PARENTS! Have you wondered about the risk to our children when they are forced to breathe their own viral and bacterial exhaust for hours on end? Have you seen the statistics that show that their risk of the virus to their overall well being is outrageously small? Are you still following orders and masking your family?
Guy Guy Crittenden, who, for 25 years, edited the trade journal HazMat Management has published an article regarding his deep concerns about masks. We are sharing his insight with his permission.
____ I happen to know a thing or two about masks and safety. Why? Because for 25 years I was the editor of an award-winning trade magazine called HazMat Management that covered such topics as pollution prevention and compliance with health & safety laws. We routinely published articles on masks, gloves, respirators, and other forms of personal protective equipment (PPE).
Now let me tell you a few things about that mask you’re wearing. And please note that what I’m about to share was also stated in the most recent edition of Del Bigtree’s program The Highwire when two OSHA mask experts spoke to the fact that the kinds of masks people are wearing were never (never!) designed to be worn for long periods and doing so is very harmful.
1. Masks are “sterilized” with Ethylene Oxide — a known carcinogen. Many teachers in various school boards have been experiencing significant symptoms as a direct result of the effects of this chemical.
2. The masks contain (not sprayed with) PTFE which makes up Teflon along with other chemicals.
I found and have posted the US patent to allow manufacturers to use PTFE as a filter in commercial masks… breathing these for extended periods can lead to lung cancer.”
Don’t agree? Argue with the experts at OSHA, which is the main US agency, i.e., its Occupational Health & Safety Agency. These masks are meant to be worn only for short periods, like say if you’re sanding a table for an hour and don’t want to inhale sawdust.
They don’t do anything whatsoever to stop the spread of any virus, and the emerging science of virology now understands that viruses aren’t even passed from person to person.
I know that sounds incredible, but it’s the case that the virus is in the air, you breathe it in, there’s no way to prevent that short of living in an oxygen tent, and if you have a strong immune system you’ll be fine, and if you have a weak immune system you may have to deal with the effects of your immune system working to restore balance within your metabolism.
So let’s say you don’t wear the blue packaged masks, and instead wear a homemade cloth mask — the kind people wear over and over and hang on their rearview mirror and so on.
Those masks are completely useless against a virus, and are also very dangerous. OSHA would never condone a person wearing a mask of this kind for anything more than the shortest time. Re-breathing your own viral debris is dangerous to health, and the oxygen deprivation children suffer wearing such masks all day will certainly cause brain damage. I’m not making this up.
Again, you might say, well, Guy you’re not a doctor. True, but I did edit that magazine for 25 years. That’s a long time and many articles on masks and PPE. I’ve attended numerous OH&S conferences and listened to experts discussing these matters.
You may hear people saying that surgeons and nurses wear masks like this all day. Um, no. No, they don’t. They’re trained in the proper use of masks, which is to wear them in the OR, then dispose of the mask when they leave that room. Are you aware that operating rooms are actually supplied extra oxygen, to compensate for the reduction in oxygen flow from mask-wearing?
To my mind, it’s criminal (not hyperbole) to force children to wear masks all day. Setting aside the very real psychological effects, we’re going to have a generation of brain-damaged children. Ever heard the expression, “Not enough oxygen at birth?” That’s a joke at the expense of a mentally challenged person, but that’s literally what we’re doing. And we’re told it’s to “keep us safe”! We’re told this by doctors who actually don’t know about PPE and laypeople who have no clue.
So, you can choose to believe me or not, but I was the editor for a quarter-century of a magazine that had a strong occupational health and safety mandate, and I can tell you that the mask-wearing currently mandated by governments and private businesses offers no health benefit whatsoever, in no way protects you or anyone else from any virus, and actually, does you damage beyond wearing it for a few minutes.
Guy Crittenden
Got that? Good. Now please share this message and get the conversation going with parents, who must end this masking of children immediately. This is a very serious matter. And related to that, let me just state this doesn’t end for me when the lockdown ends or the masking ends.
No, this ends for me when every politician and bureaucrat who inflicted this travesty, this crime against humanity, on the population, is in the dock, and faces their misdeeds in a court of law!
END NOTE: The CDC and WHO have acknowledged that asymptomatic people do not spread the virus, so the case for masks for such people is moot in the first place.”
Published with permission from Guy Crittenden, who, for 25 years, edited the trade journal HazMat Management. Visit his site at HipGnosis.co
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.
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.
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.
I have to say, as the meeting went on I became quite unimpressed. In fact, it sounded like I was listening to high schoolers.
Most surprisingly, when the topic turned to masks, the board didn’t ask for any hard data on their efficacy.
Let me explain.
During the meeting. Jim Sousa, Chief Medical Officer of St. Luke’s Heath Care System, was one of the guests on hand to give information and answer questions.
Sousa said it was important we do something, because earlier in the year, their hospital in Idaho’s Blaine County had to shut down because half the staff went out sick and under quarantine with Covid, and it looked like Covid cases in Ada County (home of Boise / the State Capitol) might resemble what happened in Blaine County.
Sousa then gave anecdotal evidence as he advocated for masks.
For example, he told a story about a couple of hairdressers in a southern state who had COVID, but because they wore masks, none of their clients became infected.
At that point, the question I wanted to ask was, “If masks work that well, why didn’t they prevent the hospital staff in Blaine County from catching Covid?” But it was a virtual meeting and there was no opportunity for questions.
Souza also stated that none of the recent spike in Covid cases came from the George Floyd protests, “because from what I saw, over half of the protesters were wearing masks.”
How’s THAT for science?
I should point out that this is the same Jim Souza who wrote an op-ed that appeared earlier this year in many Idaho papers, informing us that the virus “lies in wait. It likes crowds. It picks on the vulnerable. It waits for us to lose our focus. And then it moves in,” as if the virus were sentient.
No evaluation of the pros and cons
Amazingly, NONE of the CDH board members asked ANY tough questions of the hospital representatives on hand.
And like I said, no hard science on masks was presented. One would expect a board of this stature – making a decision that will impact 500,000+ people – to demand (& evaluate) hard data on the PROS & CONS of wearing masks.
Nope. Nothing.
Also, during his time speaking to the CDH board, Souza said that treatment for Covid in Idaho hasn’t changed much. He listed all the drugs & treatments being used, and NEVER ONCE mentioned hydroxycholoroquine, zinc, or azithromycin. The HCQ/zinc/azithromycin treatment, also known as the #ZelenkoProtocol, has been proven to clear Covid symptoms in people within 8 – 12 hours of starting the protocol.
This begs a deadly serious question. WHY are Idaho’s doctors NOT using the Zelenko Protocol? Do they still think “orange man bad?” Do they not realize that all the articles slamming HCQ as dangerous have been proven wrong & that multiple studies have shown HCQ to be safe & effective for treating Covid?
If Idaho’s doctors are letting Covid patients die without putting them on the #ZelenkoProtocol, and if our Central District Health board isn’t recommending that Idaho’s doctors look into the Zelenko Protocol, then both the doctors and the CDH board have blood on their hands.
Could it be that these hospitals would rather admit a Covid patient and collect large sums of cash for doing so instead of prescribing a valid, $20 treatment?
They will no doubt vehemently deny any such motivation, but the way Idaho’s government went all Jekyll-Hyde since $1.25 billion came our way in March / April, I have serious questions.
So what’s the next step?
The CDH board voted for CDH Director Russ Duke to draft a Mandatory Mask recommendation for Ada County, and possibly Valley County.
Yes, Idaho’s Central District Health board plans on making facemasks mandatory in Ada County, Idaho because a chief medical officer gave anecdotal stories yet had ZERO hard evidence for mask efficacy.
The Board didn’t examine any other evidence at the board meeting. None. Zip. Ziltch. Nada.
It really was like listening to high schoolers. There were so many holes in Souza’s talking points, a high school debate coach would have laughed him out of the room. And the fact that the board didn’t seek to weigh evidence from both sides of the issue was equally laughable if it weren’t so sad.
It was obvious most of the CDH board had already made up their mind to vote for mandatory masks, evidence be damned. Without waiting for the board to discuss or make a motion, CDH Director Russ Duke eagerly said he would write up a mandatory mask rule if the board wanted it.
Almost immediately after him saying that, board member District 1 Ada County Commissioner Diana Lachiondo gushed over the fact that Duke spent so much time on the phone with her this past week. At that point, it became quite apparent that this meeting was merely a formality to invoke a decision they had already reached.
Only one board member, Representative Megan Blanksma, seemed to want more consideration of facts. Thankfully, when it became obvious the board was getting carried away and about to make a decision on a far-reaching mandate concerning schools, Blanksma wisely jumped in to curtail it.
CDH Board Faux Pas
As a side note, earlier in the meeting the board went offline for a while to confer with legal counsel in executive session, because last week’s private board meeting (when they first voted to take Ada County back to Level 3) was in violation of the state’s open meeting law. As a result, when they came out of executive session, the board voided the minutes of their last meeting!
Of course, then they had to vote again to put Ada County back into Stage 3, but in so doing they also added the rule that no meetings of more than 50 people would be allowed. So much for church services!
And I think there was less than 60 seconds of discussion on this issue.
To wrap up their meeting, the CDH board voted to instruct CDH Director Russ Duke to draft an order that all of Ada County, Idaho MUST wear masks when in public and in enclosed places. No timeline was discussed for how long that might last, and board member Ted Epperly included plenty of undefined terms in his motion. And they will include masks for children, too, because even though their infection rate is phenomenally low, Souza thought it would be a good idea.
Bottom line, the board came off looking like a rubber stamp for whatever Jim Souza recommended.
It would be good to get the CDH board to CONSIDER ACTUAL SCIENCE at their next meeting. Maybe – JUST MAYBE – Idaho’s CDH will act like professionals & carefully consider both pro and con evidence before deciding any rule that will affect 500,000+ Idahoans.
Treat Our Covid Patients Better!
Idaho also needs to stop the politics and get our Covid patients treated with the Zelenko Protocol. There is rarely a reason for people to be hospitalized for Covid if they begin the Zelenko Protocol within five days of symptom onset. And with that, the hospitals would NOT be dealing with Covid patients, and there would be no need to consider mandatory masks.
Per the peer-reviewed research, there’s no need to wait for a test result to start the Zelenko Protocol, just prescribe the protocol on clinical suspicion. If our Idaho doctors and our CDH board cannot fathom that this protocol works, then we need more open-minded doctors and a better-informed Central District Health board.
As it stands, this board meeting was unimpressive. We’ve had enough knee-jerk decisions the past four months. I hope to see more professionalism and a more balanced examination of facts at their next meeting.
Health Freedom Idaho wants to thank author Daniel Bobinski for allowing us to share his report of the virtual meeting by the Central Health Department
Health Freedom Idaho encourages readers to TAKE ACTION.
Start by EMAILING your Mayor and those of your surrounding cities. The Health Departments have failed to consider the lack of safety and effectiveness of paper masks, bandanas, and face coverings as protection from a virus. Tell them you do not want them to mandate masks allowing each citizen their own body autonomy and the freedom to maintain their personal responsibility when it comes to health. Here are some resources to review and share: https://hfi.designbyparrish.com/mask-mandates
For 30 years, Daniel Bobinski has been a management / leadership coach and corporate trainer. He’s also a certified behavioral analyst, NYT best-selling author, and long-time columnist on workplace issues.
In 2019 Daniel decided to start writing about news & politics, penning a weekly column for UncoverDC. He also writes for RedState.
Daniel is a veteran and a self-styled Christian libertarian who believes in the principles of free market capitalism while standing firmly against crony capitalism.
Alert! Rights suspended! Money allocated without legislative input! All power lies solely in the hands of Governor Little! Emergency declarations have time limits of 30 days with the option to extend it for another 30 should the situation warrant. In order to get around those expiration dates the Governor keeps rescinding emergencies and replacing them, restarting the expiration clock. The June 11 update Governor Little rescinded the extreme emergency to replace it with a new emergency order that will have a 30 day/60 day time limit UNLESS the legislature terminates it by resolution AT ANY TIME. (46-1008.) Notice that does allow him to suspend rules but of course NOT laws (also referred to Idaho code). Article II of the Idaho Constitution is very clear about the separation of powers. Even the extreme emergency code does NOT allow him to write/suspend the law. In the June 11emergency order, the Governor has suspended 4 laws. Governor Little has AGAIN violated the Constitution thus violating his duty as Governor.
We demand all our elected REPRESENTATIVES AND SENATORSdo the job WE THE PEOPLEhired them to do.
The Governor illegally seized the power of the legislative branch by suspending and amending sections of the code and Allocating funds.
The legislature must convene to fulfill its constitutional obligations regarding code and allocating funds.
The legislature has the duty to ensure the continuity of state and local government pursuant to article 3 section 27 of the Idaho Constitution.
We demand that they TERMINATE the state of emergency pursuant to I.C. 46-1008.
Governor acts as King
Rather than call the legislature back into session and work with our representatives to speak on behalf of the people, Governor Little moves forward with a plan to invade privacy, remove parental rights, and remove the elderly’s rights, all for an illness that has caused 82 deaths in Idaho and causes no symptoms in 80% of people. Idaho has only 97% of the deaths that would have been normally expected between February 1, 2020 and May 29th, 2020.
What can YOU DO?Contact your legislator and tell them you expect them to represent you on June 23rd! Why the 23rd? Watch the Video below!
Why did Brad Little use martial law powers to suspend multiple line items in the Idaho Administrative Code related to parents’ rights when their children are in state custody?
The COVID-19 EMERGENCY DECLARATION Timeline:
➡️ MARCH 13 Declared ‘State of Emergency’ Brad Little puts Idaho in a state of emergency on March 13 using Idaho Code 46-1008(5)(a) to justify suspending line items from IDAPA Administrative Rules.
➡️ MARCH 23By Proclamation Governor Suspends 125+ Rules Hundreds of rules are suspended, but the most concerning are parents’ rights when children are taken into state custody. No visitation, no notice of transfer of children, changes to facility requirements where children are housed when in state custody (numbers of bathrooms, etc).
CDC’s own data released May 23rdshows that the risk to those under 60 is less than or equal to the flu. We also know that those who test positive but don’t have symptoms are actually NOT sick and can’t infect others, 1/3 to 1/2 of those who died were in nursing homes where they are fed nutrient deficient food and given flu vaccines which increase the risk of respiratory infections such as coronavirus, the actual number of deaths is about 1/20th the original extreme estimates Still, the Governor to move forward with mass testing.
➡️ APRIL 17 / APRIL 20 Idaho receives $1.25 Billion from the Federal Government from the CARES Act with more on the way. Governor Brad Little allocates as he sees fit because he refuses to convene the Legislature to do so.
Little has allocated $7 million of a possible $55 million to ‘contact tracing’ and hiring 255 individuals to track people down.
Plan mass testing of 150,000 COVID-19 molecular tests a week.
Governor Little plans on conducting primarily molecular (genetic) tests, not serology (antibody) tests – because serology tests detect antibodies and would prove most have been exposed, had the disease, and recovered. With molecular tests, government and media can continue to frighten people with the now old trope “You’re asymptomatic but test positive so you must be quarantined as you’re a danger to others.” even though FDA admits, “The detection of viral RNA by RT-PCR does not necessarily equate with an infectious virus.”
Got that, FDA admits a positive test does not mean you have an infectious virus! But a positive test will be followed by, “If you have no one to care for your children then we must ‘provide out of home care’ through social services/CPS.” Little and his team can continue to push the lie that those who test positive without symptoms can infect others despite the fact science has clearly disproven this.
Each time he issues a new emergency order the clock starts over giving him unlimited power and control under the 30/60 day extensions until the Legislature convenes and terminates the “emergency”.
Representative Tammy Nichols shares summary of Governor’s call with legislators
➡️ June 3 Governor Little Tells Legislators that he reinstated the regulations suspended. There was no proof provided.
Summary: He rescinded the extreme emergency. This is a new emergency order with the 30 day/60 day time limit UNLESS the legislature terminates it by resolution AT ANY TIME. 46-1008. Notice that does allow him to suspend rules but of course NOT laws (also referred to Idaho code). Article II of the Idaho Constitution is very clear about the separation of powers. Even the extreme emergency code does NOT allow him to write/suspend the law. NOTE: In this new emergency order he had suspended 4 laws. Governor Little has AGAIN violated the Constitution thus violating his duty as Governor.
Other Authoritarian Acts:
➡️ Federal Bill HR 6666 – This is a Federal bill that intends to provide Federal money to HHS to conduct mass forced COVID testing, including at people’s homes ➡️ Washington State Governor Inslee has hired people to supervise children in state Emergency Quarantine Centers. Will Idaho do the same? ➡️ Idaho is increasing the number of Contact Tracers from 23 to 255 ➡️ The federal government gives states billions of $$$ if states declare an “emergency” and even more for declaring an “extreme emergency”
Constitutional Republic form of government in Idaho completely gone, all power is held by Governor.
➡️Legislature discusses convening, acknowledges authority to, but sees no legal ‘mechanism’ to do so. TITLE 67 STATE GOVERNMENT AND STATE AFFAIRS CHAPTER 4 LEGISLATURE 67-422. CONVENING OF LEGISLATURE IN EVENT OF ATTACK. In the event of an attack, the governor shall call the legislature into session as soon as practicable, and in any case within ninety (90) days following the inception of the attack. If the governor fails to issue such a call, the legislature shall, on the ninetieth day from the date of inception of the attack, automatically convene at the place where the governor then has his office. Each legislator and each emergency interim successor, unless he is certain that the legislator to whose powers and duties he is designated to succeed or any emergency interim successor higher in order of succession will not be available [unavailable], shall proceed to the place of session as expeditiously as practicable. At such session or at any session in operation at the inception of the attack, and at subsequent sessions, limitations on the length of session and on the subjects which may be acted upon shall be suspended.
➡️67-422 Idaho Code demands that Legislature shall convene no later than 90 days following an ‘attack’ whether the Governor calls them back or not.
➡️Attack is defined in 67-415 Idaho Code. By the definition given and by the comments of the POTUS, Covid is certainly an attack as defined by law.
We are asking our legislators to do the following:
The legislature must convene pursuant to 67-422 Idaho Code and Idaho Constitution Article III Section 27 and must end the emergency declaration pursuant to 46-1008 (2).
The legislature must properly reallocate the funds granted by the Federal government.
The legislature must reinstate all suspended sections of the Idaho Code and all suspended sections of IDAPA Administrative Rules.
This is the only way we return to our Republic form of government.
The Idaho Legislature enacts statute/code and delegates to the Executive Branch’s State Agencies the ability to write rules to implement the statute/code.
Rights Removed including daycare, children in CPS custody, guardianship, foster care, assisted living care for elderly and vulnerable adults…
06.02.01 Dept of Corrections – Response matrix (scroll to the end)
16.03.19.200.06.a-d Family members of a resident in a home-centered care facility usually have a right to see the resident (as do medical professionals and visitors), but those rights are suspended here.
06. Access to Resident. Each provider and individuals living in the home must permit immediate access to any resident by any representative of the Department, by the state ombudsman for the elderly or their designee, by an adult protection investigator or by the resident’s personal health care professional. Each home must also permit the following: (3-20-20)T a. Immediate access to a resident by their relatives, subject to the resident’s right to deny or withdraw consent at any time; (3-20-20)T b. Immediate access to a resident by others who are visiting with the consent of the resident, subject to reasonable restrictions and the resident’s right to deny or withdraw consent at any time; (3-20-20)T c. Reasonable access to a resident by any entity or individual that provides health, social, legal, or other services to the resident, subject to the resident’s right to deny or withdraw consent at any time; and (3-20-20)T d. Reasonable access to the resident’s records, medications and treatments by the resident’s health care professional subject to the resident’s permission.
Because the suspended part references a-d, residents are still required to see representatives from the department of health and other government officials, which is explained in the section before a.
16.03.19.200.08. The same residents have the following rights suspended:
Health Services. The resident has the right to control their health-related services, including: (3-20-20)T a. The right to retain the services of their own personal physician and dentist; (3-20-20)T b. The right to select the pharmacy or pharmacist of their choice; (3-20-20)T c. The right to confidentiality and privacy concerning their medical or dental condition and treatment; (3-20-20)T d. The right to participate in the formulation of their plan of service; (3-20-20)T e. The right to decline treatment for any medical condition; and (3-20-20)T f. When the resident is unable to give medical consent, the provider will give the name and contact information of the person holding guardianship or power of attorney for health care to any health care provider upon request.
16.03.22.550.17 Residents in a traditional facility have the same rights suspended as those above, and this additional one.
17. Access by Advocates and Representatives. A residential assisted living facility must permit advocates and representatives of community legal services programs, whose purposes include rendering assistance without charge to residents, to have access to the facility at reasonable times in order to: (3-20-20)T a. Visit, talk with, and make personal, social, and legal services available to all residents; (3-20-20)T b. Inform residents of their rights and entitlements, and their corresponding obligations, under state, federal, and local laws by distribution of educational materials and discussion in groups and with individuals; (3-20-20)T c. Assist residents in asserting their legal rights regarding claims for public assistance, medical assistance, and social security benefits, and in all other matters in which residents are aggrieved, that may be provided individually, or in a group basis, and may include organizational activity, counseling, and litigation; (3-20-20)T d. Engage in all other methods of assisting, advising, and representing residents so as to extend to them the full enjoyment of their rights; (3-20-20)T e. Communicate privately and without restrictions with any resident who consents to the communication; and (3-20-20)T f. Observe all common areas of the facility. Residential Assisted Living Facilities Link
16.06.01.50.06, .07 , and 09 (.07 may be a typo, on the governor’s list is says .07 but then lists the title for .08) – Suspended parents/legal guardians rights
06. Visitation for Child’s Parent(s) or Legal Guardian(s). Visitation arrangements must be provided to the child’s parent(s) or legal guardian(s) unless visitation is contrary to the child’s safety.
07. Notification of Change in Placement. Written notification must be made within seven (7) days of a change of placement of the foster child if a child is relocated to another foster care setting. Notification must be sent to the child’s parent(s) or legal guardian(s). When the child is an Indian child, written notification must also be sent to the child’s Indian custodian(s), if applicable, and to the child’s tribe.
09. Notification of Right to Participate and Appeal. Written notification to the child’s parent(s) or legal guardian(s) must be made regarding their right to discuss any changes and the opportunity to appeal if they disagree with changes in placement or visitation. Child and Family Services Link
WHY ARE THESE SUSPENDED?
Suspension/seems unrelated to health concerns:
16.03.14.150.02(b)
b. When a hospital is leased by the owner to a second party for the operation of the facility, a copy of the lease agreement showing clearly in its context the responsibilities of both parties shall be filed with the application for a license. Hospitals Link
16.06.02.729
729. BATHROOM FACILITIES. A building used to house children must have adequate, clean, and easily accessible bathroom facilities. The number of toilets is one (1) per eight (8) females and one (1) per ten (10) males; bathtubs or showers is one (1) for each ten (10) individuals; washstands is one (1) for every five (5) individuals according to the International Building Code applicable for the type of building and its use. There must be separate use of bathroom facilities for boys and girls over six (6) years of age. There must be separate bathroom facilities for staff. Child Care Licensing Link
Send this to your legislators – your Senator and both Representatives. Demand that your legislators follow the Constitution and convene the legislature on June 23.
Tell your legislators that you expect them to do the following:
The legislature must convene pursuant to 67-422 Idaho Code and Idaho Constitution Article III Section 27 and must end the emergency declaration pursuant to 46-1008 (2).
The legislature must properly reallocate the Federal funds.
The legislature must reinstate all suspended sections of the Idaho Code and all suspended sections of IDAPA Administrative Rules.
This is the only way we return to our Republic form of government.
RESPONSES TO COMMON OBJECTIONS
Your legislators will come up with all types of excuses to try and shirk their responsibilities. Don’t let them. Here are some responses for you to use:
Excuse: Our lawyers have said that we can’t have this special session.
Response: Who said that? What are their names and phone numbers. Let’s have a three way call and address this issue together because the law is clear. If you won’t follow the law and simply want to hide behind the flawed interpretations of unelected lawyers, then tell me, what purpose do you serve? Why should I ever vote for you?
Excuse: This was not an “attack,” so the protocols don’t apply.
Response:President Trump said it was an attack. Do you agree with him? Yes or no? The Governor used the statute that specifically mentions attack. And the definition in Idaho State Law plainly states that an attack is defined as “any action or series of actions taken by an enemy of the United States resulting in substantial damage or injury to persons or property in this state whether through sabotage…bacteriological, or biological means or other weapons or methods.” (video of Trump stating its an attack)
So do you believe that the coronavirus brought damage or injury to persons or property here in Idaho through bacteriological or biological means? Yes or no? If Governor Little wants to try to legally reject the clear definition in Idaho State Law, then he must make that case publically and he must also make a public declaration stating that the Governor of Idaho disagrees with President Trump and does not recognize President Trump’s statement calling the coronavirus crisis an “attack.” Until that happens, our legislature must meet on June 23rd.
Excuse: Only the Governor can call a special session.
Response: No, you are required by law to convene automatically on the 90th day after the definition of the attack. June 23rd would be the latest day justifiable for that. Have you even read the law (Idaho State Code 67-422)? Do you know what it says? Furthermore, Idaho State Code 46-1008 which the Governor also cited to justify his Executive Orders and which only allows for 60 days in total for emergency powers, plainly states, “The legislature by concurrent resolution may terminate a state of disaster emergency at any time.” What does “at any time” mean to you? It didn’t say, only during a special session called by the Governor. Any time means any time.
Excuse: I can’t go all the way to Boise.
Response: First of all, the Republican State Convention is going to be in Nampa 2 days later, so you’re already going to be in town. Second of all, it doesn’t matter since this is required by law, and if you can’t go, the law stipulates in section 67-422 that you are supposed to send your “interim emergency successor.” So, if you’re not going to come, then send your interim emergency successor. This is the law.
Objection: Your children will never be taken away from you because of the coronavirus.
Response: Then what is the reason for the suspension of parental rights by executive order? If you don’t know, then do your job and go the special session and find out. Then undo it. Furthermore, if there is no purpose to have these rules suspended, then there should be no reason for you NOT to vote to undo it.
Objection: Relax, the Governor cannot spend the $1.25 billion dollars however he wants. He is going to have input and oversight from the legislature.
Response: How and when? This money is going to be disbursed immediately. The Governor is not going to wait until January 2021 to start spending this money. So how and when are you, as a legislator, going to have a chance to review this spending? This is why you must be at the special session, which is required by law, on June 23rd.
This post has been edited to clarify the powers assumed by the Governor are under the “Martial Law and Active Duty” Chapter of Idaho Code.
Join us at the Capitol Steps for the People’s Rally June 23rd.
GREAT NEWS! If you don’t feel sick then you won’t spread this sickness to others. IF we listen to our bodies symptoms will tell us when to ‘self-quarantine’. That’s right we don’t need a Governor’s executive order to tell us to stay home and shut down our businesses.
“Coronavirus patients without symptoms aren’t driving the spread of the virus, World Health Organization officials said Monday, casting doubt on concerns by some researchers that the disease could be difficult to contain due to asymptomatic infections.”
So with this World Health Organization report that asymptomatic carriers of the coronavirus “rarely” spread the virus to others, we just shut down the nation and drove our economy into a recession for nothing.
Our Governor’s phased openings, offering bribes for people to return to work and fines for those businesses opening out of necessity are all clear indications that there is a NEED for our Representatives and Senators to return to their jobs at the Capitol and REPRESENT THE PEOPLE.
Are YOUR Legislators going to show up to Represent You?
