Over 2,000 medical and healthcare professionals signed an open letter to NHS Chief Executives of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland urging them to lift the requirement for staff, patients and visitors to routinely wear a face covering while on their premises. The letter, organised by Smile Free – a campaign group opposed to mask mandates – was sent on June 6th 2022. To date, responses have been received from Scotland and Wales, each attempting to justify, in very similar ways, their persistence with routine masking of professionals and service users.
Smile Free believed that the NHS bosses’ attempts to defend their pro-mask position contained several major flaws, and duly detailed these in further correspondence. The response to the Chief Executive of NHS Scotland is reproduced in full below. (A similar, slightly shorter version was sent to the Chief Executive of NHS Wales.)
Syed Kerbalai (Chief Nursing Officer, Healthcare Associated Infection & Anti-Microbial Resistance Policy Unit).
Dear Mr Kerbalai
Thank you for your letter dated July 14th 2022, responding to our expressed concerns about the persistence of mass masking in healthcare settings. We appreciate you taking the time to reply.
We welcome your recognition that staff members can use their “professional judgement” and remove masks to reduce a patient’s distress and enhance communication. And we also support your expressed concern for the wellbeing of staff who experience emotional or physical discomfort as a direct result of wearing a face covering. In addition, it is reassuring to note your endorsement of the principle that no patients should be refused treatment – nor visitors refused access to loved ones – should they choose not to wear one.
We would, however, wish to highlight some fundamental flaws in your attempts to justify the persistence of widespread masking in your healthcare settings.
First, there is an underlying assumption throughout your response that masks are effective in reducing viral transmission. The evidence for this premise is – at best – weak and contradictory. The science reviews you refer to are skewed towards the recommendations of state-funded public health bodies, with insufficient weight given to more independent researchers who have conducted randomised controlled trials in real-life settings (for example here and here) and comprehensive evidence reviews (here and here) that all conclude that masking healthy people achieves no appreciable reduction in viral transmission. Furthermore, two literature reviews of the impact of surgical masks in hospital settings (here and here) indicate that even these higher quality face coverings did not protect either patient or health professional from infection.
Second, the risk of those without symptoms passing the SARS-CoV-2 virus to other people does not justify masking healthy people. So called ‘asymptomatic transmission’ is rare, and pre-symptomatic transmission – although a little more common – is unlikely to make a significant contribution to the propagation of a pandemic.
Third, it is likely that your directives regarding how to promote the wearing of face coverings – expressed as “politely encouraged”, “strongly encouraged”, “highlight the benefits” and “recommended” – will habitually morph into the harassment of those people opting not to follow this advice. Consequently, there is a risk of alienating a vulnerable subset of the general public (the people you are commissioned to serve), thereby discouraging them from both seeking medical help and visiting hospitalised loved ones.
Fourth, and most importantly, you disregard the wide range of significant harms associated with masking healthy people, instead displaying a blinkered mono-focus on the risks associated with the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Apart from passing references to “glasses steaming up” and staff sometimes feeling “hot and uncomfortable”, there is no acknowledgement of the many recognised negative consequences – physical, social and psychological – of masking (see here for an overview of the evidence).
At Smile Free, we routinely hear anecdotal reports of how (often vulnerable) people suffer as a direct consequence of the expectation to wear a mask in healthcare setting. What defence would NHS Scotland offer when faced with complaints – and threats of litigation – from:
1. The family of an elderly lady who died shortly after fracturing her femur in a fall after being pressured to wear a mask in a hospital outpatient department?
2. A hard-of-hearing man who accidentally overdosed on prescribed medication, a mask having rendered his doctor’s instructions inaudible?
3. Relatives of an inpatient who died directly as a result of miscommunication between two masked health professionals?
4. The father of a young woman, a victim of historical sexual and physical abuse, who was re-traumatised by the obligation to wear a mask for an outpatient appointment resulting in her subsequently taking her own life?
5. A long-standing patient with respiratory difficulties who contracts pneumonia as a consequence of repeated masking when attending for appointments?
6. A lady whose historical problem of recurrent panic attacks is re-activated by the somatic sensations of a mask over her mouth, leading to a prolonged admission to psychiatric hospital?
7. A coroner’s report of the death of a young child from a non-Covid illness after the parents were too scared to attend hospital (partly as a result of the fear perpetuation associated with widespread masking)?In the above scenarios it is questionable whether professional leads, and those in senior management roles, could rely on a defence of, “We were following protocols”.
In light of the above, together with the concerns raised in our original letter, we respectfully request that you reconsider your decision to persist with recommending masks for all staff, patients and visitors and – instead – allow people a genuine choice as to whether or not to cover their faces in healthcare settings.
Yours sincerely
Dr. Gary Sidley (Retired NHS Consultant Clinical Psychologist) on behalf of Smile Free
It is encouraging that, over recent months, the dominant ‘masks-work’ and ‘masks-do-no-harm’ narratives are – seemingly – beginning to crack. The large majority of sports-events attendees, shoppers, pub-goers and diners are now mask free, the richness and complexity of their facial expressions routinely available to their fellow humans. With few exceptions, the requirements to wear a face covering on transports systems, including airlines, have been ditched. Some of our MP are, belatedly, waking up to the futility (and harms) of the mask craze, a cross-party group of MPs recently writing a letter to Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak urging them to “rule out future mask mandates”. And even in Scotland – a country characterised by strict enforcement of COVID-19 restrictions – care home staff and visitors are no longer being advised to wear face coverings all the time, the latest guidance importantly acknowledging the “rights and choices of those within the social care sector”, while also explicitly recognising that masks can have harmful effects “on health and mental wellbeing” and create “communication barriers”.
Regrettably, the main outliers to this gradual return to non-mask sanity are healthcare premises.
Although a significant number of NHS Trusts appear to have relaxed their mask requirements, many are persisting with the expectation that staff, patients and visitors should cover up. The current position is often confusing, with ‘guidance’, ‘policy’ and ‘legal requirements’ typically being in conflict. Healthcare professionals who contest the imposition of face coverings in the workplace are performing an important role in the ongoing mission to rid our society of mask mandates, yet they can often find themselves in a bewildering situation, unclear about their rights and options. (In such situations, the support and guidance offered by the Workers of England Union can be helpful, as illustrated by this webinar.)
As we move through the autumn and into the winter, the prevalence of respiratory viruses will significantly increase and it is inevitable that the pro-mask fanatics will, once again, be screaming for the imposition of mandates. In order to neutralise these irrational voices, it is vital that the embers of the ‘masks-are-an-effective-and-harmless-way-of-controlling-a-respiratory-virus’ myth are fully extinguished within our healthcare settings. If not, the ineffective and harmful practice of masking heathy people will re-ignite. The stakes are high.
Dr. Gary Sidley is a retired NHS Consultant Clinical Psychologist and co-founder of the Smile Free campaign.
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.
https://youtu.be/02cxttcA02w?si=kPMV_qtnscPmbMFZ
Donald Tusk in Poland arresting and locking up political opponents.
No surprise really.
I believe the EU fine Poland for daring to use coal. But I thought all countries in the EU were “Independent”?. ——At least so said the wicked witch Sturgeon
https://www.youtube.com/live/abhmHqj7WCk?si=rJCR9lh1q_-27BfS
Sir Kneel doesn’t know the sex of his children.
Midazolam Health Secretary The Covid Con
latest leaflet to print at home and deliver to neighbours or forward to politicians, media, friends online.
Bringing blankets to cold eco activists worried about warming is about as absurd and pathetic as it comes. All institutions today are infected with the Snowflake virus. They would want to bring Ian Huntley some extra bottles of bleach to make sure his house was clean and free of evidence. They would ask Harold Shipman for advice on their mother in law. They would make sure Hitler had enough corn beef and beans in his bunker.
Amusing to note that they were all wearing hi-tec fossil fuel based clothing and happy to accept fossil fuel based blankets too…
He was a vegetarian because he objected to animal slaughterhouses so beans only. I suppose Blondi, Negus and Stasi would have enjoyed the corned beef.
“France gives up on meritocracy”
Brilliant comment underneath this article:
‘Writing from France, I need to say this:
Firstly, Macron was never supposed to be elected president in 2017. He was having a go to build up his CV but, suddenly, a scandal engulfed the front leader, Francois Fillon, and forced him out. A vaccum opened up, and Macron walked in. Pure luck and coincidence.
He had huge momentum behind him and set up a new party, “En Marche” and just about every chimp with that label got elected – Attal being one of them.
Macron’s first choice of premiere was Edouard Philippe. A fairly competent and steady person who soon started attracting rumours of presidential standing. Macron reacted by sacking him and replacing him with the most awful gormless oaf imaginable, Jean Castex, who was premiere during covid. He is now in charge of the Paris metro, and he still wears a mask (whenever on TV, that is).
At the last elections, Macron lost his majority in parliament and appointed Elizabeth Borne, who has one quality in common with Castex: totally gormless.
Now he replaced her with this kid.
I remember Attal vividly from the covid nightmare. He was the media spokesman nervously lying through his teeth. He was so nervous and so dishonest you could see him visibly shaking. He has no guts, no brains and no spine.
What he does have in common with previous holders of the office (after Macron learned his lesson with Edouard Philippe), is that Attal is absolutely no threat to the boss.
Macron chooses people not because of their abilities, but because of the exact opposite: no one in government can outshine him. Given that it does not take much to do so, he is scraping the barrel ever harder.
Meritocracy vanished in France ages ago. Not just now.
Unfortunately, the mass/legacy media is totally pro-Macron, who pays McKinsey consultants to tell him what he should do. It is a muppet show here. (Sorry Kermit, Ms Piggy.)’
Let us never forget Micron’s complicity in bullying the spineless Bunter into lockdown.
‘We had prepared the closure of our border and told Prime Minister Johnson we would implement it that day if there was no evolution [of British measures],” a senior French official familiar with the conversation told POLITICO.
French paper Libération reported Saturday evening that Macron had “threatened” Johnson. The French official said that was “too strong a word” to describe the call.’
https://www.politico.eu/article/france-was-ready-to-shut-border-had-uk-not-toughened-coronavirus-measures/
Micron always reminds me of ‘Inspector Clouseau’. Where is Chief Inspector Dreyfus when you need him……..
The ‘news round up’ above is dominated by the Horizon scandal. How I wish that the outcry, attention from politicians and column inches dedicated to it over the last few days were also being directed to the (ongoing) wrongs of the covid era. One can only dream how quickly the population would wake up if all the press were trumpeting the government wrongs and lies about being stabbed and the tremendous harms (and excessive deaths) that have been caused.
Yes, yes, yes!
‘‘Trial by media’ saved the sub-postmasters. Ministers should know better than to attack the press”
Attack the press? The press are in their fecking pockets! Msm are the government mouthpieces, this is just a one off
Smokescreens part 8 was a good article. Made me think that it might be wise to add the affair of the last 4 years to the same bucket list as the Horizon scandal.
In
we find
And right there is the problem. It’s not their job. It’s our job or the NHS/GP businesses job to take it as seriously as we/they deem appropriate. Telling us how to (they think) avoid infection is a medic’s job, not government. Deciding how to sub-allocate the enormous piles of taxpayers money which has been given to the NHS – that’s their job.
I know a number of retired medics from drinking with them in our student days. I can assure you they were no more intelligent than other people and just as unconcerned about drinking to excess.
I work with a just retired GP one or two days a week. He’s a nice enough chap but in all other respects thoroughly mediocre. Very much BBC informed. Medically too much a fan of pharma solutions. He never ventures to discuss the Scamdemic, well at least not in my presence but I get the impression he is / was fully on board.
Not nice but dim but certainly nice but mediocre.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/gas-lamps-westminster-led-replicas-jacob-rees-mogg-tory-tories-b1131514.html
Cultural vandalism is the comment. Exactly. This is the Khant’s true, undeclared Manifesto. London must be destroyed.