapnic state compromises normal physiological and psychological balance, deteriorating health and promotes the developing and progression of existing chronic diseases [23][38][39][43][47][48][57][11][12][13]. For instance, ischemic heart disease caused by hypoxic damage to the myocardium is the most common form of cardiovascular disease and is a number one cause of death worldwide (44% of all non-communicable diseases) with 17.9 million deaths occurred in 2016 [57].

Hypoxia also playing an important role in cancer burden [58]. Cellular hypoxia has strong mechanistic feature in promoting cancer initiation, progression, metastasis, predicting clinical outcomes and usually presents a poorer survival in patients with cancer. Most solid tumors present some degree of hypoxia, which is independent predictor of more aggressive disease, resistance to cancer therapies and poorer clinical outcomes [59][60]. Worth note, cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide, with an estimate of more than 18 million new diagnosed cases and 9.6 million cancer-related deaths occurred in 2018 [61].

With respect to mental health, global estimates showing that COVID-19 will cause a catastrophe due to collateral psychological damage such as quarantine, lockdowns, unemployment, economic collapse, social isolation, violence and suicides [62][63][64]. Chronic stress along with hypoxic and hypercapnic conditions knocks the body out of balance, and can cause headaches, fatigue, stomach issues, muscle tension, mood disturbances, insomnia and accelerated aging [47][48][65][66][67].

This state suppressing the immune system to protect the body from viruses and bacteria, decreasing cognitive function, promoting the developing and exacerbating the major health issues including hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimer disease, rising anxiety and depression states, causes social isolation and loneliness and increasing the risk for prematurely mortality [47][48][51][56][66].


The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks.

Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.

Credit authorship contribution statement

Baruch Vainshelboim: Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing – original draft.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.


[1]E.M. Fisher, J.D. Noti, W.G. Lindsley, F.M. Blachere, R.E. ShafferValidation and application of models to predict facemask influenza contamination in healthcare settings Risk Analysis, 34 (2014), pp. 1423-1434 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[2] World Health Organization. Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19. Geneva, Switzerland; 2020.Google Scholar[3] C. Sohrabi, Z. Alsafi, N. O’Neill, M. Khan, A. Kerwan, A. Al-Jabir, et al. World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19)Int J Surg, 76 (2020), pp. 71-76 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[4] Worldometer. COVID-19 CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC. 2020. Google Scholar[5] A.S. Fauci, H.C. Lane, R.R. Redfield Covid-19 – Navigating the Uncharted N Engl J Med, 382 (2020), pp. 1268-1269 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[6] S.S. Shrestha, D.L. Swerdlow, R.H. Borse, V.S. Prabhu, L. Finelli, C.Y. Atkins, et al. Estimating the burden of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in the United States (April 2009-April 2010) Clin Infect Dis, 52 (Suppl 1) (2011), pp. S75-S82 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[7] W.W. Thompson, E. Weintraub, P. Dhankhar, P.Y. Cheng, L. Brammer, M.I. Meltzer, et al.Estimates of US influenza-associated deaths made using four different methods Influenza Other Respir Viruses, 3 (2009), pp. 37-49 View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[8] Centers for Disease, C., Prevention. Estimates of deaths associated with seasonal influenza — United States, 1976-2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2010,59:1057-62. Google Scholar[9] S. Richardson, J.S. Hirsch, M. Narasimhan, J.M. Crawford, T. McGinn, K.W. Davidson, et al.Presenting Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes Among 5700 Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the New York City AreaJAMA (2020)Google Scholar[10] J.P.A. Ioannidis, C. Axfors, D.G. Contopoulos-IoannidisPopulation-level COVID-19 mortality risk for non-elderly individuals overall and for non-elderly individuals without underlying diseases in pandemic epicentersEnviron Res, 188 (2020) Google Scholar[11] American College of Sports MedicineACSM’s Resource Manual for Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Priscription(Sixth ed.), Lippincott Wiliams & Wilkins, Baltimore (2010)Google Scholar[12] P.A. Farrell, M.J. Joyner, V.J. Caiozzo ACSM’s Advanced Exercise Physiology (second edition), Lippncott Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore (2012) Google Scholar[13] W.L. Kenney, J.H. Wilmore, D.L. Costill Physiology of sport and exercise(5th ed.), Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL (2012) Google Scholar[14] World Health Organization. Advice on the use of masks in the community, during home care and in health care settings in the context of the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak. Geneva, Switzerland; 2020. Google Scholar[15] B. Sperlich, C. Zinner, A. Hauser, H.C. Holmberg, J. Wegrzyk The Impact of Hyperoxia on Human Performance and RecoverySports Med, 47 (2017), pp. 429-438 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[16] W.J. Wiersinga, A. Rhodes, A.C. Cheng, S.J. Peacock, H.C. Prescott Pathophysiology, Transmission, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A ReviewJAMA (2020) Google Scholar[17] N. Zhu, D. Zhang, W. Wang, X. Li, B. Yang, J. Song, et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019N Engl J Med, 382 (2020), pp. 727-733 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[18] J.T. Poston, B.K. Patel, A.M. Davis Management of Critically Ill Adults With COVID-19 JAMA (2020)Google Scholar[19] C.R. MacIntyre, H. Seale, T.C. Dung, N.T. Hien, P.T. Nga, A.A. Chughtai, et al. A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workersBMJ open, 5 (2015) Google Scholar[20] K.D. Patil, H.R. Halperin, L.B. BeckerCardiac arrest: resuscitation and reperfusionCirc Res, 116 (2015), pp. 2041-2049 View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[21] M.F. Hazinski, J.P. Nolan, J.E. Billi, B.W. Bottiger, L. Bossaert, A.R. de Caen, et al.Part 1: Executive summary: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment RecommendationsCirculation, 122 (2010), pp. S250-S275 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[22] M.E. Kleinman, Z.D. Goldberger, T. Rea, R.A. Swor, B.J. Bobrow, E.E. Brennan, et al.American Heart Association Focused Update on Adult Basic Life Support and Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation Quality: An Update to the American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Circulation, 137 (2018), pp. e7-e13 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[23] K.G. Lurie, E.C. Nemergut, D. Yannopoulos, M. Sweeney The Physiology of Cardiopulmonary ResuscitationAnesth Analg, 122 (2016), pp. 767-783View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[24] B. Chandrasekaran, S. Fernandes“Exercise with facemask; Are we handling a devil’s sword?” – A physiological hypothesis Med Hypotheses, 144 (2020) Google Scholar[25] A. Konda, A. Prakash, G.A. Moss, M. Schmoldt, G.D. Grant, S. Guha Aerosol Filtration Efficiency of Common Fabrics Used in Respiratory Cloth Masks ACS Nano, 14 (2020), pp. 6339-6347 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[26] N.H.L. Leung, D.K.W. Chu, E.Y.C. Shiu, K.H. Chan, J.J. McDevitt, B.J.P. Hau, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks Nat Med, 26 (2020), pp. 676-680 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[27] M. Gao, L. Yang, X. Chen, Y. Deng, S. Yang, H. Xu, et al. A study on infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers Respir Med, 169 (2020) Google Scholar[28] J.D. Smith, C.C. MacDougall, J. Johnstone, R.A. Copes, B. Schwartz, G.E. Garber Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis CMAJ, 188 (2016), pp. 567-574 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[29] R. Chou, T. Dana, R. Jungbauer, C. Weeks, M.S. McDonaghMasks for Prevention of Respiratory Virus Infections, Including SARS-CoV-2, in Health Care and Community Settings: A Living Rapid ReviewAnn Intern Med (2020) Google Scholar[30] D.K. Chu, E.A. Akl, S. Duda, K. Solo, S. Yaacoub, H.J. Schunemann, et al. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysisLancet, 395 (2020), pp. 1973-1987 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[31] Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Implementation of Mitigation Strategies for Communities with Local COVID-19 Transmission. Atlanta, Georgia; 2020.Google Scholar[32] D. Isaacs, P. Britton, A. Howard-Jones, A. Kesson, A. Khatami, B. Marais, et al.Do facemasks protect against COVID-19?J Paediatr Child Health, 56 (2020), pp. 976-977 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[33] P. Laveneziana, A. Albuquerque, A. Aliverti, T. Babb, E. Barreiro, M. Dres, et al. ERS statement on respiratory muscle testing at rest and during exerciseEur Respir J, 53 (2019)Google Scholar[34] American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory, SATS/ERS Statement on respiratory muscle testing Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 166 (2002), pp. 518-624 Google Scholar[35] T.W. Kao, K.C. Huang, Y.L. Huang, T.J. Tsai, B.S. Hsieh, M.S. Wu The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal diseaseJ Formos Med Assoc, 103 (2004), pp. 624-628 View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[36] United States Department of Labor. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Respiratory Protection Standard, 29 CFR 1910.134; 2007. Google Scholar[37] ATS/ACCP Statement on cardiopulmonary exercise testingAm J Respir Crit Care Med, 167 (2003), pp. 211-277[38] American College of Sports Medicine ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription(9th ed.), Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Health, Philadelphia (2014) Google Scholar[39] G.J. Balady, R. Arena, K. Sietsema, J. Myers, L. Coke, G.F. Fletcher, et al.Clinician’s Guide to cardiopulmonary exercise testing in adults: a scientific statement from the American Heart AssociationCirculation, 122 (2010), pp. 191-225 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[40] A.M. Ferrazza, D. Martolini, G. Valli, P. PalangeCardiopulmonary exercise testing in the functional and prognostic evaluation of patients with pulmonary diseasesRespiration, 77 (2009), pp. 3-17 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[41] G.F. Fletcher, P.A. Ades, P. Kligfield, R. Arena, G.J. Balady, V.A. Bittner, et al.Exercise standards for testing and training: a scientific statement from the American Heart AssociationCirculation, 128 (2013), pp. 873-934 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[42] M. Guazzi, V. Adams, V. Conraads, M. Halle, A. Mezzani, L. Vanhees, et al.EACPR/AHA Scientific Statement. Clinical recommendations for cardiopulmonary exercise testing data assessment in specific patient populationsCirculation, 126 (2012), pp. 2261-2274 View Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[43] R. Naeije, C. Dedobbeleer Pulmonary hypertension and the right ventricle in hypoxia Exp Physiol, 98 (2013), pp. 1247-1256CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[44] G.Q. Zheng, Y. Wang, X.T. Wang Chronic hypoxia-hypercapnia influences cognitive function: a possible new model of cognitive dysfunction in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Med Hypotheses, 71 (2008), pp. 111-113 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[45] A. Beder, U. Buyukkocak, H. Sabuncuoglu, Z.A. Keskil, S. Keskil Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgeryNeurocirugia (Astur), 19 (2008), pp. 121-126 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[46] J.J.Y. Ong, C. Bharatendu, Y. Goh, J.Z.Y. Tang, K.W.X. Sooi, Y.L. Tan, et al.Headaches Associated With Personal Protective Equipment – A Cross-Sectional Study Among Frontline Healthcare Workers During COVID-19Headache, 60 (2020), pp. 864-877 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[47] N. Schneiderman, G. Ironson, S.D. SiegelStress and health: psychological, behavioral, and biological determinantsAnnu Rev Clin Psychol, 1 (2005), pp. 607-628 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[48] P.A. ThoitsStress and health: major findings and policy implicationsJ Health Soc Behav, 51 (Suppl) (2010), pp. S41-S53 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[49] N. Haslam Dehumanization: an integrative review Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 10 (2006), pp. 252-264 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[50] S. CohenSocial relationships and health Am Psychol, 59 (2004), pp. 676-684 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[51 ] N. Leigh-Hunt, D. Bagguley, K. Bash, V. Turner, S. Turnbull, N. Valtorta, et al. An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and lonelinessPublic Health, 152 (2017), pp. 157-171 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[52] J. Holt-Lunstad, T.B. Smith, J.B. Layton Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic reviewPLoS Med, 7 (2010)Google Scholar[53]E. Shor, D.J. Roelfs Social contact frequency and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis and meta-regressionSoc Sci Med, 128 (2015), pp. 76-86 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[54] B.S. McEwen Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators N Engl J Med, 338 (1998), pp. 171-179 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[55] B.S. McEwen Physiology and neurobiology of stress and adaptation: central role of the brain Physiol Rev, 87 (2007), pp. 873-904 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[56] G.S. Everly, J.M. Lating A Clinical Guide to the Treatment of the Human Stress Response(4th ed.), NY Springer Nature, New York (2019) Google Scholar[57] World Health Organization. World health statistics 2018: monitoring health for the SDGs, sustainable development goals Geneva, Switzerland; 2018. Google Scholar[58] World Health Organization. World Cancer Report 2014. Lyon; 2014. Google Scholar[59] J.M. Wiggins, A.B. Opoku-Acheampong, D.R. Baumfalk, D.W. Siemann, B.J. BehnkeExercise and the Tumor Microenvironment: Potential Therapeutic ImplicationsExerc Sport Sci Rev, 46 (2018), pp. 56-64 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[60] K.A. Ashcraft, A.B. Warner, L.W. Jones, M.W. DewhirstExercise as Adjunct Therapy in Cancer Semin Radiat Oncol, 29 (2019), pp. 16-24 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[61] F. Bray, J. Ferlay, I. Soerjomataram, R.L. Siegel, L.A. Torre, A. Jemal Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries CA Cancer J Clin (2018) Google Scholar[62] S.K. Brooks, R.K. Webster, L.E. Smith, L. Woodland, S. Wessely, N. Greenberg, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidenceLancet, 395 (2020), pp. 912-920 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[63] S. Galea, R.M. Merchant, N. Lurie The Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 and Physical Distancing: The Need for Prevention and Early InterventionJAMA Intern Med, 180 (2020), pp. 817-818 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[64] D. Izaguirre-Torres, R. Siche Covid-19 disease will cause a global catastrophe in terms of mental health: A hypothesisMed Hypotheses, 143 (2020) Google Scholar[65] B.M. Kudielka, S. Wust Human models in acute and chronic stress: assessing determinants of individual hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis activity and reactivityStress, 13 (2010), pp. 1-14 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[66] J.N. Morey, I.A. Boggero, A.B. Scott, S.C. Segerstrom Current Directions in Stress and Human Immune Function Curr Opin Psychol, 5 (2015), pp. 13-17 ArticleDownload PDFView Record in ScopusGoogle Scholar[67] R.M. Sapolsky, L.M. Romero, A.U. Munck How do glucocorticoids influence stress responses? Integrating permissive, suppressive, stimulatory, and preparative actionsEndocr Rev, 21 (2000), pp. 55-89 CrossRefView Record in ScopusGoogle ScholarView Abstract© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.


Take advantage of all the books, articles, links and suppressed information YOU NEED TO KNOW that is available on this site.

REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN (published 1967): https://www.howardnema.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Report_from_Iron_Mountain.pdf

SILENT WEAPONS FOR QUIET WARS (1979) FULL DOCUMENT: https://www.howardnema.com/2020/09/13/silent-weapons-for-quiet-wars/

OPERATION LOCKSTEP: https://www.howardnema.com/2020/08/22/operation-lock-step-using-covid-19-as-an-authoritarian-weapon-for-social-control/

THE FIRST GLOBAL REVOLUTION (1992): The First Global Revolution (geoengineeringwatch.org)

UN Agenda 21 FULL DOCUMENT: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

Tragedy and Hope (MOST IMPORTANT EXCERPTS): https://www.howardnema.com/2016/10/25/critical-excerpts-from-tragedy-and-hope-1966-that-explain-events-in-the-world-today/

BETWEEN TWO AGES: America’s Role in the Technetronic Era by Zbigniew Brzezinski: https://www.howardnema.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/5a-zbigniew-brzezinski_between-two-ages.pdf

The link below is a path of breadcrumbs that leads to greater understanding of the world we live in and those who chart and guide humanity’s progress from the shadows though out the ages. Here is an ever growing catalogue of hundreds of books, PDF’s, articles, white papers, links, documents and research material on all things New World Order.


On December 3, 2020 the subversive anti-American communist traitors at YouTube TERMINATED TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL 2. On December 11, 2020 YouTube terminated TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL 3. TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL 4 was launched the same day so the more than 9,000 subscribers left orphaned will be able to find material that will be posted on alternative sites.

Subscribe to Truth Talk News on rumble:

Subscribe to TruthTalkNews on bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/QJKrgONwtmn0/

In 2016 the TRUTH TALK NEWS CHANNEL was hacked and the email address was changed. There is no way to access or respond to emails, post, or upload videos on that site. The Channel has more than 2.5 million views and over 12.5K subscribers and continues to grow. The full catologue of more than 1000 videos are still available for viewing and sharing. Subscribe to TRUTH TALK NEWS 2011-2016 Archives on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/TruthTalkNews



HowardNema.com is censored and blocked by Facebook. Nothing can be posted or shared on Facebook from HowardNema.com due to “community standards” violations concerning bogus accusations of bullying, harassment and hate speech.

When truth is called hate, when hate is called love, when ideological beliefs breed rage and violence, our society treads on dangerous ground. Ground that has been traveled many times before by fellow travelers and followers of Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol-Pot and many other Utopian charlatan totalitarians throughout the centuries. Censorship should be a warning sign from history. For all of us. Silencing one silences us all.



“Where truth the mainstream media ignores is the top story!”

Let us take a journey together down the rabbit hole.

Watch TRUTH TALK NEWS, a talk show discussing suppressed history, current events, politics, pop culture, the esoteric and exoteric, and all things New World Order.

THURSDAYS 9pm in Western Connecticut on Spectrum Cable Channel 192 serving the towns of Barkhamsted, Bethlehem, Bridgewater, Brookfield, Colebrook, Danbury, Harwinton, Kent, Monroe, New Hartford, New Fairfield, New Milford, Newtown, Roxbury, Sherman, Southbury, Trumbull, Washington, West Hartland, Winchester and Woodbury.


Subscribe to William Cooper’s MYSTERY BABYLON CHANNEL:

All information reported on TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com is sourced and verifiable and for the purposes of education and FAIR USE. Take advantage of the many books, articles, videos and FULL PDF’s available for FREE, safe downloads on this site.

TRUTH TALK NEWS and HowardNema.com ARE FREE SITES. All books and information on the sites are FREE and NOT monetized in any way.

You are not cattle. You are not a useless eater.

You do not have to be a brainwashed slave owned by the New World Order.

Do the research. Think critically.

Find your own truth. There is only one truth. . . .

Seek and you will find it.


Be a messenger.

Thank you for your continued support. God bless you all.



Share the truth!

Follow by Email