We, the people of the state of Idaho, reaffirm our solemn commitment to the foundational principles that have made America the greatest country in the world. As noted in our state constitution and restated here, we remain grateful to Almighty God for our freedom. We recognize that all of us are “by nature free and equal, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, pursuing happiness and securing safety.”
The fact that a pandemic may or may not be occurring changes nothing about the meaning or intent of the state constitution in the preservation of our inalienable rights. Despite this, in direct contravention of Idaho’s founding principles, state and local public officials have, for months, denied the people of our state basic and fundamental rights by issuing a long procession of emergency orders and edicts that have denied people freedom of movement, assembly, religion, possession and enjoyment of property, and the pursuit of happiness. This has been allowed to go on for too long.
By this letter, we demand an end to the emergency orders issued by state and local government officials and the restoration of our constitutionally-protected rights. We further resolve that any order issued in the future will be ignored, unless those orders recognize, honor, and uphold, without reservation or equivocation, our God-given rights.
Health Freedom Idaho is a volunteer organization that was formed by concerned citizens in response to a bevy of policy and philosophy shifts happening in our nation, and in particular, the great state of Idaho. Safeguarding parental authority, individual health freedom is the key founding principles of Health Freedom Idaho. Voting for representatives in our city, county, and state positions of leadership who value liberty is the foundation way of preserving our freedom.
Our General Election will be held on November 3, 2020 Polling hours: 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Visit IDAHOVOTES for more information.
https://youtu.be/g2tiZAZ22qE
HFI does not endorse any candidate.
HFI WILL post about candidates when they do, say, or write something that pertains to health freedom or parental rights. We invite you to do the same.
HFI will share events with you, such as town hall meetings, that may provide insight regarding the candidates.
HFI wants to help educate voters as you head to the voting booth. We want you to have the information that you need in order to make the best decision for you and your family.
General Information Your Ballot
Note: If you are unsure which legislative district you live in, that information along with a polling place lookup, can be found here.
The Idaho Constitution currently sets the number of legislative districts and the number of Idaho senators to be within a range of not less than 30 nor more than 35 members (and this is the same for districts). It also designates that the number of House of Representative members to be two times as many members as the Senate.
HJR4 would make a change to this language to permanently set the number of legislative districts to 35 and the number of senators to 35 (with twice as many representatives). Since 1992 there have been 35 legislative districts in Idaho. After the 2020 national census, there will be a change in district boundary lines. There is a re-districting committee set up to change legislative districts in Idaho.
“I voted against this proposed amendment in session because I found it unnecessary, I believe it hurts rural areas, and I would like to eventually see one Senator per county to balance the state’s rural vs. urban community representation.” – Heather Scott, District 1
Each potential bill goes through a 5 step journey once the committee has approved it for printing. Our special session opened today with the RS introduction and voting on which bills would be heard for this session.
TODAY’S SPECIAL SESSION UPDATE: TOMORROW IS A BUSY DAY FOR THE HOUSE: They have several bills to debate and vote on.
These 3 bills below will be on STEP 2 of 5 of their journey to becoming law. They were heard at the committee level and will now go to the floor for a vote by ALL the Representatives.
Here’s the EMAIL LIST to make comments on these bills/resolutions
These 4 similar bills are still being discussed and the meeting that will continue tomorrow after the House Floor Session. PUBLIC TESTIMONY to continue tomorrow a.m. (If you want to hear some FREEDOM LOVERS testify tune in midmorning tomorrow. *We will update when they provide a room number.)
There are 3 bills to be considered at the Special Session which begins Monday rumor has it that the committees are meeting to discuss all the bills on SUNDAY. The bills can be read at the bottom of the Governor’s proclamation.
WE NEED TO ACT NOW. The state didn’t mandate masks, rather, they had local cities and counties do it for them. It’s not hard to see that the same thing will happen with a vaccine. This Special Session of the Legislature beginning August 24th will provide cover to allow the government to enact such orders.
JOIN THE CITIZENS MARCH AGAINST GOVERNMENT IMMUNITY @ 7:30 a.m. Monday at the Capitol
Attend the Hearing for RS28049 10:30 A.M. Room EW42
RS28046 – the first bill attached at the bottom of the proclamation states. “An emergency existing therefor, which emergency is hereby declared to exist, the act shall be in full force and effect on and after it’s passage and approval.” This bill makes it a LAW that an emergency exists but there is no end date for it.
Translated: This means the Governor or any other entity like a health department can use emergency powers whenever they want.
RS28049 is the last bill attached at the bottom of the Governor’s proclamation. It says that all businesses and persons will have immunity from liability for actions taken related to a “coronavirus-related pandemic or epidemic” as long as they make a “good faith effort to comply with a statute, rule, or lawful order of a government.”
Businesses that do not comply with every edict of government WILL HAVE LIABILITY. This is not about protecting small businesses, it is about compelling behavior of businesses.
Said another way, it is using society to control and exclude those who choose another path. Just as with the mask mandates, any government entity can “order” businesses to require proof of vaccination with a coronavirus vaccine in order to enter their business once the vaccine is available and there will be nothing we can do about it. And even if you are injured or killed by this brand new, experimental vaccine, you will be on your own. Interestingly, this bill will sunset July 1, 2023.
EMAIL NOW. Attend In-Person or Virtually Regarding RS28049
Per the Meeting Announcement: Limited public seating will be available in the committee room. Committee meetings will be live-streamed in designated overflow rooms throughout the Capitol.Please wear a mask and maintain physical distancing while in the Capitol.********************************************
HOUSE JUDICIARY, RULES & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE 10:30 A.M. Room EW42 Monday, August 24, 2020 There is a POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY. *Limit your comments to 3 minutes.* Provide written copies for public record.
PLEASE EMAIL AND CALL OUR LOCAL LEGISLATORS AND EMAIL ALL IDAHO LEGISLATORS AND ASK THEM TO STOP THESE BILLS.
WE NEED AS MANY FOLKS AS POSSIBLE TO CALL AND EMAIL NOW!!!
TALKING POINTS – please write your own or choose from below:
1) Please oppose RS28049 which opens the door for businesses to require medical procedures to enter their premises. In the same way masks are now required, vaccination could be required, even though federal law recognizes vaccines injure and kill some recipients. 2) Please oppose RS28049 which will effectively do away with businesses that do not want to do the bidding of the government by exposing them alone to liability. 3) Please oppose RS28049 which is not about protecting businesses but compelling behavior of businesses, said another way, it is using society to control and exclude those who choose another path such as not wanting to inject a vaccine. 4) Please oppose RS28049 as a business that might require a vaccine to enter would have no liability for the damage that vaccine might cause nor would the vaccine makers which are protected under the Prep Act. Individuals will be left to fend for themselves if they suffer a catastrophic injury resulting in losing their job, excessive medical costs, and even loss of life. 20% of the formerly healthy individuals in the high dose group of the Moderna phase II trials had to be hospitalized and this vaccine will permanently alter the recipient’s DNA. 5) Please oppose RS28046 as the language of this bill is outrageous. No legislature may codify into law the existence of a state of emergency but this bill does exactly that by never providing an end date for said emergency.
6) Please support legislation that protects all businesses from liability for a customer contracting Covid in their establishment.
We are born with God-given rights that the Constitution protects. Your right to shop mask-free is protected by state and federal civil law, which defends your religious freedom. This religious exemption clearly states the applicable laws and the penalty for violating the laws. The Civil Rights Act IDAHO STATUE 73-402 prohibits religious discrimination in the workplace, which includes hiring, firing, promotions, and other aspects of employment. The law also requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for employees who wish to practice their religion without restraint.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is federal civil rights legislation that prohibits discrimination in numerous settings including: employment, education, voting, and public accommodations.
This flyer is for educational purposes and may be used to show business associates, but it does not guarantee your entry into any particular business establishment.
Laws Protecting your Right to NOT Wear a Mask in Public
IDAHO STATUE 73-402. FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION PROTECTED. (1) Free exercise of religion is a fundamental right that applies in this state, even if laws, rules or other government actions are facially neutral.(2) Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability. (3) Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person is both:(a) Essential to further a compelling governmental interest; (b) The least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. (4) A person whose religious exercise is burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. A party who prevails in any action to enforce this chapter against a government shall recover attorney’s fees and costs. (5) In this section, the term “substantially burden” is intended solely to ensure that this chapter is not triggered by trivial, technical or de minimis infractions.History:[73-402, added 2000, ch. 133, sec. 2, p. 353.]
Refer to the 1964 FEDERAL Civil Rights Act (a federal law).
Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Injunctive Relief Against Discrimination in Places of Public Accommodation
SEC. 201. (a) All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, and privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin. (SOURCE)
(2) Civil Rights and Non-Discrimination LAWS protect your right to enter any place of business without a mask:
Reference 6: ADA Information and links: 42 U.S. Code § 12181. See thisPublic entities, including grocery stores, cannot discriminate based on disability
When a public entity provides services, programs, or activities to the public, no qualified individual with a disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any public entity on the basis of disability. 28 C.F.R. § 35.130.
Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12165
The Attorney General is responsible for enforcing Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12165 and the relevant regulations implementing Title II, 28 C.F.R. pt. 35 and 49 C.F.R. pt. 37.
Contact the ADA Information Line at 1-800-514-0301
(3) Your medical condition is private and does not need to be disclosed to anyone. HIPAA Privacy Rule
§242. Deprivation of rights under color of law [meaning law enforcement] Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Idaho has been in a declared state of emergency by the Governor since March 13 – just one week shy of five months. During this time, a number of our statutes have been altered or suspended by the Governor’s proclamation while appropriation of significant funds has been completely undertaken by the executive branch of state government. The Constitution says this responsibility is reserved for the legislature.
However, the Idaho Constitution has been aborted during this lengthy “emergency”.
During these five months, 246 Idahoans have allegedly died of a particular disease.
Each day the news reports that hospitals are overrun by patients and they are on the brink of having to ration care. (This comes after a three-month complete shut-down of everything including important surgeries and diagnostic procedures to help the hospitals prepare for an influx of ICU patients.)
The hospital admissions for COVID don’t EVER reflect the dire emergency that ‘killed the constitution’.
Currently the hospitals show their admissions like this:
St Alphonsus Hospital Admissions from their website (red are admissions labeled COVID) Notice when the extreme emergency was declared there is barely any hospital admissions!
Past death rates remain consistent throughout the past five year trending up steadily with our population growth. Even with a DECLARED PANDEMIC and EXTREME EMERGENCY the death rath for all Idahoans remains consistent.
Each year the numbers remain fairly consistent. Death rates for Idaho HAS NOT seen a drastic increase.
But the numbers – the facts – reveal a stark difference to the story they have been telling.
There is NOT a spike in deaths due to COVID-19. In fact, there are several dozen even fewer deaths this year than in previous years in Idaho.
Each month for the past five years, about 1,100 Idahoans die for a variety of causes. The biggest difference is our loved ones are dying alone – without human touch.
Death is a part of life.
Saying that is not callous.
What is callous are the doctors and nurses who use the excuse that “people are dying from a virus this year” to force their patients to die alone – without loving family and human touch – surrounded by strangers and machines. Families are saying goodbye to loved ones through an iPad screen.
Families are left to mourn the passing of their loved ones without the comfort of gatherings or funerals because the Governor and the hospitals prefer the federal funds received from the “rolling” state of emergency.
There is no new data or science in this area telling us that wearing masks is beneficial. Death rates continue to drop yet mask-wearing continues to grow. The case count increases as the testing is increasing. The GREAT NEWS is that more positive tests we find, the lower the death rate, and our current infection/death rate is falling below 1% making this equivalent to the seasonal flu.
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE – Harvard doctors and scientists “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes).
The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”
Masks Are of Limited Benefit
The truth is you aren’t irrational or obdurate if you are skeptical about masks. The “experts” have admitted that masks’ efficacy is usually negligible. Dr. Anthony Fauci himself, in a “60 Minutes” interview early in this pandemic, dismissed masks as essentially useless.
“There is no reason to be walking around wearing a mask. When you are in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel better, and might even block a droplet,” he said with almost an eyeroll, “but it’s not providing the perfect protection people think it is, and often there are unintended consequences…”
Fauci may have changed his tune, but plenty of sensible doctors are still speaking up. A doctor in the Wall Street Journal pointed out that cloth masks—the type worn by the overwhelming majority of the population—are not very effective, echoing Fauci’s earlier admission. The WSJ author noted that even the N95 masks fall short: “They’re considered effective at blocking coronavirus particles only when they’re form-fitted and tested to make sure there isn’t any leakage.”
WHO warns that “the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks” PDF
WHO’s most recent recommendations say the following: “Masks can be used either for protection of healthy persons (worn to protect oneself when in contact with an infected individual) or for source control (worn by an infected individual to prevent onward transmission).” They do not recommend mask-wearing in healthy people unless in contact with a sick individual.
Research shows that cloth face coverings are useless at best, dangerous at worst.
OSHA says environment with less than 19.5% oxygen is unsafe. Gases such as CO2 displace oxygen. Wearing a mask for just a few seconds causes CO2 to accumulate and displace oxygen causing oxygen levels to fall below 19%. OSHA says anything below 19.5% is an “imminent threat to health or life.”
The 7 studies CDC uses to justify its mask policy do not support that end. They do not evaluate healthy people. They just hope no one will actually read the studies.
In short, cloth masks are largely symbolic. The science hasn’t changed, but the agenda has.
Even though there hasn’t been a single documented case of a child passing the virus to a teacher in the world and only a few documented cases of child to parent transmission Idaho public schooled children will be forced to wear masks the entire school day. Experts say that such drastic measures are detrimental to the health and well being of our children!
You might be surprised to know…
Childcare centers remained open during lock-downs to support families of those workers deemed ‘essential’. There were NO OUTBREAKS among the 40,000 children between the ages of 1 and 14 at 1,100 separate sites for daycare.
“there is converging evidence that the coronavirus doesn’t transmit among children like the flu — that it’s a lower risk.”
Dr. Joshua Sharfstein at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health
There are two related reasons for this, Sharfstein explains: One is that children seem to be less likely to get infected, and the second is that when they are infected they are much more likely to be mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic. If they’re not coughing or sneezing, it’s harder for them to spread the virus to others. The New Yorkerreported that Iceland, which did extensive contact tracing, found only two examples of child-to-parent transmission. (SOURCE)
Mark Woolhouse, professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, University of Edinburgh, told the PA news agency there are three main risks associated with children returning to school.
He described these as the risk to children, the risk to teachers, and the risk of transmission in the community increasing.
Speaking as an independent researcher, and not in an advisory role, he said: “Covid-19, though a very unpleasant virus, and capable of causing illness, on occasion in any age group, in fact, is very, very very rarely a serious problem in children.
WHAT ABOUT OXYGEN?
Mask wearing is bad for your health.
For years OSHA has required that employers do medical testing of their employees before they require them to wear these types of masks.
If you don’t have good oxygen intake and continue to build up CO2 in your blood becomes acidic and that will negatively affect your immune system. So those most at risk could be putting themselves even more at risk by wearing these masks.
Masks reduce our flow of oxygen and cause a condition called hypoxia or low oxygen levels in the body. Hypoxia can cause heart attacks, strokes, seizures, death and more. Low oxygen levels stress the body resulting in increased cortisol. Cortisol suppresses the immune system rendering people MORE susceptible to illness.
Other questions to consider…
How many employees are being harmed by being required to wear these masks and if someone gets ill or dies because of wearing these masks will the employers be sued?
A Certain Type of N95 Mask May Do More Harm Than Good
Experts say certain N95 masks with front valves protect the user but don’t prevent that person from spreading COVID-19 to others nearby. Getty Images
Experts are warning the public against wearing certain types of N95 face masks with front valves.
They say the masks protect the people wearing them but do not stop virus droplets from escaping and infecting others.
The masks are designed for construction workers to use to keep out dust and other particles.
All data and statistics are based on publicly available data at the time of publication. Some information may be out of date. Visit our coronavirus hub and follow our live updates page for the most recent information on the COVID-19 outbreak.
Not all N95 respirator masks are created equal.
In fact, you may unknowingly be wearing one that does more harm than good when it comes to preventing the spread of COVID-19.
That was the warning the San Francisco Department of Public Health sent via Twitter last week.
It said, in part, “the ones with the valves or openings on the front are NOT safe, and may actually propel your germs further.”
It was a reminder that the city’s original public health order requiring face coverings said that any mask with a one-way valve was not to be used.
“Valves of that type permit droplet release from the mask, putting others at risk,” the order stated.
Experts who spoke with Healthline agreed.
“The virus can be transmitted through the valves, which offer no filtration at all,” said Dr. Ali Raja, executive vice chair of the department of emergency medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital and an associate professor at Harvard Medical School.
“Any mask with a one-way valve is only going to protect the person wearing it. It won’t protect anyone around that person from potential exposure to virus particles they exhale,” he told Healthline. “It may give the people surrounding them a false sense of security.”
“In the spirit of ‘your mask protects me and my mask protects you,’ a mask with a valve virtually makes that impossible,” said Jessica Malaty Rivera, MS, a microbiologist and contributor at the COVID Tracking Project.
Enforcing Mandates
City Councils, Mayors and Police call mask mandates un-enforcable.
City Councils and the Police have said numerous times that a mask mandate is unenforceable. They will push enforcement onto the already struggling businesses under the pressure of license removal.
Mandatory masking provides the foundation on which governments continue to justify emergency measures and rule by executive fiat, and it creates a national mood of consent that America will accept indefinite government expansion because we face a “new normal.” –Molly McCann is Of Counsel with Sidney Powell, P.C
RESOURCES:
*keep in mind censorship in place to keep amping up the fear so that people will comply with the narrative – which is, “There is no cure, our only hope is a vaccine.” The profits from the vaccines are projected at 44 billion a year. It is being fast-tracked and it will be liability-free for harm and death it will cause.
Its been quite a week for the Southwest Public Health District. They attempted to hold a public meeting, without the public. Canceling meetings twice due to the turn out of individuals who wanted to attend, the Health District settled on hosting their public meeting at the courthouse to allow space for the people. They also provided public access with a live-streamed video and recorded the event for those in surrounding areas who were unable to attend in person.
Several weeks ago, neighboring Ada county’s health district implemented a mask mandate. Concerned local citizens of Canyon, Gem and Owyee realized that it was likely this would be on the agenda for Southwest Health District.
Several organizations reached out to their members to contact the county commissioners who sit on the health district board.
There were 1500 comments received by District Health more than half were against a mask mandate.
Thankfully the Commissioners voted AGAINST a mask mandate for Canyon, Payette, Owyee, Gem, Washington and Adams Counties.
This means that private business owners will not be burdened with enforcing a mask mandate under the threat of license removal. The police and city council in other counties have stated that A MASK MANDATE IS UNENFORCEABLE.
The No. 1 way to prevent coronavirus isn’t wearing a facemask. Until June 5, the WHO maintained that face masks weren’t a solid defense for healthy people and could lead to user error that heightens their risk. In fact, the current best evidence suggests wearing a mask to avoid viral respiratory infections such as COVID-19 offers minimal protection if any. Dr. Gregory Polland of the CDC claimed that masks were for a behavioral reminder.
Now 4 months into the COVID virus, death rates have declined by large percentages. Testing has increased by large percentages and the media only reports on the increased cases. In Idaho, more than 60% of our deaths are in pseudo quarantined assisted living facilities. Those immune-compromised individuals don’t have the leisure of going to the parks, stores, and participating in community activities. Yet, our health districts want to mandate masks for all people – including our children so that we can go out in society.
We are certainly not going to support authoritarian rule and the destruction of the economy, community, and our personal freedoms, based on a current 0.26% CDC estimated COVID mortality rate. Mandating face masks and lockdowns (never enacted before in recent history for any other virus) is an over-reaction unwarranted for this virus. Illness is part of life.
Using is the unlimited authority he granted to himself under several extended proclamations of emergency, our Governor has imparted to the health districts across the state the authority to implement mask mandates on citizens. The Idaho Constitution reserves the role of writing laws for our legislature. These masks mandates are unenforceable. Beyond that clear point, we ask the health districts and the city mayors have you considered these questions/potential problems should you implement a mask mandate?
What about people who cannot breathe well in the masks, including those who do not have a respiratory medical condition (i.e. anxiety symptoms caused by oxygen deprivation)? Would they require a “doctor’s note”? How would you regulate this? Businesses (i.e. grocery stores) in California are refusing service to un-masked patrons even if they have a doctor’s note. Is this illegal discrimination? Does this violate HIPPA regulations?
Will you be providing a mask supply to businesses? (many of which are already struggling financially). What about the stress caused to employees who must face potential violence from angry citizens who disagree with a mask mandate? Can police services handle these extra calls and are you willing to place this burden on law enforcement agencies? Are you prepared to fine or jail citizens and businesses, already stressed and financially burdened by consequences of the lockdown? Is a universal mask mandate based on flimsy scientific evidence worth the trouble that it may cause? Could it exacerbate the economic depression?
What about potential infection via the eyes? Lack of eye protection eliminates any benefit a mask would provide.
Please recall that as of just recently the CDC, WHO, and US Surgeon General did NOT recommend masks for the general public (healthy people) outside of healthcare facilities.
In addition, the American Medical Association states that “Face masks should be used only by individuals who have symptoms of a respiratory infection such as coughing, sneezing, or, in some cases, fever. Face masks should also be worn by health care workers, by individuals who are taking care of or are in close contact with people who have respiratory infections, or otherwise as directed by a doctor. Face masks should not be worn by healthy individuals to protect themselves from acquiring respiratory infection because there is no evidence to suggest that face masks worn by healthy individuals are effective in preventing people from becoming ill. Face masks should be reserved for those who need them because masks can be in short supply during periods of widespread respiratory infection. Because N95 respirators require special fit testing, they are not recommended for use by the general public.” https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762694
Have you found studies that measure the long-term health risks of masks for both adults and children? Could the intervention be worse than the illness itself? Is it legal and ethical to mandate an intervention for children that could potentially affect their health, where the child’s parents or legal guardians alone have the right to make these decisions for them?
Could you consider a less intrusive mandate based on more on conclusive scientific evidence, i.e. face mask mandate in public only for those who are sick/vulnerable, or requiring hand sanitizing at business entrances.
We agree with common sense science-based measures encouraged for any type of viral illness i.e. handwashing and staying home when sick, but it seems much of the nation is reacting based on hysteria, emotion, and fear. For this virus, the focus should not be on the number of cases sensationalized in the media (since many people are asymptomatic and most recover without medical intervention, there are problems with testing i.e. false positives, and there is evidence of data fraud) but on COVID-caused hospitalization and death rates.
The world population has been living with several types of coronaviruses (and millions of other kinds of viruses and bacteria) for decades, and current science is still making discoveries about the complex and amazing nature of our God-given immune system. Our society will adjust to this new virus as the population achieves natural herd immunity.
We are certainly not going to support authoritarian rule and the destruction of the economy, community, and our personal freedoms, based on a current 0.26% CDC estimated COVID mortality rate. Mandating face masks and lockdowns (never enacted before in recent history for any other virus) is an over-reaction unwarranted for this virus. Illness is part of life.
Instead of fear-based reactions, public health efforts should focus on protecting vulnerable populations (i.e. nursing homes) and educating medical practitioners and the general public on COVID treatment remedies and how to strengthen and support the immune system.
The evidence for masks (as explained below) cited by health authorities (supposedly our nation’s “experts”) is inadequate and does not justify forcing what could be considered a medical intervention on millions of healthy people. In even considering a sweeping mandate the burden of proof is on health and government officials to provide sufficient and conclusive (not anecdotal) evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that there are NO negative health effects (physical, mental, or emotional) associated with the implementation of mask policies. Please review all the citations given on the governor’s website from the CDC and Idaho Health & Welfare (https://coronavirus.idaho.gov/idaho-resources/) used to justify face coverings? Here is our summary.
CDC Citations –
The CDC provides a list of 19 citations. Citations 1-12 only discuss asymptomatic transmission and are not actually mask studies. *the first study was actually shown to be fraudulent as the individuals experienced fever and chills. Still the CDC uses it. If this study is fraudulent it casts doubts on all they provide.
Citations 13 – 15 are the only studies that address cloth masks (see below). If the government is not going to provide a constant supply of surgical masks to the entire population, most people will opt for cloth masks due to affordability and availability. CDC encourages the general public to use cloth/home-made masks to preserve the surgical mask supply for healthcare workers. These 3 studies show some potential benefit to masks, but efficacy depends on proper use and fit (no gaps), the number of layers and type of fabric, and other measures used to reduce infection. A mandate will not be able to control these factors. Study #14 shows that filter efficiency was significantly reduced by gaps – this problem alone makes universal masking unrealistic and unsupported as a mandate. The general public is not fit-tested or trained on mask-wearing, they do not seal or tape masks to their skin, and do not live in a clinically controlled environment. Many of the materials in these studies were sealed around a tube, not tested on real people. Look around – you will rarely see a lay-person with a mask that does not have any gaps (not to mention those people who pull their mask down to sneeze!).
Citations 16 – 19 only address surgical mask material with no gaps, or a patient was instructed on proper use. It should be noted that not all viral RNA droplets/aerosols actually contained virus, and infectivity was not confirmed.
Citation 13 (author Davies): “…the homemade mask did not significantly reduce the number of particles emitted… In contrast, the surgical mask did have a significant effect.” “Although any material may provide a physical barrier to an infection, if as a mask it does not fit well around the nose and mouth, or the material freely allows infectious aerosols to pass through it, then it will be of no benefit.” “An improvised face mask should be viewed as the last possible alternative if a supply of commercial face masks is not available, irrespective of the disease against which it may be required for protection. Improvised homemade face masks may be used to help protect those who could potentially, for example, be at occupational risk from close or frequent contact with symptomatic patients. However, these masks would provide the wearers little protection from microorganisms from other persons who are infected with respiratory diseases. As a result, we would not recommend the use of homemade face masks as a method of reducing transmission of infection from aerosols.”
Citation 14 (author Konda): This is the only study that tested mask materials with and without gaps. Surgical masks and multi-layered fabrics had some filter efficiency, however, “Whereas the surgical mask provides moderate (>60%) and excellent (close to 100%) particle exclusion below and above 300 nm, respectively, the tests carried out with the 1% opening surprisingly resulted in significant drops in the mask efficiencies across the entire size range (60% drop in the >300 nm range).” For example, the 1 layer 80 TPI quilter’s cotton (which is stated as often used in DIY masks) as shown on Table 1 only has a 9% filter efficiency, even without a gap. A surgical mask with any gap only has a 50% filter efficiency. “Our findings indicate that leakages around the mask area can degrade efficiencies by ∼50% or more, pointing out the importance of “fit”. “It is critically important that cloth mask designs also take into account the quality of this “fit” to minimize leakage of air between the mask and the contours of the face, while still allowing the exhaled air to be vented effectively.”
Citation 15 (author Aydin): This study showed some benefit to cloth masks (1-layer T-shirt had a 43.3% blocking efficiency) but tested only droplet dissemination (not aerosolized particles), and only tested the materials without any gaps.
Idaho Department of H&W Citations –
Reference numbers 3 – 7 and 9 are duplicate citations from the CDC list. Reference #8 is the CDC article that provides the link to their mask references. Reference #10 is a short article with no mask information.
Reference #1 is an article written by doctors that actually questions the benefits of masks and has no mask data. “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection…. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.” “What is clear, however, is that universal masking alone is not a panacea. A mask will not protect providers caring for a patient with active Covid-19 if it’s not accompanied by meticulous hand hygiene, eye protection, gloves, and a gown. A mask alone will not prevent health care workers with early Covid-19 from contaminating their hands and spreading the virus to patients and colleagues. Focusing on universal masking alone may, paradoxically, lead to more transmission of Covid-19 if it diverts attention from implementing more fundamental infection control measures.” “One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis.”
Reference #2 concluded that “Results obtained in the study show that common fabric materials may provide marginal protection against nanoparticles including those in the size ranges of virus-containing particles in exhaled breath.” “…fabric materials show only marginal filtration performance against virus-size particles when sealed around the edges. Face seal leakage will further decrease the respiratory protection offered by fabric materials.” This study did not measure face seal leakage.
Other studies and citations questioning masks:
“We do not recommend requiring the general public who do not have symptoms of COVID-19-like illness to routinely wear cloth or surgical masks because: There is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission… Sweeping mask recommendations—as many have proposed—will not reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission, as evidenced by the widespread practice of wearing such masks in Hubei province, China, before and during its mass COVID-19 transmission experience earlier this year. Our review of relevant studies indicates that cloth masks will be ineffective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 transmission, whether worn as source control or as PPE.” “In sum, given the paucity of information about their performance as source control in real-world settings, along with the extremely low efficiency of cloth masks as filters and their poor fit, there is no evidence to support their use by the public or healthcare workers to control the emission of particles from the wearer.” COMMENTARY: Masks-for-all for COVID-19 not based on sound data, https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data
“Laboratory tests showed the penetration of particles through the cloth masks to be very high (97%) compared with the medical masks (44%).” “We have provided the first clinical efficacy data of cloth masks, which suggest HCWs should not use cloth masks as protection against respiratory infection. Cloth masks resulted in significantly higher rates of infection than medical masks, and also performed worse than the control arm”. “A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers”, https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/5/4/e006577.full.pdf
“None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection. Some evidence suggests that mask use is best undertaken as part of a package of personal protection especially hand hygiene.” (bin-Reza F et al. The use of mask and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: A systematic review of the scientific evidence. Resp Viruses 2012;6(4):257-67. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/)
“….homemade masks are not considered PPE, since their capability to protect HCP is unknown. Caution should be exercised when considering this option. Homemade masks should ideally be used in combination with a face shield that covers the entire front (that extends to the chin or below) and sides of the face.” https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/ppe-strategy/face-masks.html
Potential health risks voiced by doctors and other professionals:
Possible increased risk of infection (inhaling trapped virus, bacteria, and other toxins you would normally be exhaling?): “The rates of all infection outcomes were highest in the cloth mask arm, with the rate of ILI (influenza-like illness) significantly higher in the cloth mask arm compared with the medical mask arm.” (the cloth masks were 2-layer cotton) “Adverse events associated with facemask use were reported in 40.4% of HCWs in the medical mask arm and 42.6% in the cloth mask arm. General discomfort and breathing problems were the most frequently reported adverse events.” “The physical properties of a cloth mask, reuse, the frequency and effectiveness of cleaning, and increased moisture retention, may potentially increase the infection risk for HCWs. The virus may survive on the surface of the facemasks, and modelling studies have quantified the contamination levels of masks. Self-contamination through repeated use and improper doffing is possible….Observations during SARS suggested double-masking and other practices increased the risk of infection because of moisture, liquid diffusion and pathogen retention. These effects may be associated with cloth masks.”
Hypoxia and immune system impairment (hypoxia can cause heart attacks, strokes, seizures, death and more. Low oxygen levels stress the body resulting in increased cortisol. Cortisol suppresses the immune system rendering people MORE susceptible to illness).
Shehade H et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-Inducible Factor-1 negatively regulates Th1 function. J Immunol 2015;195:1372-1376.
Westendorf AM et al. Hypoxia enhances immunosuppression by inhibiting CD4+ effector T cell function and promoting Treg activity. Cell Physiol Biochem 2017;41:1271-84.
Sceneay J et al. Hypoxia-driven immunosuppression contributes to the pre-metastatic niche. Oncoimmunology 2013;2:1 e22355.
Ben Swann All the studies show no benefit from a mask. Not effective in randomized controlled trials. Those studies that are being used by the media are easily manipulatable and easily bias studies that don’t represent natural conditions.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8upEg-bEJ8
Del Bigtree interviews Denis Rancourt, PhD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ODBTdNiG0
Del Bigtree demonstrates how CO2 builds up to hazardous levels very quickly.
https://youtu.be/RzqcN6ybfkE?t=6590
Dr. Kelly Victory This video talks about how children have less than 1/4 of the virus in their noses as adults. We have no documented cases of children infecting adults. Any children who have died had serious underlying issues. The risk of a child dying from COVID is as close as being struck by lightning.
The local health department held a meeting today in North Idaho, which was suppose to be open to the “public.” The main item on the agenda: mandatory masks. The public had less than 24 hours notice. More than 200 people showed up to stand for your freedom- all ages- moms with kids in tow, elderly folks, people in ministry, and retired law enforcement and more than 500 logged in to their zoom call. The sheriff was on hand to keep the public from attending the meeting. Asking the public who was there to attend and offer public comment to ‘just let them (the health district) have their meeting’ and to ‘picket outside’.
The meeting was interrupted early on, not only by attending members of the public who were not allowed access to the meeting that was discussing the possibility of a mask mandate but also by a hacker who managed to break into a Zoom’s screen-sharing function and write “No Masks” on the data slides. The move forced speakers to abandon the slides and speak of their scripted presentations.
A motion by the Panhandle Health District board of health to mandate masks failed to come to a vote, as no other member would second the motion to require residents and visitors to wear the protective coverings.
A mom attending the meeting reported:
We were not allowed into the meeting room. Instead we filled the hot lobby. ( almost like the AC was purposefully tuned off to deter the public from coming. ) They were hoping for a secret meeting, and they did not get that. They failed to get a second motion for mandated masks.
You can be supportive of masks, you can wear a mask all day long for all I care….and still you can be completely against the government MANDATING a face covering for men, women and children.
Where I live, we still enjoy our freedom to gather for church services on Sunday. People in states with mandated masks have been out of church since March! So please do not tell me there is no correlation. The governor of California has admitted that (even WITH mandated masks that he believes work so well) churches will be closed indefinitely. (until a vaccine is made and mandated)
Mandatory masks WILL directly affect your freedom….long term. It will effect your freedom to gather and worship, your children’s freedom to go to school and your ability to live your life without a covering over your face. This is more then a “slippery slope”……it’s a complete cliff jump into a mandated Covid Vaccine.
Don’t fall for it. They are playing off of your fear right now.
I am more than happy to give you 6 feet or more distance while out shopping, in order to respect your space and make you feel safer, but don’t you dare push your fear on my children’s future.
Northern Idaho Sheriff tells all 200 people waiting to ATTEND a public health meeting that there is only room for 16 in one room live and 18 individuals in the other room. In this video you hear the sheriff call the public who showed up to voice their concerns at a public health meeting – “protesters” telling them to have their ‘picket outside’ asking the public to just ‘let them (the health district) have their meeting.’ These are un-elected officials who are instituting mandates that require medical interventions on healthy people across the state. Where there is forced medicine there is NO LIBERTY.
The next meeting is to be held next Thursday, July 23, 2020.
Local friends, please come. If I can show up as a mother of 5 young kids and a husband with a crazy work schedule, you can too! This is our children’s future we are talking about. Please show up.
KEEP CHECKING THE SITE REGARDING MEETING INFORMATION:
In the Journal of the American Medical Association:
“Face masks should not be worn by healthy individuals to protect themselves from acquiring respiratory infection because there is no evidence to suggest that face masks worn by healthy individuals are effective in preventing people from becoming ill.
Face masks should be used only by individuals who have symptoms of respiratory infection such as coughing, sneezing, or, in some cases, fever.
Face masks should also be worn by healthcare workers, by individuals who are taking care of or are in close contact with people who have respiratory infections, or otherwise as directed by a doctor.
