By “We the People of Ventura County”
Dear Dr. Robert Levin & Michael Powers,
Our expectation as the residents of Ventura County is that you, as our public officials, are making informed decisions based upon truth and science to encourage individual sovereignty, inalienable rights, and robust medical debate – to ensure that your recommendations are appropriate and advantageous, rather than deleterious, to public health.
Since only 4 states in the nation are still maintaining mask recommendations/guidance/mandates, it does give one cause to wonder why Ventura County would even consider such an action in opposition to the wealth of science showing masks have a statistically insignificant positive impact on viral transmission, and indeed, cause harm; while also violating several international human rights laws, federal US laws, and CA state laws.
We would appreciate a thoughtful and detailed response to each of the items below substantiating why you would continue to recommend masking by way of Guidance and/or Mandates, in light of these items:
1) Per Attorney Michael D. Curran, Curran & Curran Law, in regards to the CDPH Mask Memo:
Unelected bureaucrats in the department of public health have no independent authority to issue any legally enforceable health/safety order. It is not being issued pursuant to Government Code section 8625 of the California Emergency Services Act, nor does it carry the Government Code enforceability of section 8665. Nor does it describe the penalties for noncompliance. In fact the source of the alleged “mandate” is an unsigned state health memo referencing mask “guidance.” you have freedom of choice to wear a mask or not, that is your Constitutionally protected freedom of choice.
2) Mandating masks is an unprecedented human experiment forced upon citizens. If masks were FDA approved, the Emergency Use Authorization would be unnecessary. The reason the FDA issued the EUA specifying that consent is required, that harms be properly described, and that masks must not be labeled to imply they offer antiviral protection, is precisely because they are not FDA approved for this use, and their safety, efficacy and health risks are not properly understood. So the uncomfortable truth is that people wearing masks, either voluntarily or under threat of punishment by their local authorities, are partaking in a grand medical experiment without their consent.
3) Public officials who mandate masks without mention of their risks, fail in their duty to provide informed consent by not communicating crucial information to citizens that they need to make educated medical decisions affecting their personal health. The reality is that a community is comprised of people with widely varying health status, with each person having a unique history of biological factors and family predispositions. As cardiovascular disease continues to be the #1 killer to this day in the US and worldwide, wouldn’t it be of utmost importance to communicate the risk of calcification of arteries from increased CO2 to the millions of people battling this deadly disease? How many other conditions besides heart disease are worsened by breathing high levels of CO2? Knowing what health factors influence the severity of adverse effects from wearing a mask is absolutely essential information for individuals to make the call as to whether this medical intervention is right for them or not. It should always be left up to the individual to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks. Even if masks were effective at significantly reducing transmission of a disease, the “greater good” argument cannot be used to mandate a medical intervention if it comes at the cost of an individual losing their health or their life in sacrifice to a perceived community benefit.
4) In Jacobsen vs. Massachusetts, a landmark case on government-mandated medicine, the US Supreme Court unequivocally ruled that there must be clear public health benefit to justify the imposition of a medical mandate. There is little, if any, public health justification in this case as evidence from “gold-standard” mask studies show that facial coverings offer negligible benefit to the wearer or those in their vicinity when it comes to reducing viral transmission among the general population. That evidence even suggests that incorrect or long-term use of masks may increase the risk of transmission, especially with cloth or “community” masks.
5) It is a core principle of international law that informed consent is required before subjecting anyone to human experimentation. The United States has established a protocol under Title 21 United States Code to ensure that people in the United States are not forced to participate in human experiments without legally effective informed consent. See 21 C.F.R. § 50.20.
6) Please find attached a document entitled: Effectiveness of masks at preventing transmission of respiratory pathogens ,which details 42 studies and the outcomes on effectiveness of masks in preventing viral transmission as well as harms caused by mask wearing. The document provides links to each study. Please provide your response to these studies and their outcomes in a detailed manner. https://turnthetide.buzz/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/MASKS-Links-to-Studies-1.pdf
7) Please provide a detailed reason for mask Guidance and/or Mandates in Ventura County based on the document you, Dr. Levin, prepared in April of 2020 https://vcportal.ventura.org/CEO/VCNC/2020-04-18_VCNC_Masks_Pros_and_Cons_v02.pdf
The Arguments Against Wearing a Mask on your comparison chart go on for 2.5 pages longer than the Arguments in Favor of Wearing Masks. If the Risks and Harms outweigh the benefits, how can it be in the best interest of public health to continue issuing Mask Guidance and/or Mandates?
8) States with the most restrictive mandates had worse outcomes than open states. California vs. Florida being the best example.
9) The ineffectiveness of face masks in stopping the spread of viral respiratory diseases, including Covid-19, is widely known and acknowledged in the scientific and medical literature and scientific communities. Therefore, it seems that the transition in public health recommendations to promote widespread mask mandates was based on a combination of low-level observational studies, speculative mechanistic studies, fear, and, most of all, POLITICS, NOT SCIENCE.
Masks do NOT reduce infection rates.
10) Lockdown Policies and Mask Mandates Linked With Lower IQ in Children
11) masks cause people, especially children, to touch their face more,
and touching one’s face increases risk of infection.
12) “[Wearing masks and being around others wearing masks] may have an impact on [preschoolaged children’s] speech and language development. They rely a lot on reading mouths and facial expressions to learn words and language. [Masks] will definitely interfere with social and emotional development.” -Wendy Ell, Occupational Therapist and Executive Director of the Missouri Child Psychiatry Access Project (July 2020)
We request a detailed and specific reply to these items be made publicly available to the residents of Ventura County.
TELL YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT CITIZENS JOURNAL Please keep us publishing – DONATE