Should wearing masks be made mandatory in public indoor places?
Markham Mayor Frank Scarpitti recently introduced a motion at York Region Council that would see the wearing of masks made mandatory in all public indoor places. This would include all shopping centres and retail locations, schools, daycare centres, libraries, community centres, and more.
You can read more about the Mayor’s motion here: York Region council considering law to make face masks mandatory
In addition, much has been written on the subject of mandatory face masks, both for and against the measure. Here are links to some recent articles:
CTV News: As public spaces begin to mandate face masks, studies show they prevent infections
OCLA: Opposing Mandatory Face Masks in Ontario Municipalities
The Case Against Mandatory Face Masks For COVID-19
Since the motion was announced by Mayor Scarpitti, I have received numerous messages from residents, mostly expressing concern. One email in particular presented a compelling argument against mandatory face masks and I’ve copied it (with permission) below:
Dear Markham City Council Members:
I understand municipalities are currently under pressure from Public Health Ontario to adopt mandatory masking policies to control COVID-19.
I am an Operating Room Nurse with 25 years of experience who is VERY concerned about the misuse of masks I see in the community and the infection risk posed by them. I tire of academics without real-world experience, lacking in practicality, that offer simple fixes like “reminders” to teach mask skills.; skills that take significant training and experience to master.
Not only does the misuse of masks increase viral transmission but they isolate mentally and physically impaired populations such as the hearing impaired. Also, many populations cannot wear a mask due to physical and mental issues.
To better help you understand grades of evidence used by Public Health Ontario, I have provided you a picture below of what is called the hierarchy of evidence. Note the highest forms of evidence are well-conducted meta-analysis or systematic reviews and that the highest grades of studies are called randomized control trials (RCT).
Considering this diagram, please truly read their report including complete findings. Note that high grades of evidence ( RCTs and systematic review) fall short on demonstrating the merit of masks to control viral spread. Indeed. the majority found masks could not show benefit. Low grades of evidence such as ecological reports and retrospective cohort observational studies presented are prone to bias and should be recognized as such.
The Public Health reports one “study” that found cloth masks increase infection risk by 13%. This study is in fact the only RCT conducted on cloth masks. This worrisome finding should carry considerable weight. Rather it is mentioned only in passing.
Public health Ontario neglected to include ample, compelling top grades of research. This includes a May 2020 meta-analysis published in the CDC journal Emerging Infectious Diseases. This review examined studies from 1946-2018 and found surgical face masks don’t significantly reduce viral transmission and in fact, improper use increases the risk of infection spread. Several trials on masks in community settings, including a 2015systematic review found participants who wore masks had just as many infections as those who did not. A May 2020 review, also highlighted the transmission risk associated with mask use, could not prove that masks do or do not prevent viral transmission. Scientific advice to the UK government also found inconclusive evidence in their review to support any benefit from community mask use.
Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center of Infectious Disease and Research Policy, has spoken out about the inadequate evidence to support the public use of face masks. In relation to the CDC’s recommendation of cloth masks he stated,
“Never before in my 45-year career have I seen such a far-reaching public recommendation issued by any governmental agency without a single source of data or information to support it.“
Despite this. Ontario Public Health has now sent out a polished guide to encourage municipalities to enforce mask use that barely touches upon the fact that there are significant risks and evidence gaps therein
I have included further evidence in a paper I wrote that I ask you to please read before making any decisions. For it offers the perspective of a front line worker who is highly experienced with masking who understands science and the limitations of masking in real-world settings.
For an easy read, look at this article on the four consequences of wearing face masks
Furthermore, consider the argument presented by The Ontario Civil Liberties Associationwho requests the WHO retract their mask recommendation because they are based on inadequate evidence.
Also, the New York Times ran a recent article on the retraction of a dishonest paper promoting universal mask use that confirms the previous warnings of Dr. Michael Osterholm on low grades of supporting evidence.
I leave you with the words of leading epidemiologists found in April 2020, British Medical Journal who note serious potential side-effects of wearing masks who conclude:
“it is necessary to quantify the complex interactions that may well be operating between positive and negative effects of wearing surgical masks at the population level. It is not time to act without evidence.”
Thank you for your very valuable time and consideration on this very serious matter
Cindy Gough RN, BScN, MScAH, CGNC
Toronto Ontario
PS. As you are aware, a policy must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat. That said, could you also please review this Charter Analysis report by the Justice Centre of Canada. For it presents questions that demand immediate answers as to why ANY restrictions, let alone masking, remain upon the citizens of Ontario. Such restrictions pose significant risks to the citizens of Ontario due to continued restricted access to surgery, no visitor policies and the risk of pushing people into poverty (a health scourge of the top order)
This decision should not be taken lightly, and I am seeking more input from residents. Please take a few moments to complete the poll below. I’d like to make sure your voice is heard and your concerns are represented.
Restoration of Swan Lake and Swan Lake Park
Do You Support Restoration of Swan Lake and Swan Lake Park?
A local group of residents, the Friends of Swan Lake Park, are lobbying Markham Council to support the restoration of Swan Lake and Swan Lake Park. The group wants Council to address poor water quality issues in the Lake, the invasive plant species in Swan Lake Park and to commit to a long term restoration plan for all of the environmental elements in Swan Lake and Swan Lake Park. There is more information on the issues and the group’s recommendations on their website https://friendsofswanlakepark.ca/
Swan Lake Park, 25 Swan Park Road in the Greensborough area of Markham, is located north of 16th Avenue, midway between Markham Road and 9th Line. The Park is home to over 90 species of birds and mammals. The group states that Swan Lake is dying, that fish and plants cannot survive in the murky water, that invasive plant species are overtaking the Park and that the Lake contains bacteria that can be harmful to animals and humans.
The City of Markham currently takes limited measures to attempt to maintain water quality in Swan Lake. These activities include; water quality monitoring, geese control, and signage maintenance. The annual cost for these activities is $45,000. In addition, in 2013 Markham conducted a chemical Phoslock treatment to address very poor water quality at that time. The one-time Phoslock treatment costs approximately $250,000.
Markham Council is being asked to commit to a long term plan for the restoration of the water quality in Swan Lake. Preliminary estimates are that a sustainable plan for restoring and maintaining Swan Lake are in the order of $1.5 – $2.0 million over 20 years, or about $75,000 – $100,000 per year. The cost of restoring the land based elements has not been determined yet.
What are your views? Please complete our poll below.
Should Markham replace street lanes with temporary bicycle lanes?
Dear residents, neighbours and friends of Ward 5,
Markham City Council has been asked by staff to consider a temporary measure that would see a selection of 4 lane roadways reduced to 2 lanes to accommodate dedicated cycling lanes. This issue will be discussed at the upcoming Development Services Committee meeting on Tuesday, June 8th. The full staff report can be reviewed at this link: Traffic Operational Changes Related to COVID-19
Markham Roads Being Considered
Markham staff has prepared a list of 21 potential sections of Markham roads that could be considered for this program, totalling 40.6km of roadway. Staff is recommending that two of these locations be implemented. The two streets are 1.8km of Bullock Rd between Hwy 7 and Laidlaw, and 2.2 km of Enterprise Blvd between Warden and Main St Unionville. The estimated cost for these two closures, over the 5 month period from June to October is $105,000. This would convert to approximately $26,250 per km of road.
Design for Temporary Bike Lanes
As mentioned, the recommended closures are temporary, and staff is recommending orange traffic pylons and temporary signage be installed along the routes.
Have your say
In light of the financial pressures the City is experiencing, which I recently wrote about, I feel it’s important to hear from residents on this issue. It’s your money, after all. Please take a moment to complete the Poll below and let me know your thoughts.
Andrew
P.S. At Markham’s next Electronic Development Services Committee meeting staff will be presenting their recommendations. The meeting begins at 9:30am on Monday, June 8th. There are also opportunities for you to speak. Instructions on how to do so are on the weblink.
Financial stresses hit residents, businesses, and the City of Markham
Dear residents, neighbours and friends of Ward 5,
There have been numerous tragic consequences of the pandemic, namely many of our most vulnerable, our beloved seniors and special needs residents have been hardest hit. Many have lost their lives. We will mourn with the families who have suffered these loses. Thankfully Markhaven has announced there are no cases of COVID in their facility over the Victoria Day long weekend. We must continue to be vigilant to ensure it stays that way.
For others who have recovered after weeks of illness, we are thankful for your steady return to health and wish you continued strength and wellness. In addition to our human suffering, we are faced with huge economic impacts to the country, province and our city. Personal financial stresses have hit many small business, restaurants, and salons to name a few. Many our favorite places to shop have been hit hard.
The City of Markham has not been spared from financial stress during this difficult time. In late March Markham Council introduced a number of measures to provide some financial relief for residents and small businesses. You can read more about these measures here. To ensure the safety and health of our residents and city staff, Markham also closed community centres and libraries. Many residents have asked why Markham is not able to offer property tax reductions or refunds, and our staff has prepared a PDF that helps answer this question. You can read it here.
The closing of our facilities, services, and recreation programming, along with the measures noted above, is estimated to cost the city approximately $4 million per month. This shortfall is very concerning to me. Provincial legislation currently prohibits municipalities from carrying a fiscal deficit – unlike the federal and provincial governments, our budgets must balance.
Our current situation is temporary, and we will soon return to normal, but Markham Council will have to address how will we make this loss up. The options we will be considering include; raising property taxes, reducing service levels, using some of our reserve funds, postponing or cancelling some capital projects. Ultimately it will likely be a combination of these measures.
I would like your input
As your elected representative, and Vice Chair of Markham’s budget committee, I am your voice. I have prepared a quick survey (below) to gather input from residents. Perhaps you have an opinion on how we should proceed and I would be very grateful to hear from you.
Together we will get through this.
Andrew
P.S. At Markham’s next Electronic General Committee meeting staff will be reporting on the economic situation we face together as a community. The agenda link will provide some information on the reports being presented. The meeting begins at 9:30am on Tuesday, May 19th. There are also opportunities for you to speak. Instructions on how to do so are on the weblink.
Swan Lake Park is home to over 90 species of birds and animals
News Review Media – February 25, 2020
The Friends of Swan Lake Park, a group of Markham residents committed to saving Swan Lake and Swan Lake Park, announced the official launch of its new website www.friendsofswanlakepark.ca and its first public meeting on March 9 to discuss the issues in the Park.
Swan Lake Park is situated at 25 Swan Park Road in Markham, which is north of 16th Avenue, midway between Markham Road and 9th Line.
The Park, situated at 25 Swan Park Road, is home to over 90 species of birds and mammals. “Swan Lake is dying, most fish have died, and plants cannot survive in the murky water. The lake contains bacteria that can be harmful to animals and humans, and seven invasive plant species are overtaking the Park,” suggests the group.
Fred Peters, a spokesperson for Friends of Swan Lake Park, says the group is working with Markham and other government agencies to develop a sustainable plan that addresses all essential elements within Swan Lake Park.
A number of factors continue to contribute to the poor water quality in Swan Lake. In addition to the fact the lake has no natural circulation – it was created from an old quarry – the lake also has a very high level of phosphorous, caused mostly by waste produced by the high population of geese on the lake.
Controlling the Canada Goose population in Markham has been a challenge across the City, and is not unique to Markham. Some municipalities have implemented a program of culling geese as a means of controlling the goose population. While the practice of culling is effective relative to other measures, it is also controversial and often met with strong opposition from some conservation and animal rights groups.
Should Markham be raising foreign national flags at the Civic Centre?
Markham officials under fire over Chinese flag raising
Hoisting of the flag sparks protest, call for end to practice and demand for public apology
Oct 31, 2019 by Heidi Riedner, Markham Economist & Sun
The hoisting of the flag of the People’s Republic of China in Markham has raised some serious questions.
The city, its mayor and some of its councillors are under fire from some area residents who say a recent flag raising celebrating the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China under Chinese Communist Party leadership was simply wrong on a number of fronts.
That has sparked a call for an end to the practice of foreign flag raisings at the Civic Centre, a public apology from Mayor Frank Scarpitti and an accounting of public dollars in support of a third-party event after Markham security forces and York Regional Police had to be called in to deal with the ensuing protest.
“We need to stop this practice and it needs to stop now,” Annette Cacorovski said, adding no foreign flags should be raised at any time, but “particularly at this volatile and hostile time.”
Cacorovski is referring to the current state of relations between Canada and China, which have soured since the December arrest of Chinese Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver on an extradition request by the United States.
China then arrested Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, and continues to detain them to this day, on vague charges related to national security.
The Chinese government also toughened the sentence of a Canadian held on drug charges — changing a 15-year prison sentence to a death sentence — and blocked Canadian canola exports to China.
Recent tensions in Hong Kong have sparked protests on Canadian soil, including in Markham.
Peggy Leung — who is of Hong Kong descent and who organized protests at Queen’s Park and Toronto’s city hall against what she considers gross human rights violations — said the Markham event raises questions about inclusivity, diversity and a society reflective of the democratic values Canadians hold dear.
“This was not a celebration of Chinese culture; this was support for the Chinese flag and the state it represents,” she said. “The city may have been doing it since 2014 and there may have never been an issue before, but there’s never been hostages before, nor terrible tensions to this extent before.”
She questions why the Markham event went ahead when scheduled flag raisings planned for the same weekend in Richmond Hill and Vaughan were cancelled, despite pleas from residents to the contrary and advance warning protests were being planned.
Residents also feel they were duped by the city, after the event went ahead as scheduled despite emails stating it had been cancelled and flyers that the city said erroneously stated financial support via Celebrate Markham.
All three flag raisings were being conducted by the Federation of Chinese Canadians in Markham (FCCM) — the same group that also organizes and runs the “Taste of Asia” event each year in Markham.While Toronto Mayor John Tory became one of the first Canadian mayors outside of Vancouver to weigh in on the conversation about China when he boycotted the ceremonial raising of the Chinese flag in his city, Markham Mayor Frank Scarpitti, as well as councillors Jack Heath and Amanda Colucci, attended the FCCM event in Markham.
“It’s not only highly inappropriate with two Canadians still being held, but also could be considered tacit endorsement of China and its policies,” said Martin Leung. “That’s the major reason we are against it and we think it was the wrong message for our politicians to send.”
Markham Council and staff have received numerous concerns about the City’s flag raising policy, which can be reviewed here. In response to these concerns Council has requested staff to bring forward the flag raising policy for discussion and review at a future Council meeting.