Sick of Burnout? Spread COVID

I’m sick to death of our country’s experts pretending as though individualizing masking is an appropriate substitute for mandates. Mask mandates work to reduce the spread of COVID. This is not up for dispute. A study conducted by Gavin Leech from the University of Bristol encompassing 6 continents and a survey of 20 million people found “the evidence that mass mask wearing reduces transmission implies that mandates (and other mask-promotion policies) may be effective against COVID-19 if and when they improve or increase the use of masks.” That aligns with a study of Canadian mask mandates by Alexander Karaianov et al. at Simon Fraser University that found they led to a 22 per cent weekly reduction in new COVID cases. In one study of Boston-area schools before and after mask mandates were lifted, they found that 12,000 extra cases emerged after the mandate was repealed. Montreal physician Gabriel Labos does a good job in a column to the Montreal Gazette explaining that masks work by evaluating several of these studies.

You may have seen the article by the New York Times’ resident bed bug Bret Stephens that utilized a particular study to argue that mask mandates were ineffectual. You’ll be shocked to know that he most likely didn’t read the fucking thing. In short, the study relies primarily on pre-COVID studies on mask usage, rejects drawing firm conclusions, and even finds in two cases that masks reduced spread, in one case by 35 per cent. Despite this, the “lead researcher” said masks make no difference “full stop.” He also believes COVID was in Europe for years before the pandemic kicked off, so take that for what it’s worth. A full break-down of this disinformation can be found in Kelsey Piper’s Vox article on the matter.

It’s frustrating that any article about mask mandates needs this crucial evidence surrounding the subject. What’s even more frustrating is that, while its inclusion is needed, it rarely ever is.

Enter the CBC and their article by Adam Miller “Why mask mandates are lifting in hospitals across Canada.”

The article begins by quoting B.C provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry, who once agreed that higher transmission in variants was good news. “I've been a big supporter of mask wearing when it's appropriate,” she said in the piece. Then she relied on the defense of saying you can wear a mask, they just won’t require it.

Next cited is Saskatchewan’s chief medical health officer Dr. Saqib Shahab. Who said they “really hope outbreaks won’t rise as a result of this policy.”

They will.

It’s curious how those against these policies are broadly gestured towards after these comments. Those saying this will individualize responsibilities and possibly violate the human rights of high-risk patients are “some health-care worker unions and advocates.” No one is given space to express that view at this point in the article. Instead, those concerns are shifted to half-way through the piece.

It would be tedious to go through every single paragraph of this article, so instead I will summarize the most appalling part that downplays the destruction of COVID in Canada.

Miller uses Dr. Alon Vaisman, assistant medical professor at University of Toronto and an infection control physician at Toronto’s University Health Network as a source in this piece. In a truly baffling statement, he claims that removing masks will help ease the burnout of health-care workers.

"I absolutely see the reasoning there, because it seems like a very low-risk manoeuvre. I think it's important to recognize that if you take health-care workers, for example, they've been working extremely hard the last three years.”

Vaisman does not see the reasoning because it’s not a low-risk manoeuvre. Be it established that mask mandates reduce the spread of COVID, it is actually the opposite. Especially considering that COVID cases and hospitalizations have been more consistently worse than 2020 or 2021.

The suggestion that removing mask mandates in hospitals would reduce health-care worker burnout is some twisted double-think. What would reduce health-care worker burnout is reducing the strain on the system that COVID has made the norm, i.e mask mandates in more places. Vaisman ignores this, instead saying if they could remove mandates, “it’s very helpful to reduce burnout.”

You know what also reduces burnout? Not getting fucking COVID.

Later in the piece, Vaisman told CBC that the morbidity and mortality of COVID has fallen over the last few years. In fact, it seems as though mortality has not fallen. 2022 was the deadliest year for COVID in Canada. It’s even noted in the piece that “COVID hospitalization levels still remain stubbornly high in Canada,” linking to the same info I did a few paragraphs above. So where is this lower risk? Why was this info cited paragraphs after Vaisman’s comments? Why was it tucked away in a section at the end about the possibility of returning mask mandates?

Even so, let’s dispel the myth that mild COVID is not harmful. It can cause brain damage. Risk of heart-disease skyrockets. COVID damages your immune system through harming T-cells. A study found that two infants suffered brain damage while infected with COVID in the womb. Mild cases can even cause long COVID. So no, I’m sorry, I don’t buy this reasoning.

You know what would help health-care workers? Ventilation. Mask mandates. Paid sick days. Job protections. A well-funded and operated health-care system. Repealing Bill 124 in Ontario. None of this is mentioned, and it seems like it never will be.

It’s rare that an article for The Catch will genuinely get me angry. Usually it’s a mix of confusion, indignation and a perverse comedic reaction. I’d like to think that the past three years, for better or worse, have numbed most of my other emotions. Instead, this piece twisting itself into a pretzel to justify removing another layer of protection for both health-care workers and patients has created new veins in my forehead.

Well done, I suppose. That’s a feat.

Regardless of my personal feelings, by shifting this move into the realm of helping “burnout” the entire discussion of the policies of social murder has been obliterated. I wish I could say this was unique, instead it’s just another point in the disastrous trend in our capitalist news coverage on the ongoing COVID pandemic.

That’s where the first draft of this edition ended. But then something new arose about the journalist behind this piece, Adam Miller. I learned about this piece specifically through the excellent Twitter thread by mutual @anxiouscatmom. But in that thread, you’ll notice that the link to Miller’s Twitter isn’t blue. That’s because Miller has been untagging himself from all criticism of his piece on that site.

He knows what he’s doing.