@Lunar567 - The BMJ is reputable certainly. However, your reading of the article is flawed. They compare medical grade masks with cloth masks, and, unsurprisingly, medical grade masks offered significantly better protection. They conclude: "However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated." That is not the same as saying that cloth masks provide less protection than not wearing a face covering. The idea behind face coverings is that if everyone wears them, we will reduce the risk of infection as we are much less likely to infect others if we wear a mask.
Your second article from The Freedom Journal is an excellent example of why some people should not read research articles. They take the results of a 2018 article which conclude a serious hypoxia-blood clot can result from under-oxygenation. They then extrapolate that to state that as masks result in reduced oxygenation (totally untrue and multiple studies show it to be untrue), wearing masks leads to hypoxia-blood clots. Complete and utter nonsense. Mind you, what can we expect from the outlet that also contains an article saying covid tests are being used by the establishment to infect people?
Your third article is again nonsense. Yes, cognitive dissonance is a thing but a blog claiming that if we could only understand the facts as the author does, we would realise that covid is a conspiracy is not exactly overwhelming evidence of anything. The author has distorted facts to fit in with their theory, which is not a particularly helpful approach.
Anyway, if this is the extent of your "research", I think it's safe to conclude you have no scientific background and that your research simply consists of searching for support for your conspiracy theories (cognitive dissonance anyone?).