CORRESPONDENCE - 85A - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Orozco, Norma From:Rosalia Colorado <myvoice@oneclickpolitics.com> Sent:Saturday, July 04, 2020 2:11 PM To:Penaloza, David Subject:Wearing a mask should be a choice; protect your constituents Re: Wearing a mask should be a choice; protect your constituents Dear Council Member Penaloza, I am writing to urge you to do your part to make sure that mask-wearing is voluntary, not mandatory. Many jurisdictions are basing their face mask policies on guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC has flip-flopped its position on face coverings several times since March but is now recommending that everyone wear a mask in public. This recommendation is not supported by strong empirical evidence. Though there is science to support mask-wearing, there’s also a preponderance of science showing that masks can cause considerable harm and are ineffective in preventing the spread of coronavirus. There is also no science supporting the use of masks by healthy individuals. So emergency orders that are being issued to help protect public health are actually hurting individuals’ physical and emotional well being — and violating their basic human rights, constitutional rights and religious rights. Evidence that masks reduce the transmission of viral respiratory infections within community settings is equivocal at best. A recent meta-analysis (bit.ly/2VHaubd) that included nearly a dozen randomized, controlled trials and 10 observational studies found that there was no clear clinical or laboratory-confirmed evidence that masks prevent infection. Even the U.S. Surgeon General has noted that masks “are not effective in preventing the general public from catching the coronavirus.” (bit.ly/31Dgdm5) In terms of harm, studies show that wearing a face covering reduces blood and tissue oxygenation — which can be deadly — while increasing carbon dioxide levels. The use of masks can also increase the risk of infection and the spread of viral illness (particularly cloth masks), hinder detoxification that occurs through exhalation, impair the immune system, and cause a wide range other physical and psychological issues. (bit.ly/31Epv1e). Moreover, some masks have been found to contain known carcinogens, which put people at risk from inhaling toxic chemicals and having them come into contact with their skin. There is no science to support the use of masks by healthy individuals, and the World Health Organization backed this up when it said, “WHO stands by recommendations to not wear masks if you are not sick or caring for someone who is sick.” Forcing healthy individuals to wear face coverings is a completely unnecessary intervention that dehumanizes their interactions with others. More important, it eliminates their right to make informed decisions about what risks and precautions they are willing to take. It is unethical and unconstitutional to subject healthy, law-abiding citizens to measures that can result in physical and emotional harm and that impinge on their ability to move freely throughout society. For those with deeply held religious beliefs, mask mandates violate their ability to abide by natural law and follow their convictions to walk in faith, not fear. As such, the decision to wear a mask is a highly personal one and should not be universally mandated; measures that are meant to protect the community as a whole are not effective if they hurt individuals in that community. 1