The SLO County Public Health Department is warning residents that various cards claiming to exempt the holder from California’s face covering ordinance are fraudulent and not endorsed by the U.S. Department of Justice.
In a “rumor alert” posted to the department’s Facebook page on June 22, county staff linked to a recent press release posted by the U.S. Department of Justice, which says that various printouts of face covering exemption cards, many of which include the U.S. Department of Justice seal, are floating around the internet.
“These postings were not issued by the department and are not endorsed by the department,” the press release reads. “The department urges the public not to rely on the information contained in these postings and to visit ada.gov for ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] information issued by the Department.”
Printouts like these have circulated through SLO County Facebook groups in recent weeks. Bob Gannage recently posted such a face mask exempt card to the Facebook group “Reopen San Luis Obispo County,” which includes the U.S. Department of Justice seal and the department’s ADA violation reporting number.
The card claims that wearing a face mask “posses” a mental or physical risk to the holder.
“Under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) [sic], I am not required to disclose my condition to you,” the card reads. “If found in violation of the ADA you could face steep penalties. Organizations and businesses can be fined up to $75,000 for your first violation and $150,000 for any subsequent violations.”
The card also claims that any business or organization that denies access to a card holder because of a face covering rule will be reported to the “Freedom to Breathe Agency“, a group that appears to have recently formed in opposition to COVID-19-related face covering requirements.
A number of other similar printouts and links to cards on the Freedom to Breathe Agency’s website have also been shared in local Facebook groups.
Although the state issued an executive order requiring Californians to wear face coverings in public while physical distancing is not practical, SLO County spokesperson Michelle Shoresman said the focus is more on promoting compliance and less on enforcement. Businesses are allowed to deny access to individuals who refuse to wear a mask, but Shoresman said that unless a situation becomes disruptive, that will likely be the extent of the consequences.
Still, a number of individuals are exempt from wearing face coverings—young children, those with certain physical and mental health issues, some disabilities—and Shoresman said there is no official verification process or documentation for those individuals.
“We encourage residents and business owners to recognize and respect that some people are not able to wear a face covering for legitimate medical and mental health reasons, including reasons that are not readily visible,” Shoresman wrote in a statement to New Times. “Individuals do not need to provide proof of those conditions.” ∆
This article appears in Food and Drink 2020.
The ADA also allows a business to refuse service or employment to a person with a disability if their presence would result in a “direct threat” to the health and safety of others, and the threat cannot be eliminated through a reasonable accommodation. Based on COVID-19 guidance from the CDC and other global health organizations, persons not wearing a face mask pose a direct threat to the safety of customers and employees, so they can be prohibited from entering the store. However, there are other reasonable ways customers who cannot wear masks could be accommodated — such as curbside pickup of their items. So stores are required to serve disabled customers who can’t wear masks, but they aren’t required to serve them in a way that threatens others.
If you truly can’t wear a mask long enough to buy only what you absolutely need, stay home and order delivery. If you can’t get delivery, get curbside pick up. You will be saving lives, perhaps even your own.
Charlie, your comment is well written, cites credible sources, has no logical flaws, makes a good point, and spreads useful info. But, half the people dislike it. I can’t tell if I should laugh or cry.
I think we need to talk about just how deadly this virus is.
As per the CDC estimates, the current death rate for symptomatic cases (mind you we’re not even including unsymptomatic cases since that would drastically lower the death rate) is:
ages 0-49 –> .05%
ages 50-64 –>.2%
ages 65+ –> 1.3%
(source: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html)
So Charlie, I ask you, do these numbers constitute a direct threat to workers? If these numbers freak you out, consider the mortality rate for the 2018-2019 flu season as per the cdc (source : https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html)
ages 0-4 –> 1.3%
ages 5-17 –> 0.4%
ages 18-49 –> 1.8%
ages 50-64 –> 9%
ages 65+ (get ready for this) –> 48.7%
We never wore face masks for the flu but all of a sudden we’re wearing them for something that is ostensibly less deadly?
where is the logic in that? I don’t expect an answer because I have come to realize this whole thing about face masks, lockdowns etc is more about people’s childish attachment to their views. People form an assumption and come hell or high water refuse to change it in the face of contrary evidence. I truly wish that, as a country, we could break free from the chains of cognitive dissonance but unfortunately I think it is built into us as a species. Ultimately, it will be how we destroy ourselves.
Gabriel, those are great stats.
I’m looking over the CDC website from the links you provided and you did a great job.
However, digging a little further, it seems just in the U.S.A.
2018-2019 (October 2018-Mid February 2019)
Influenza estimated deaths = 34,200
5 Months of Covid-19
2/1/2020-6/24/2020 = 107,997 Deaths involving Covid-19
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/COVID19/index.htm
@Gabriel
Those weren’t percentages in that second article you were reading, those were the total number of people per 100,000 cases. Meaning that it wasn’t a 48.7% mortality rate, it was a 0.0487% mortality rate. The same for the other flu percentages you linked, they are off by a factor of 1000. The articles you linked prove that Covid is significantly more dangerous. More dangerous to non-sensitive individuals even than the flu is to sensitive individuals.
@Tim
I stand corrected. I had read “mortality rate” and erroneously assumed that it was a percentage. Thank you for that clarification. Still, I think there is an argument to made for whether face masks make sense given what we know.
All discussion of death rates also ignores the significant cases of major organ damage that people can be left with after recovery. In some cases, people will suffer debilitating illness for the rest of their lives because of it.
This article from Scientific American further explains that the flu death statistics are not actual, diagnosed deaths, but (an ER doctor’s words) “wildly inflated statistical estimates” based on assumptions and including all pneumonia deaths plus much more. In all his years of practice this doctor recalls seeing one confirmed flu death. Covid-19 is far, far different. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/comparing-covid-19-deaths-to-flu-deaths-is-like-comparing-apples-to-oranges/
Just wear a mask..its not that hard. For fucks sake.
@Gabriel
Actually, masks WERE being required of people who showed symptoms, a fact with which I am quite familiar, as I had the flu that year.
Further reasons why that’s not actually comparable:
* The flu has both a vaccine that inhibits the spread and lessens the severity of any case you might catch, and a quite effective antiviral medication that treats it readily (which I also am personally familiar with).
* Even without taking into account flu vaccination, COVID is around twice as infectious as the flu.
* We did, in fact, mandate face masks for the flu roughly a century ago, as well as business closures and social distancing, before we developed flu vaccines and antivirals.
* Asymptomatic flu carriers are not a significant contributor to the spread of the flu, but covid has shown itself to be most communicable at least two days before the onset of symptoms and with asymptomatic carriers; therefore, quarantine of those with symptoms is ineffective in preventing the spread of covid.
Seriously, just wear the goddamn mask. If the CDC is wrong and they’re not a necessity, all it’s costing you is the need to wear a mask for a few hours. If they’re not wrong, and data suggests they are not wrong, it’s saving lives. Do you really consider you not being mildly inconvenienced more of a price to pay than human lives?
Nothing like a supposed “official” card that has a blatant misspelling. POSSES? hahahaha
I would hope that a genuine government-issued card would have the card-holder’s name on it. Otherwise, how would you know whether the card was issued to the person presenting it?
A doctor lays out the case for face masks, with links to studies and other sources:
https://www.facebook.com/james.larson.md/posts/10221384253946100
Charlie Waters you are wrong. Per the Ca Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code Sections 51 et al) business owners cannot refuse to serve or allow access to disabled people. Per Section 54 its a MINIMUM $4000 per violation statutory penalty PLUS the aggrieved can recover ATTORNEY’S FEES. Neither the ADA nor the Unruh Act were suspended by Newsome’s unconstitutional mandates. I give you the law. Please provide the legal info for the exception you allege.
Much of this nonsense was based on the B.S. LA Times article stating: “Newsom orders mandate: all Californians must wear masks in public” was proven to be a fallacy. (It was actually a “Guidance for the use of face coverings” from the CDOH) it was obvious when the likes of CNN picked up on it and The Patch ran with it to inflame panic keeping people “played”. No Governor has authority to mandate anything. No citizen is obligated to obey a “guidance” Show me the penal code attached to a “guidance”? Thought so. Stay played America…
Dennis James Balsamo, please imagine that I run a welding shop. In that welding shop, I can, and must, deny employment to a blind person. Hopefully the reasons why are obvious.