Two Hospitals That Brought Back Mask Mandates Backtrack After Complaints

Written by Dr Gary Sidley on July 31, 2024. Posted in Current News

On July 9th, the Daily Sceptic published my article describing how three healthcare providers had reinstated a requirement for staff, patients and visitors to wear masks in all clinical areas (PSI published about it here – Ed)

I also urged the readers who recognised the perniciousness of this restriction (a.k.a. the rational among us) to show their displeasure by lodging a formal complaint to the offending organisations.

Today I can announce some good news: two of the errant establishments have now reversed their mask impositions.

The first health provider to backtrack was Manx Care (which runs health and social care services in the Isle of Man). After reinstating the need for face coverings on its premises on June 27th, this nonsensical, ideologically-driven measure was lifted on July 16th. A spokesman said:

Whilst masks are no longer universally required in Manx Care’s patient-facing settings, colleagues and visitors are reminded that they should do whatever makes them feel safe.

Its reverse ferret on masks is to be welcomed. As for the “whatever makes them feel safe” comment, I guess this is a reasonable suggestion; in a purportedly free country, people should be able to wear what they want, be it a clove of garlic around their necks, a lucky charm bracelet on their wrists or a strip of porous plastic across their airways.

The second organisation to do a volte-face was Worcestershire NHS Trust. On July 18th a spokesperson announced:

Following a significant reduction in the number of Covid positive patients in our hospitals, as well as a reduction in their length of stay, the requirement for masks to be worn in clinical areas has now been lifted.

While the Trust is trying to rationalise its rapid backtracking on the basis of less people registering positive on tests that are prone to error and bordering on meaningless (for example, they fail to reliably detect those that are infectious or imminently symptomatic), it deserves credit for promptly ditching its requirement for face coverings.

So two out of three healthcare providers quickly seeing sense is encouraging news. The outlier which has yet to retract its mask imposition is University Hospitals of North Midlands.

However, there are indications that even in this bastion of pro-mask lunacy there is widespread non-compliance with the mask requirement. For instance, here are testimonies from two supporters of Smile Free (a campaign group opposed to mask mandates) that suggest that sanity is prevailing:

I’ve been to the University Hospital of North Midlands (Stoke on Trent) today prepared for battle about wearing a mask but I’m very pleased to report that the majority of people were not wearing a mask, not even all the staff.

May I take this opportunity to thank you for all your hard work regarding this crazy means of control!

Another Smile Free member wrote:

I had a great response from the hospital in Stoke. In my second e-mail to them, I asked if I would still be given medical treatment if I refused to wear a face mask.

In reply they said that nobody would be denied care or medical treatment for not wearing one. This more or less seems to be an admission that they cannot enforce this.

On a more negative note, the initial responses from the pro-mask healthcare providers to the multiple complaints were a familiar mix of evasion and dubious justifications. The Complaints Team of University Hospitals of North Midlands stated:

As you will appreciate, being a major teaching hospital we have a significant number of patients that are immunocompromised as well as some staff. Our priority is to protect these individuals as much as we can whilst in our care as well as comply with our duties under the Health & Safety at Work Act.

Similarly, Sarah Shingler (Complaints Officer for Worcestershire Acute Hospitals) wrote:

With the number of Covid-positive patients increasing, we have reintroduced the use of masks in all clinical areas for staff, patients and visitors until further notice.

This measure is necessary to protect colleagues and our patients from the risk of infection, and we are grateful for the support of those visiting and working in our hospitals.

Both these initial replies to formal complaints from members of the public implicitly assume that masks constitute an effective viral barrier and are not associated with a range of harms.

The empirical evidence suggests otherwise (see here and here).

As if this mono-focused obsession with one virus was not bad enough, Ms. Shingler aloofly dismisses complainants by stating:

We do not have anything further to add to this statement; please note that we will not respond to any further correspondence on this subject and will only register and investigate formal complaints which relate to direct experiences of the services at our hospital from patients or visitors who have attended…

Any further emails received at this address which do not meet this criteria [sic] will be filed without response.

The propensity for those in positions of influence to mindlessly mimic the decisions of others was witnessed all too often during Covid.

Therefore, the actions of one NHS Trust will potentially have ramifications for the rest, and it is legitimate for U.K. citizens – irrespective of geographical location – to make their concerns known to the pro-mask outliers.

Also, it would be wise for complaints officers to pause and reflect that it is the country’s taxpayers who provide their salaries before they high-handedly dismiss their concerns.

But overall, the fact the two out of the three healthcare providers who recently re-imposed mask requirements have now jettisoned this restriction is grounds for celebration.

And, given that these reverse ferrets occurred so quickly (in less than three weeks), it is reasonable to suggest that the multiple complaints submitted by Smile Free members and Daily Sceptic readers may have had an impact.

In this increasingly technocratic world, it is refreshing to believe that visible dissent from ordinary people can achieve change.

See more here dailysceptic.org

Header image: 12news.com

About the author: Dr. Gary Sidley is a retired NHS Consultant Clinical Psychologist and co-founder of the Smile Free campaign opposed to mask mandates.

Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method

PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX. 

Trackback from your site.