Re: Government Response to SARS-CoV-2
I am writing as a result of my concern with government overreach in the response to SARS-CoV-2. The mass and indiscriminate containment of citizens and the restricting of access to our economy, courts, parliament and livelihoods are extraordinary measures that have never before been considered, much less implemented. The impact of these measures on our physical, emotional, psychological and economic well-being is considerable and clearly not sustainable.
If the goal is to keep our families and communities healthy, not just in the short-term but also in the long-term, I require further information to enable me, in all good conscience, to continue to support these extraordinary measures being imposed by government.
I respectfully request answers to the following questions with regard to governmental strategies being enacted in response to SARS-CoV-2:
- What evidence supports the strategies and actions enacted by the government?
- What data informs the government’s intervention strategy for SARS-CoV-2?
- What is the source of this data?
- What scientific data is the government relying on to justify the imposition of ‘physical distancing’ as an effective method to reduce transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus?
- What scientific data is the government relying on to justify the use of masking as an effective method to reduce transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus?
- Do the mortality numbers justify the response?
- What data exists to indicate that the total ‘excess mortality’ in Canada has increased substantially during this period of SARS-CoV-2 infection?
- Is the mortality data reliable given the inability of the medical system to differentiate between individuals dying from SARS-CoV-2 and those dying with SARS-CoV-2?
- What is the justification for the continued restrictions given the number of reported deaths attributed to SARS-CoV-2 is not out of the normal range when compared to the annual mortality from influenza and pneumonia through the last decade?
- What is the merit of continuing mass and indiscriminate restrictions?
- The reason given for imposing mass and indiscriminate restrictions was to “flatten the curve” in order to prevent overwhelming of our medical services. Given that our hospitals are now operating at 50 – 60% capacity, what is the justification for continued restrictions?
- What efforts and actions are being implemented by the government to support the acquisition of natural immunity and thus the development of herd immunity?
- What does the scientific evidence indicate is the impact of ‘physical distancing’ on the development of natural herd immunity?
- What does the scientific evidence indicate is the impact of ‘physical distancing’ on prolonging the epidemic?
- What consideration is being given to the wider consequences of mass containment?
- What is the anticipated impact of mass and indiscriminate containment on overall health, including the loss of life, as a result of restricted access to social supports, earning a livelihood, medical and dental services, religious services and recreational resources?
- What consideration is being given to the impact of the current restrictions on our economy and on individual and national debt?
- What is the government’s exit strategy from the imposed restrictions?
- What is the timeline for this exit strategy?
- What evidence supports this exit strategy?
- What is the rationale for preventing those with low/no risk of mortality and those who have already developed immunity from returning to normal life?
- Given that other countries have already lifted restrictions, or never imposed such mass restrictions, what evidence does this government rely on to justify continued restrictions?
- What is the rationale for the closure of our courts?
- When can we expect our courts to re-open?
- What is the justification for the effective closure of our parliament?
- How can we hold our government accountable for their actions when our parliament is effectively closed?
- When can we expect our parliament to fully re-open?
- What is the rationale for reliance on a vaccine?
- How is it logical that life will ‘return to normal’ only after a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is available, when humanity is exposed to incalculable numbers of infectious viruses and bacteria in daily living – for which there are no vaccines?
- Are other treatment modalities which have shown promise in the treatment of CV 19 (Remdesivir, VITAMIN C and D, zinc, HCQ, GTH precursors and oxygen treatments, including hyperbaric chambers) being utilized, and if not why not?
- Who will assume legal and financial liability for any injury or death resulting from a vaccine for SARS-CoV-2 given important safety protocols, including animal testing, are being bypassed?
- What consideration is being given to protecting our rights and freedoms?
- If a vaccine is developed for SARS-CoV-2, will this government support the right of individuals to fully informed consent and bodily sovereignty?
- Will this government protect our right to privacy and forbid the use of surveillance technologies to monitor citizens?
The Onus is on Government
During this time of extraordinary measures, it is critical that our response be measured, reasonable, and supported by demonstrable evidence. The severe curtailment of civil liberties without projected timelines for their rescission, the shutdown of economic activity and resulting job losses, the increase of human suffering through confinement and restriction of liberty, and the closure of courts of justice denying citizens a ready recourse, are all factors which bear close scrutiny, and must be weighed in the balance of a Constitution which zealously guards the rights and freedoms of citizens.
I recognize that governments may enact laws and pursue policies that limit Charter rights and freedoms, but the onus is on the government to prove that the limit is demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. My response to current and proposed government decrees is therefore reliant upon the evidence and rational requested.
I look forward to your earliest reply.
May 1, 2020
Canada Central Office
415 West Hunt Club Rd
Nepean, ON K2E 1C5
Dear Canadian Costco Executives:
It is my understanding that Costco Canada is considering implementing a policy whereby all shoppers will be required to wear a mask, as is occurring in USA Costco stores effective May 4th. I am writing to express my strong objection to this policy for several reasons:
- Masking is Not Evidence based
The scientific literature is very clear that the wearing of a cloth mask does not prevent transmission or infection. In his scientific review of masking, Dr. Denis Rancourt states:
“There have been extensive randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies, and meta-analysis reviews of RCT studies, which all show that masks and respirators do not work to prevent respiratory influenza-like illnesses, or respiratory illnesses believed to be transmitted by droplets and aerosol particles.”
Dr. Rancourt explains:
“No RCT study with verified outcome shows a benefit for . . . community members . . . to wearing a mask. There is no such study. There are no exceptions. Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public.”
It is my understanding that using a mask to prevent exposure to a virus as SARS-CoV-2 is akin to erecting a chain-link fence to keep out mice. It is critical that our response to SARS-CoV-2 be measured, reasonable, and supported by demonstrable evidence. The bottom line is that there is no evidence to support the use of masking to prevent transmission or infection.
Dr. Rancourt also lists the unknowns with regard to potential harm from broad public policies to wear masks. These include:
- Do used and loaded masks become sources of enhanced transmission, for the wearer and others?
- Do masks become collectors and retainers of pathogens that the mask wearer would otherwise avoid when breathing without a mask?
- Are large droplets captured by a mask atomized or aerolized into breathable components?
- Can virions escape an evaporating droplet stuck to a mask fiber?
- What are the dangers of bacterial growth on a used and loaded mask?
- How do pathogen-laden droplets interact with environmental dust and aerosols captured on the mask?
- What are long-term health effects, such as headaches, arising from impeded breathing?
- Are there negative social consequences to a masked society?
- Are there negative psychological consequences to wearing a mask, as a fear-based behavioural modification?
- What are the environmental consequences of mask manufacturing and disposal?
- Do the masks shed fibres or substances that are harmful when inhaled?
Dr. Rancourt concludes:
“In an absence of knowledge, governments should not make policies that have a hypothetical potential to cause harm. The government has an onus barrier before it instigates a broad social-engineering intervention, or allows corporations to exploit fear-based sentiments. Furthermore, individuals should know that there is no known benefit arising from wearing a mask in a viral respiratory illness epidemic, and that scientific studies have shown that any benefit must be residually small, compared to other and determinative factors.”
- Violation of human rights
To impose a practice as mandatory masking is a significant infringement upon individual rights and freedoms, something that should be precious to every Canadian. I recognize that governments may enact laws and pursue policies that limit Charter rights and freedoms, but the onus is on the government to prove that the limit is demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. Given the above scientific review of masking, there is no justifiable reason to impose masking on the general public.
Shoppers and Costco staff should be free to use or not use a mask as per their individual free will and conscious choice. Anything less is overly authoritarian and contributes to a culture where the systemic violation of our freedoms are tolerated.
If this policy is to be implemented for Costco Canada, I will refrain from patronage of your stores and services until such time as this policy is rescinded.
While I will miss shopping at Costco as I have appreciated the advances Costco has made in making available organic and local products produced by ethical and responsible farmers and other environmentally conscious measures, I cannot in good conscious support an organization who participates in a policy as this.