Even if masks worked, by definition, one who doesn’t wear one could not harm another person. After all, that other individual always has the ability to wear the mask and reap its amazing benefits, if he thinks they exist. On the other hand, it turns out that wearing a mask can actually harm others — the most vulnerable among us.

It was known from day one that children were not at risk from this virus. It was also evident from day one that shutting schools, isolating children, and then only exposing children to humanity through masks would destroy their physical, emotional, and mental health and reverse the language and developmental growth of a generation of children. A new U.K. report chronicles the degree of civilizational arson that was committed against our children, turning an entire generation of children into helpless creatures incapable of talking, learning, and performing basic functions.

“A few providers felt that wearing face masks continued to have a negative impact on children’s communication and language skills,” observed the report from the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (OFSTED). “Children turning 2 years old will have been surrounded by adults wearing masks for their whole lives and have therefore been unable to see lip movements or mouth shapes as regularly. Some providers have reported that delays to children’s speech and language development have led to them not socialising with other children as readily as they would have expected previously.”

While many have already focused on the harm of school closures to children, the shocking devastation to those who were infants and toddlers during the period of social mummification are incalculable and just becoming apparent. The report makes numerous observations regarding the youngest of children, now approximately 3-6 years old:

• These children have limited vocabulary or lack of confidence to speak.
• Babies have struggled to respond to basic facial expressions.
• Children “have started to speak in accents and voices that resemble the material they have watched,” due to excessive screen time to keep them occupied during social isolation.
• More children need help with basic self-care functions such as blowing their noses, putting on their coats, and tying their shoelaces.
• More children have trouble telling time.
• Fewer children are toilet-trained, making more children unready for school by age four.
• Because of the lockdown, fewer infants and toddlers were walking outside and early childhood day care providers have noticed delays in crawling and walking.

The report notes that the cumulative effect of all these early childhood development problems has created a backlog for specialists in the field. Some communities have seen referrals to speech pathologists rise 22% above pre-lockdown baselines. The U.K. report is based on inspections of 70 nurseries and early child care provider centers between Jan. 17 and Feb. 4, 2022.

At least the U.K. government is coming clean about the devastation a day late, a dollar short. Our government is still covering up the problem, as the CDC is attempting to roll back key language developmental benchmarks for children to accommodate the “new normal.”

One could not possibly have conjured up a more nefarious plot to destroy the future of our children than the confluence of actions taken against them over the past two years. In fact, it’s gotten so bad for children that they might not have enough acumen to even learn about the licentious sexual curriculum these same actors desire to groom them with.

What’s worse than driving older children into depression by denying them normalcy is how little children have been groomed into thinking this sort of lifestyle is normal. In a recent interview, Yuval Harari, an adviser to the World Economic Forum, described that this great reset and new “industrial revolution” will make human beings the product. He stated that they are “learning to produce bodies and minds.” Are these the sort of bodies and minds he is thinking of? Turning us into a bunch of incapable, bungling fools who can’t function and are fully controlled by global governments?

\u201cThe product this time will be humans themselves. We are basically learning to produce bodies and minds. \nThe problem [with the lower classes] is boredom and what to do with them. How will they find some sense of meaning in life when they are basically meaningless, worthless.\u201dpic.twitter.com/4y7HKdRwSu

— Wittgenstein (@Wittgenstein) 1649578551

There is no doubt that this was done by design, because there was no way any sane government official could have thought children were at risk for the virus, and certainly not enough to wreak such destruction upon them. If officials were blind to the facts the first week, they could always have come around a week or two or even a month or two later. Yet they allowed this to go on for one to two years, and in some places like New York City, they are still criminalizing the breathing of toddlers.

A recent study of COVID-positive hospitalizations in the U.K. found that, in one large children’s hospital, only 10% of the few children hospitalized with COVID actually had severe COVID symptoms. 56% of them were incidental infections discovered by mass testing. We have been making this point since May 2020, but it did not stop the politicians from running with false information to prolong the misery of children.

Not only were children never at risk from the virus, but even if they were, there is zero evidence that masks work. The Brownstone Institute posted a list of 150 studies and articles showing masks don’t work to stop the spread of viruses, something our government knew from day one of this pandemic. A recent population-based observational study of 600K schoolchildren 3-11 years old concluded, “Mandates in schools were not associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 incidence or transmission, suggesting that this intervention was not effective."

The only trial that was purported to show efficacy was the Bangladeshi study, which turned out to be fraudulent in many ways, and once we got the full data set, it showed no statistically significant difference from the control group.