Letter To Business Owners

For Our Rights Forums General Discussion Letter To Business Owners

Letter To Business Owners

    • Levana Lomma
      Topics: 22
      Replies: 3

      June 20,2020

      Dear Business Owner,

      Fear is a natural, biological response to a threat to one’s survival. It triggers a fight or flight reaction before one has the ability to rationally analyze and calibrate a response to the perceived threat. This primal response has become incredibly prevalent among the average person in our community and unfortunately has led to a uniform reaction to the current perception of a worldwide pandemic. The majority of business owners have dutifully heeded the recommendations of the Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) out of blind faith alongside the need to maintain a public image of conformity as a declaration of responsible action to protect life. 

      This unquestioning trust in the CDC is in fact proving to cause more harm than good and as a concerned member of this community I feel it is my duty to inform you that your mask policy is in fact posing a serious health risk to your employees and customers alike. I urge you to please take the time to engage in your own research and use critical thinking to arrive at your own conclusion concerning best practices for your business.

      In case you didn’t know this, the Governor’s 9th Supplementary Emergency Proclamation declares thatall persons are encouraged to wear a cloth face covering as described and recommended by the CDC.” [2] The use of face masks by employees and customers is a RECOMMENDATION. It is NOT LAW. Laws are passed through legislation. You, as a business owner have the full authority to choose whether or not to impose a mask policy in your business. 

      According to the CDC:  “We now know from recent studies that a significant portion of individuals with coronavirus lack symptoms (“asymptomatic”) and that even those who eventually develop symptoms (“pre-symptomatic”) can transmit the virus to others before showing symptoms.”[1]

      However, if you take the time to actually read through the recent studies you will discover that they all claim that “further study” is in fact needed and that some results remain inconclusive while others claim “more research is needed”.

      Why have we suddenly changed our perception concerning disease prevention to include this irrational and extreme practice of prolonged mask usage when we have never done this in the past? Have we ever reacted in such a fashion to the news of an infectious outbreak before? And why are we behaving this way over a virus that appears to be nowhere near as deadly as we thought?

      Data coming from the CDC suggests that the mortality rate of COVID-19 is actually much less than previously expected. Although “fact checkers” have now reported that the previously released death rate of 0.26% is “false news” (of course!) it’s important to note that even that number was not exactly accurate anyway just based on the fact that the case (or crude) mortality rate only takes into account confirmed coronavirus cases, excluding people with mild or no symptoms that do not require medical attention. If you include all those “infected” but not affected the mortality rate would actually be much closer to the seasonal flu! [3]

      Meanwhile, the infection fatality rate accounts for the estimated number of mild and asymptomatic cases. It tends to be lower than the crude fatality ratio because it shows that more people have contracted the virus without dying. [4]

      We continue to be deluged with the fear mongering proposition that perfectly healthy individuals have suddenly become a threat to others simply because they are breathing. This notion of danger from asymptomatic carriers is nothing more than an inaccurate fallacy. A Chinese study found that asymptomatic carriers in general may not be sources of contagion. Specifically, it concluded the following regarding infectivity of asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers: “In summary, all the 455 contacts were excluded from SARS-CoV-2 infection and we conclude that the infectivity of some asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 carriers might be weak.” [5]

      The most important information I want to share with you as I ask you to please reconsider your mask policy is the fact that it is widely known to virologists and medical professionals that a cloth face mask does not prevent the transmission of airborne viral particles, nor will it keep the wearer from becoming ill. [6] Results from a random controlled trial published in the British Medical Journal, caution against the use of cloth masks finding that: “Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97%” and “moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks, and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.”[7]  According to the WHO, the main modes of transmission of the COVID-19 virus are direct contact with an infected individual and droplets produced when coughing or sneezing.[8] The CDC and a leading German virologist, both concur there is no evidence of the virus spreading through aerosols (i.e. tiny particles floating in the air). [9]

      The following is from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration: 

      Paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of the Respiratory Protection Standard considers any atmosphere with an oxygen level below 19.5 percent to be oxygen-deficient and immediately dangerous to life or health. To ensure that employees have a reliable source of air with an oxygen content of at least 19.5 percent, paragraphs (d)(2)(i)(A) and (d)(2)(i)(B) of the Respiratory Protection Standard require employers working under oxygen-deficient conditions to provide their employees with a self-contained breathing apparatus or a combination full-facepiece pressure-demand supplied-air respirator with auxiliary self-contained air supply. In the preamble to the final Respiratory Protection Standard, OSHA discussed extensively its rationale for requiring that employees breathe air consisting of at least 19.5 percent oxygen. The following excerpt, taken from the preamble, explains the basis for this requirement:

      Human beings must breathe oxygen . . . to survive, and begin to suffer adverse health effects when the oxygen level of their breathing air drops below [19.5 percent oxygen]. Below 19.5 percent oxygen . . . , air is considered oxygen-deficient. At concentrations of 16 to 19.5 percent, workers engaged in any form of exertion can rapidly become symptomatic as their tissues fail to obtain the oxygen necessary to function properly (Rom, W., Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2nd ed.; Little, Brown; Boston, 1992). Increased breathing rates, accelerated heartbeat, and impaired thinking or coordination occur more quickly in an oxygen-deficient environment. Even a momentary loss of coordination may be devastating to a worker if it occurs while the worker is performing a potentially dangerous activity, such as climbing a ladder. Concentrations of 12 to 16 percent oxygen cause tachypnea (increased breathing rates), tachycardia (accelerated heartbeat), and impaired attention, thinking, and coordination (e.g., Ex. 25-4), even in people who are resting.[10]

      I urge you to reconsider mandating that your employees and customers adhere to the CDC guidelines concerning the use of facemasks. Just a few minutes of research will prove that restricting oxygen intake and subjecting your employees to prolonged exposure to carbon dioxide is in fact very detrimental to their health. Be advised that many concerned citizens are becoming quite aware of this danger and you are likely putting yourself in a place where legal action may be taken by those who are injured by your policy.

      It’s time to let go of irrational fear and take a common sense approach to creating a workplace that is not only safe but welcoming to those who value their right to protect their own health in the way that they feel is best for them. 



      1. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/cloth-face-cover.html#studies
      2. https://governor.hawaii.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2006097A-ATG_Ninth-Supplementary-Proclamation-COVID-19-distribution-signed.pdf
      3. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html
      4. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/27/cdc-suggests-coronavirus-fatality-rate-higher-than-flus-but-at-least-8x-lower-than-initial-estimates/
      5. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7219423/ 
      6. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2762694 
      7. https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577 
      8. https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/modes-of-transmission-of-virus-causing-covid-19-implications-for-ipc-precaution-recommendations 
      9. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/02/no-proof-coronavirus-can-spread-shopping-says-leading-german/
      10. https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_id=25743&p_table=INTERPRETATIONS
      • This topic was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by Levana Lomma.
Viewing 0 reply threads

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.