121944
  • Log in
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result
  • Articles
  • About
  • Archive
    • ARCHIVE
    • NEWS ROUND-UPS
  • Podcasts
  • Newsletter
  • Premium
  • Donate
  • Log In
The Daily Sceptic
No Result
View All Result

Masks are Not Protective, Says Health & Safety Executive

by Dr Niall McCrae
24 June 2022 10:10 AM

As a trade union rep for the Workers of England, I have spent the last two years defending our members against intrusive, ineffective and potentially injurious COVID-19 policies. Until three months ago, when the vaccine mandate in health and social care was revoked by the Government, almost all of my cases were workers who refused to take two or more injections to keep their jobs. Since then the battleground has shifted to mask-wearing rules (often involving the same employees).

Forcing staff to wear a mask for their entire working day is unprecedented in most healthcare settings. As it is now accepted by all but the shrillest of Covid zealots that morbidity of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is similar to influenza, many of the radical interventions from lockdown to face covering seem disproportionate, if not damaging. 

A month ago, national guidelines for the NHS dropped ubiquitous masking in clinical areas. However, most NHS trusts were unwilling to relax from pandemic mode. Absurdly, no exemptions are accepted for face covering. And so we have had a steady stream of cases, with several members being threatened with dismissal despite valid health concerns.

In disciplinary proceedings I have challenged employers with a set of six questions:

  1. Do you consider masks as a medical intervention?
  2. Do you promote informed consent?
  3. Do you honour exemptions?
  4. Please provide evidence (in summary) that masks are effective
  5. Could you give assurance that prolonged mask-wearing is not detrimental to physical or mental health?
  6. Could you explain why masks are required for COVID-19 but not influenza?

No employers have given satisfactory answers. The first question is fundamental: if the employer were to define masks as a medical intervention, consent would be necessary. Instead, they tend to place the requirement within policy for personal protective equipment (PPE).

Trust policy documents repeatedly label masks as “fluid repellent”. For an airborne respiratory virus, blocking the projectiles of sneezes and coughs has benefit. But this will certainly not stop infection or transmission, as found by numerous experimental and observational studies of masks. Yet these devices were imposed in every corner of the hospital estate, often tyrannically, affecting patients and visitors as well as staff. My friend Sian, taking her daughter to A&E after a nasty accident, was basically told ‘no mask, no entry’ (she eventually agreed to wear a visor).

As a fellow union rep discovered, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) does not regard the widely worn type of surgical mask as PPE. Here is a quote from the HSE guidelines for influenza:

What is the difference between a surgical mask and a FFP3 mask?

Surgical masks are plain masks that cover the nose and mouth and are held in place by straps around the head. In healthcare settings, they are normally worn during medical procedures to protect not only the patient but also the healthcare worker from the transfer of microorganisms, body fluids and particulate matter generated from any splash and splatter. Whilst they will provide a physical barrier to large projected droplets, they do not provide full respiratory protection against smaller suspended droplets and aerosols. That is, they are not regarded as personal protective equipment (PPE) under the European Directive 89/686/EEC (PPE Regulation 2002 SI 2002 No. 1144).

Therefore, there is no justification for NHS trusts demanding use of surgical masks, which do not protect against airborne respiratory viruses. But then, shouldn’t doctors, nurses, midwives and senior managers have known that already?

Dr. Niall McCrae is a rep for the Workers of England Union and a mental health ethicist.

Tags: Covid RestrictionsFace MasksHospitalsHSEMask MandatesNHS

Donate

We depend on your donations to keep this site going. Please give what you can.

Donate Today

Comment on this Article

You’ll need to set up an account to comment if you don’t already have one. We ask for a minimum donation of £5 if you'd like to make a comment or post in our Forums.

Sign Up
Previous Post

News Round-Up

Next Post

BBC Boycotts Mayor’s Briefings After Bristol Council Banned Reporter for Quizzing him over 9,000-Mile Flight for Climate Conference

Subscribe
Login
Notify of
new follow-up comments
    Please log in to comment

    To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.

    Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.

    27 Comments
    Oldest
    Newest Most Voted
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Savage
    Savage
    2 years ago

    Interestingly enough on this subject I have just had an eye consultation refused this morning at my local NHS clinic in St Albans because I declined the offer of wearing a mask in the facility. I had a very repetitive conversation with the medical care professional there who explained how good they were at keeping everyone ‘safe’.
    I failed to succumb to her less than compelling persuasion and left as neither of us was going to give way.
    I’ve emailed the NHS outfit that manages this service to seek confirmation on whether we have a de facto refusal of treatment and access to services if a face mask is not worn. I asked for a one word answer. I will await a reply.

    201
    -1
    stewart
    stewart
    2 years ago
    Reply to  Savage

    Based on my experience and speaking to doctors and nurses I know over the years, I am pretty certain that people who work in the NHS don’t like the patients. That is of course not true of every doctor and nurse nor of every patient, but for the most part, the staff find interaction with patients not very pleasant and something they can’t wait to get over and done with.

    This impression is somewhat validated by the experience of the last 2+ years. Every opportunity that has presented itself to push patients away has been taken, be it cancelling service, online consultations, barring visitors.

    It also explains partly why the NHS has legions of staff doing all sorts of jobs that in aggregate make up the service to patients. Think of a typical visit to the NHS. You’ll see a chain of people, none of who spend more than a few minutes with you at most before you get passed on to someone else. Everyone is very rushed and simply have to get on to something else (rarely another patient, but rather writing something down, looking something up, checking something).

    I see masks as part of that effort do push patients away. Masks create a barrier between people and for doctors and nurses, they serve to put distance between themselves and their patients. A doctor I know confessed as much to me, saying that she didn’t mind the masks and in some ways was grateful for them as it saved her having to put on an empathic expression when she was tired or low on energy – which is most of the time.

    If they could anaesthetise us at the door, wheel us in, carry out a diagnosis without our participation, treat us, attach a set of follow up instructions for us read, then wheel us back out and wake us up, that is exactly what they would do.

    And they would claim it was the best thing for our safety.

    130
    -1
    Marcus Aurelius knew
    Marcus Aurelius knew
    2 years ago
    Reply to  stewart

    Nurses used to train on the job, as such there was never any doubt in their minds about what the job was about.

    These days, they have to “study” for ages and are perhaps then a little dismayed when expected to do the actual work. They are also, in my experience, looking to be promoted to one of the endless “management” or “consultant” positions; they have been patronised by their “education”.

    88
    -1
    John
    John
    2 years ago
    Reply to  Marcus Aurelius knew

    My qualification required to register with the NMC was a three year DipHE of which 50% was in practice and 50% in university. In the good old days, when my father trained, it was two years for SEN and 3 years for SRN. Yes the training was ward based, but there were classroom sessions as well. The other difference was that student nurses were included in the numbers as they were employed by the hospital.
    Personally, I don’t think that there would have been a difference for me whichever training scheme was used, I was 50 when I qualified after a previous career as a systems/software engineer.
    However, and it’s probably truer now that it’s all degree only, it is a means to obtaining a degree.
    To fulfill the role of nurse practitioner I needed courses at level 7 post graduate level.

    16
    0
    BurlingtonBertie
    BurlingtonBertie
    2 years ago
    Reply to  Savage

    Your inalienable right to refuse to consent to a NPI as stated in Article 6 of the UNESCO Universal Declaration of Bioethics & Human Rights has been breached. It states that not giving consent to an intervention, which masking is, does & should not be detrimental to an individual’s right to receive medical care.
    Stating that one is exempt, as you lawfully are exempt just by deciding not to submit to wearing a muzzle, is a route which is unchallengeable & they have no right to question the reason for the exemption.
    I hope that you receive a reply.

    93
    -1
    JohnK
    JohnK
    2 years ago
    Reply to  BurlingtonBertie

    Correct. That is why it was possible, right from the start, to download all the graphics for creating “exemption” badges from a gov.uk website. Not well advertised, but it’s up to us to use it if required. Soon after the scam started, there were some cases (in the legal definition) in which damages claims were made against organisations that refused to provide services on those grounds. The Discrimination Act 2018, and the Equality Act 2010 were also useful. The ones I read about appeared to have settled outside court, but cash changed hands on account of that.

    Along the lines of selective publication, the bureaucrats kept quiet about the fact that there was never a requirement for a third party to grant exemption. Unilateral declaration, and printing out the bits and pieces published (quietly) by themselves, was what I did, almost two years ago.

    ...ion from face covering card to print.pdf
    38
    0
    JohnK
    JohnK
    2 years ago
    Reply to  JohnK

    P.S. This was the original source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-when-to-wear-one-and-how-to-make-your-own It says that it is “withdrawn”, but that’s no surprise. What I have attached above was a DHSC publication back in August 2020.

    18
    0
    Marcus Aurelius knew
    Marcus Aurelius knew
    2 years ago
    Reply to  Savage

    Well done for not giving way, Savage. Horrible times indeed. Yes, do please let us know the response.

    46
    0
    VAX FREE IanC
    VAX FREE IanC
    2 years ago
    Reply to  Savage

    WTF a downvote???

    6
    -2
    elsvan
    elsvan
    2 years ago

    Earlier this week I was refused a mammogram because I refused to wear a mask and I also refused to use hand sanitiser. When I pointed out that there was no mandate for hand sanitiser, I was met with stunned silence. My refusal to wear a mask was met with even more incomprehension.
    So basically the people there felt that the risk to them of Covid (all ladies under 40, healthy) was greater than the risk of me having undiagnosed breast cancer – despite having a family history of that.
    Thanks NHS.

    159
    -1
    stewart
    stewart
    2 years ago
    Reply to  elsvan

    I think they just wanted your compliance.

    They all carry out normal unmasked lives on trains, in pubs and supermarkets.

    It’s just that when you are in their little fiefdom, you do what they say. They don’t care about you, obviously. They care about themselves and their own authority.

    86
    0
    DevonBlueBoy
    DevonBlueBoy
    2 years ago
    Reply to  stewart

    Authority without responsibility; the happy hunting ground of incompetent bureaucrats to bully the people who pay their wages

    11
    0
    JohnK
    JohnK
    2 years ago

    What a surprise. Perhaps they have actually learnt about it all? I never used them anywhere during the last two years.

    There was a fair bit of useful information, from the British Standards Institution, and others. In particular, much of the junk on sale had tiny labels that most people would not read, that said that they were NOT masks to any standard, so as to avoid being prosecuted under trading standards. Much of it was a con, and an opportunity to sell junk.

    86
    0
    Marcus Aurelius knew
    Marcus Aurelius knew
    2 years ago
    Reply to  JohnK

    I have pointed out the very same label to many people wearing masks, they stare at me vacantly.

    Lights on, nobody home.

    64
    0
    RW
    RW
    2 years ago
    Reply to  JohnK

    I still remember the inscription on the set I bought when they were mandated. It said (in the kind of broken English one expects from the Chinese) Fashion mask. Not a medical mask. Use for dust protection, sun protection, fashion. Yet, there are still people clinging to them.

    47
    -2
    Judy Watson
    Judy Watson
    2 years ago
    Reply to  JohnK

    Here in Thailand we had the mask mandates lifted yesterday, HOORAY.

    I chucked the remainig box of masks in the cupboard and checked the price I paid for them

    50 ‘masks’ 40 baht = 95p sez it all really.

    17
    0
    Lockdown Sceptic
    Lockdown Sceptic
    2 years ago

    It’s really good to see Niall is still fighting.

    When you see people still wearing masks you ask yourself “do the no wonder how all these unmasked people are not dropping dead?”

    **
    Stand in the Park Sundays 10.30 -11.30am 
    make friends & keep sane 
    from the globalist covid & climate propaganda
    *
    Wokingham 
    Howard Palmer Gardens Sturges Rd RG40 2HD  
    *
    Telegram astandintheparkbracknell

    43
    -1
    RW
    RW
    2 years ago

    Deserves to be mentioned here again (and it may be useful in such disputes): The Ebola stations set up during the most-recent Ebola epidemic represented a serious attempt at preventing viruses from escaping into the environment and infecting health workers or other patients. Despite all these efforts, some people still got infected. That so-called Sars-CoV2 infection prevention measures never even came remotely close to that is a conclusive proof that they’re nothing but theater and that neither actors nor directors of this penny dreadful drama take it seriously.

    Last edited 2 years ago by RW
    42
    -1
    JohnK
    JohnK
    2 years ago
    Reply to  RW

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism “Something must be done” etc. Many so-called experts were attempting to create an impression of competence; with some of us, it’s backfired.

    15
    -1
    TheGreenAcres
    TheGreenAcres
    2 years ago

    Can nobody read, it says on the box that the masks are not intended to prevent infection??

    42
    -1
    crisisgarden
    crisisgarden
    2 years ago

    Right. Something’s happened. I’ve just been to Tesco and a significant number of shoppers were masked. All varieties out in numbers, from the anxious elderly to the virtue-signalling young. What’s happened? How have they been nudged?

    35
    -2
    RW
    RW
    2 years ago
    Reply to  crisisgarden

    Nothing particularly unusual. Just another ONS junk estimate about rising levels of infection in healthy people. The only noteworthy thing about that is that Omicron variants have now supplanted Sars-CoV2 variants in official messaging and that the UKHSA is trying to pull a WHO by labelling some of them as variants of concern.

    As I’ve already written in the past: Until the professional pandemic bullshitters have their microphones disconnected and other resources repurposed, we’re only out on bail and the nonsense can start over at any minute.

    35
    -1
    ellie-em
    ellie-em
    2 years ago
    Reply to  crisisgarden

    I have noticed recently that more and more adverts for NHS services are creeping in on tv and are showing people wearing masks.

    14
    0
    crisisgarden
    crisisgarden
    2 years ago
    Reply to  ellie-em

    Oh Lordy ! Will they ever leave us alone?

    20
    0
    rachel.c
    rachel.c
    2 years ago

    Well done Niall and those who have to put up with this nonsense. I’m retired but do my best to challenge maskers where possible. As ever, the NHS is a postcode lottery. I was refused access (without facecloth) to a gp surgery for stitches removal by a young nurse who claimed she was “vulnerable”. Not so far away the nurses at the Minor Injuries Unit were more accepting. We are living amongst the possessed – people who barely function because they see threats everywhere – but must keep chipping away and staying sane.

    17
    0
    Martin Frost
    Martin Frost
    2 years ago

    This kind of nonsense is still going on all over the world and much worse besides.. The basic problem is global leaders aided by the media can not admit that most of the rules and regulatons that were imposed on their societies have been utterly pointless. As a consequence Covid zealots (who were afforded unprecedented influence during the panicdemic) continue to persecute people by whatever means is available to them.They want lockdown or semi-lockdown to be made a permanent way of life. Why? Look at the Green movement. It is full of nutters too!

    15
    0
    carter20
    carter20
    2 years ago

    I believe the WHO do not regard masks as PPE either—this should further remove question one from the equation.

    1
    0

    NEWSLETTER

    View today’s newsletter

    To receive our latest news in the form of a daily email, enter your details here:

    DONATE

    PODCAST

    The End of American Empire? – With Doug Stokes

    by Richard Eldred
    2 May 2025
    6

    LISTED ARTICLES

    • Most Read
    • Most Commented
    • Editors Picks

    BREAKING: Merz Government Orders Pushback of All Illegal Migrants at German Borders, Effectively Abolishing Asylum

    7 May 2025
    by Eugyppius

    News Round-Up

    8 May 2025
    by Richard Eldred

    Sun-Dimming Quango has £800 Million of Taxpayer Money to Blow – and a CEO on £450k

    8 May 2025
    by Sallust

    Orsted Cancels Hornsea 4 Wind Farm – and Kills Miliband’s ‘Clean Power 2030’ Agenda Dead

    7 May 2025
    by David Turver

    EXCLUSIVE: Britain Forced to Spend £1.5 Billion to Mitigate Wind Turbine Corruptions to Vital Air Defence Radar

    8 May 2025
    by Chris Morrison

    What Does Renaud Camus Actually Believe? Part Two: Is He Really a Conspiracy Theorist?

    26

    BREAKING: Merz Government Orders Pushback of All Illegal Migrants at German Borders, Effectively Abolishing Asylum

    21

    News Round-Up

    18

    Orsted Cancels Hornsea 4 Wind Farm – and Kills Miliband’s ‘Clean Power 2030’ Agenda Dead

    41

    EXCLUSIVE: Britain Forced to Spend £1.5 Billion to Mitigate Wind Turbine Corruptions to Vital Air Defence Radar

    15

    Australia’s Liberal Party Only Has Itself to Blame for its Crushing Defeat by Labour

    8 May 2025
    by Dr James Allan

    EXCLUSIVE: Britain Forced to Spend £1.5 Billion to Mitigate Wind Turbine Corruptions to Vital Air Defence Radar

    8 May 2025
    by Chris Morrison

    What Does Renaud Camus Actually Believe? Part Two: Is He Really a Conspiracy Theorist?

    8 May 2025
    by Steven Tucker

    BREAKING: Merz Government Orders Pushback of All Illegal Migrants at German Borders, Effectively Abolishing Asylum

    7 May 2025
    by Eugyppius

    Definitive Guide to the WHO Pandemic Agreement

    7 May 2025
    by Dr David Bell and Dr Thi Thuy Van Dinh

    POSTS BY DATE

    June 2022
    M T W T F S S
     12345
    6789101112
    13141516171819
    20212223242526
    27282930  
    « May   Jul »

    SOCIAL LINKS

    Free Speech Union
    • Home
    • About us
    • Donate
    • Privacy Policy

    Facebook

    • X

    Instagram

    RSS

    Subscribe to our newsletter

    © Skeptics Ltd.

    Welcome Back!

    Login to your account below

    Forgotten Password? Register

    Create New Account!

    Please note: To be able to comment on our articles you'll need to be a registered donor

    Already have an account?
    Please click here to login Log In

    Retrieve your password

    Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

    Log In
    wpDiscuz
    No Result
    View All Result
    • Articles
    • About
    • Archive
      • ARCHIVE
      • NEWS ROUND-UPS
    • Podcasts
    • Newsletter
    • Premium
    • Donate
    • Log In

    © Skeptics Ltd.

    You are going to send email to

    Move Comment
    Perfecty
    Do you wish to receive notifications of new articles?
    Notifications preferences