Please read this carefully, fully and to the end this statement before assaulting me physically, psychologically and intellectually with a request to muzzle myself. Thank you.

The below applies to healthy citizens generally and also specifically to myself. If people feel vulnerable, they are welcome to entertain their own protection, self-isolation, quarantine etc to avoid the need to gag the rest of the populace. Personally I am presently healthy and have had no illness, cold, flu etc in the last 3 years.

This proposed measure is totally unwarranted and not medically based in any shape or form and will cause more harm than any it is supposedly advertised to avoid. There is presently, despite what you might hear on the mainstream establishment propaganda outlets such as BBC, Sky news, ITV and others, NO epidemic or pandemic and most especially in this locality as evidenced by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) data indicating NO excess deaths over normal seasonal ACROSS THE WHOLE OF EUROPE.

If the government can avoid providing necessary protection to CARE HOMES before and during the peak of the epidemic despite clear SAGE advice that this was necessary, it is hardly logical or appropriate to insist on gagging the general population.

It may have come to your notice since you have been doing it since birth and also possibly now, that proper human respiration is essential to the health of humans. It operates by a number of complex mechanisms, all with good reason.

In general, air is drawn in via nose and mouth in circumstances where more air is required such as during exertion temporarily or consistently. This air is taken into the lungs on an in-breath and then excluded on an out breath. The exhaled breath contains air that should be returned to the ambient environment. This air is generally excluded via the nostrils (except in certain circumstances as outlined earlier).

If some form of face covering is present covering simultaneously mouth and nose, this will result in re-circulation of a large proportion of the breathed air. Re-circulation of the excluded air is not normal and will lead to depleted oxygen content and increases carbon-dioxide content as well as increases other things normally exhaled. Repeated episodes of re-circulation are therefore UNWISE and UNHEALTHY for the human.

Owing to possible contamination of the face covering (for a large number of reasons including because of unknown properties of the materials and the collection of airborne particles), this will also result in further contamination of breathed air with no ability of the user to know what they may be breathing consistently. Such face covering could for instance capture PERMANENTLY or until professionally cleaned, unknown toxic substances that would NOT normally be present or if they are, only fleetingly as the subject transitions through an area of contamination. This could therefore logically amplify breathed air contamination adding to health risks.

Furthermore, it will be appreciated that unless the subject is PREVENTED FROM BREATHING at all, the re-circulated and amplified respiration exclusions will of course enter the surrounding space occupied by the subject in no less quantity than without the covering. Given a non-surgical face covering scenario, such air will predominantly if not most often come directly through gaps between the subjects flesh and the chosen face covering. Such exclusions (being partially constricted) will be at a higher velocity than before and will thus travel further and in simultaneous multiple transverse directions (i.e. left, right, up and down) thus resulting in MORE mixing in the natural air than without such a covering. This is basic and common-sense physics. The more effective the covering in terms of filtering, the more the air will escape in this fashion.

For air that passes OUT of a face covering in all directions, this will now be contaminated by now FOUR different things as below, resulting in greater risk to subject and others.

1) Any pre-existing contamination in the said material which is likely to be unknown to the user without lab analysis;

2) Any biological material COLLECTED from the users own body during ongoing respiration or other exclusions (some of which might normally be collected by the user using a disposable tissue or handkerchief);

3) Any contaminations collected during the subjects travels since last cleaning of the covering;

4) The users own direct breath since any such face coverings if not specifically designed for the purpose – as they are for surgical use for instance – will not stop the passage of airborne particles. (Picture this – all airborne particles SMALLER than the face covering mesh size will simply flow through with the said air). Such breath, as mentioned will be of a lower quality due to re-circulation effects.

This is far more contamination than if the breath was natural.

The other effect of re-circulation will be to amplify potentially toxic air resulting in degradation of the subject’s own health. This could include the onset of respiratory conditions.

Thus, far from being a positive measure, this will create an overall WORSE situation. Given that the NHS is now overwhelmed (10,000,000 patients to be seen backlog), my risk assessment is that I need to preserve my health and not add to this burden (which will inevitably disadvantage others with potentially worse conditions to be treated).

Safety and Security of myself and others: This measure will not allow quick reactions in the case of emergencies. It will not allow me to assess the risk from others. It will not allow me to assess if OTHERS are at risk – e.g. including in distress or about to pass out, let alone allow them free communication. If there is an assault or a robbery, I will not be able to identify any such person in a subsequent identification process.

This measure is a violation of free speech and freedom of expression since communication is 96% body language.

This measure is clearly politically driven with no exit strategy – this will go on for at least 6 months and the only exit strategy will be a mandated nationwide vaccine which I am sure you will realise will be VERY bad news as a) a fully safe one cannot be guaranteed for years and b) the likelihood will be a BAD vaccine sooner with ulterior purposes.

This measure is clearly counter-productive (it will reduce shopping) and media driven and has not been debated in Parliament and is further contrary to the Common Law of the land. It is clear that the government has applied these measures WITHOUT proper consideration of all factors including those advised in WHO leaflet WHO/2019-nCov/IPC_Masks/2020.4.

Extreme distress. Ever since the announcement in parliament, I have been incredibly distressed by this proposal and its implications medically, physiologically, economically and in terms of the long run including on children. You probably appreciate that stress is a paramount feature in the onset of illness. Notwithstanding the aforementioned, this is therefore one measure that will be of negative, not positive health consequence and it is entirely possible that it could result in pursuance of damages subsequently.

If you cannot accept the above, please say so politely giving your considered reasons why you think I am wrong and ask me to leave but note that if you do I may never visit your establishment again. See also the Equalities Act 2010 requiring consideration of individual circumstances.