The Inter-Agency Task Force for the Management of Emerging Infectious Diseases is considering requiring individuals to wear face shields — another expense for us — in public places. It was also reported that the President was not joking when he said we should use gasoline as disinfectant. How can we be so petty? Can this government, please, do better inspiring us with bigger things like new strategies, a comprehensive approach to beat the COVID-19 threat, and the promised roadmap to recovery?
On the mandatory wearing of face masks: I agree that wearing face masks is absolutely necessary to prevent transmission of the virus. It should be enforced without exception. But I must say that the rule is anti-poor, not unlike the anti-poor ECQ stay-home rule that pushed tricycle, jeepney, truck, and bus drivers and riders and other ordinary workers out of job, and kept the poor, the sidewalk vendors, and the jobless from moving around to find work and food to put on their table.
Why do I say the rule on wearing masks is anti-poor?
The cheapest face mask costs P25 apiece, retail. Buying one mask each day to have one person in a household in vulnerable communities go out for necessities amounts to P750 a month—money the breadwinner has to take from the already meager earnings he makes, if he makes any. Saving P750 for food and other necessities, instead of spending it on face masks, could force a household to send somebody out for necessities without a mask on, risking arrest. Now, this government just might require face shields, which cost P150 each!
Last July 21, I wrote Parañaque City Mayor Edwin L. Olivarez, to propose that the city government supply needy families in our community with masks before it orders the jailing of anybody not wearing masks in the streets. No reply. I now urge the national government to supply households in vulnerable communities all over the country with face masks—or face shields, should the IATF proceed with the plan.
Col. Leonardo O. Odoño (Ret.)
PMA ‘64, colloo64@yahoo.com