Author: Worsley Times

Zak Muggleton-Gellas, Year 2

According to recent governmental guidelines, and compliant with the University of Leeds guidelines, LFTs play an integral role in COVID-19 spread prevention. But, contrastingly, as suggested on social media, LFTs can have carcinogenic effects. From a personal standpoint, this ideology was presented as an innocent message from a family member, and this article was born from the research that was carried out to obtain an informed and unbiased response. Anti-vaccinators and COVID-deniers are topical communities in the current climate and therefore are used as ammunition against the governmental guidelines to protect against covid. Statements such as these, to members not included within the scientific community, can be scare-mongering and potentially lead to unnecessary exposure to the virus. One could additionally theorise that it can cause the scientific community to become neglectful, as individuals who support the government become resistant to research any opposing claims, and the NHS are under scrutiny. There is a duty to research these claims, specifically after the thalidomide crisis (Kim, 2011). 

Ethylene oxide has been used for over 60 years, in the hospital environment, as a device to sterilise medical equipment (Mendes et al, 2008). It is a colourless, odourless gas that is used in various cosmetic products. This includes being noted on the back of LFTs for sterilisation of the equipment used (BCPP, 2021). A Facebook user posted a video stating that, due to this sterilisation, the cotton buds used in the test kits cause encephalitis, endocrine dysfunction (neuroendocrine tumours), leukaemia, breast cancer and lymphoma (Reuters Fact Check, 2021). While there is significant evidence that ethylene oxide is a carcinogen (Vincent et al, 2019), and there has been increased breast cancer incidence in female factory workers producing the chemical as well as hospitals (BCPP, 2021), the presence of the gas in the sterilisation process does not pose a harmful risk of cancer to LFT users. Specifically, there is no found evidence that it can lead to brain – it can be interpreted the comment did not refer to other parts of the head – cancer. 

As a basis, sterilised devices undergo preconditioning and humidification, gas introduction, exposure, evacuation, and air washes (Reuters Fact Check, 2021), with several chemicals to wash that include hydrogen peroxide, chloride dioxide, ethylene oxide (FDA, 2021). The objective of the evacuation and air washing section of the process is to remove the harmful chemicals, such as ethylene oxide, from the equipment, before use. In addition, the amount of ethylene oxide decreases to below measurable levels after 3 weeks and is monitored to be below dangerous levels by the International Standard Organisation (ISO). As well as this, the low risk of exposure can be categorised by the limited contact (about 20 seconds per test) and the contact only being the throat and nasal passage (GovUK, 2021). Users can therefore be reassured that it would take 40 year of testing, two times every week (or 4,160 tests with no deviation from that schedule) to be placed into a high-risk category for ethylene oxide exposure. 

Overall, as supported by a freedom of information request answered by the government (GovUK, 2021), the claim stating that they will cause cancer is factually incorrect, and that this harmful claim is not to be taken into the NHS’ consideration when advising others on how to test for covid. They will continue to be an accessible method of testing, as we work globally to find guidelines that decrease the cases in our population. 

References

Kim JH, Scialli AR. Thalidomide: the tragedy of birth defects and the effective treatment of disease. 2011. [Online]. [Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21507989/].

Cunha Mendes GC, da Silva Brandão TR, Miranda Silva CL. Ethylene oxide potential toxicity. 2008. [Online]. [Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18452382/].

BCPPL. Ethylene Oxide. 2021. [Online]. [Available at: https://www.bcpp.org/resource/ethylene-oxide/].

Reuters Fact Check. Fact Check-Lateral flow tests do not cause cancer; ethylene oxide sterilisation is a widely-used process that is regulated by international safety standards. 2021. [Online]. [Available at: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ethylene-oxide-idUSL1N2LO1YM]

Vincent MJ, Kozal JS, Thompson WJ, Maier A, Dotson GS, Best EA, Mundt KA. Ethylene Oxide: Cancer Evidence Integration and Dose-Response Implications. Dose Response. 2019. [Online]. [Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31853235/ ].

FDA. 2021. Ethylene Oxide Sterilisation for Medical Devices. [Online]. [Available at: https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/general-hospital-devices-and-supplies/ethylene-oxide-sterilization-medical-devices].

GOVUK. Freedom of Information request about the safety of ethylene oxide (EO) and its use to sterilize the swabs used in lateral flow tests (FOI-21-294). 2021. [Online]. [Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-responses-from-the-mhra-week-commencing-19-april/freedom-of-information-request-about-the-safety-of-ethylene-oxide-eo-and-its-use-to-sterilize-the-swabs-used-in-lateral-flow-tests-foi-21-294]

Katie Webb, Year 2

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill was introduced to parliament on 9^th March 2021 (UK Parliament, 2022). Following the police involvement at the Sarah Everard Vigil days later, it entered the wider public’s consciousness, helped by the #killthebill social media campaign. The illiberal attempts to curtail protest have been widely reported and faced criticism from The Times (Hamilton. S, 2021) to the Guardian (2021). But why aren’t we talking about its impact on Gypsy, Traveller and Roma communities more? After all, it’s only going to criminalise their way of life.

The government is trying to clamp down on so-called “unauthorised encampments,” where people are occupying land against the wishes of the landowner. The bill does this by making trespassing a criminal offence instead of a civil one. Police will have the power to arrest trespassing adults and confiscate their vehicles, which may well be their home. If someone is found guilty, sentences can be up to three months imprisonment and a £2500 fine (Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill, 2021).

Gypsies, Travellers and Roma refer to many diverse groups of people, each with distinct cultural heritage, traditions and way of life. Despite rich cultural history, centuries of oppression have contributed to their underrepresentation in history books. At present, there are an estimated 100,000 to 300,000 people who identify as Gypsy, Traveller or Roma (The Traveller Movement, no date). Many groups are considered ethnic minorities (Women and Equalities Committee, 2019) and many traditionally endorsed a nomadic way of life, although the proportion living in static caravan sites – as well as houses – has grown considerably (ONS, 2014). Now, a nomadic way of life is completely under threat.

The bitter irony of this bill is that it will criminalise unauthorised encampments despite a chronic shortage of spaces on authorised traveller sites. The charity Friends, Family and Travellers revealed in January 2021 that there were 1696 households on waiting lists for pitches, yet only 101 pitches available (Friends, Families & Travellers, 2021). Additionally, research from 2020 showed that only 8 out of 68 local authorities in the South East of England had identified enough land to accommodate the Gypsies, Travellers and Roma in their local area (Nuttal et al., 2020). In short, many people accused of trespassing do so simply because they have nowhere else to go. 

This lack of traveller sites is recognised as a key issue by the police. In consultations between the police and the Home Office, 93.7% of police forces identified better site provision as the solution to unauthorised encampments, and only 21.7% of respondents supported criminalising them (Gilmore et al., 2020). Yet instead of substantially increasing funding for new sites, or bringing back a statutory obligation to provide sites (as there was in the now-repealed Caravan Sites Act of 1968), the government has decided to press ahead with criminalising unauthorised encampments.

The wording of the bill is truly frightening. The government is broadly trying to create it an offense to reside on someone else’s land, with a vehicle, not leave when requested and cause harm in the form of offensive behaviour, disruption or damage. However, the wording of the bill encompasses so much more. Someone doesn’t have to have actually resided on the land to be included in the bill, but just be “intending to reside,” and nor do they need to cause actual harm but merely generate a concern that “significant damage or significant disruption . . . is likely to be caused.” Someone doesn’t have to have actually done anything, but simply be deemed to be intending to, in order to be committing a criminal offense. This criminalisation of intent should scare all of us. Yes, giving police powers to act proactively can be considered a good thing in certain limited circumstances. Yet is it a good idea when these powers will likely be mainly used against a group of people who face so much conscious and unconscious prejudice? The definition of offensive behaviour, amongst other things, includes “insulting” behaviour and signs, which will inevitably rely upon the police and landowners subjective experience of this. Is it wise to have a law – which will likely be used against a historically persecuted group – have such subjective terms left open to the interpretation of the police, who like most people will suffer implicit biases?

If a police officer “reasonably suspects” an offense has occurred (remember that someone might not have actually done anything, but be deemed to be intending to) they can seize any “relevant property”. This includes vehicles, wherever they are located. This will, in all likelihood, be Gypsies, Travellers and Roma homes. The disproportionality of this proposal is staggering. To take away someone’s home, if they are accused of something that was only recently a civil crime. To take away someone’s home without providing a viable legal alternative. To take away someone’s home for something that has a shorter maximum custodial sentence than shoplifting. If the government proposed taking away someone’s home for almost any other minor crimes, be it petty theft, possession of drugs, drunk and disorderly conduct, and quite possibly for far more serious crimes, there would be uproar over the sheer unfairness of it. What I’m really saying is, if this was happening to almost any other group of people, we wouldn’t stand for it. So why are we?

At the time of writing, a recent defeat of Priti Patel’s particularly draconian amendments regarding protest of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill in the Lords has delayed the bill, but it is still expected that the bulk of it (including the parts about unauthorised encampments) will eventually pass into law. Yes, there is some hope for future legal challenges, likely under Article 8 and Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, or at least judicial guidance over the subjective terms of the bill. But this is by no means a guarantee, and it almost doesn’t bear thinking about how many people will be made homeless, traditions abandoned and families heartbroken before this happens. Yet we must bear to think about it, as it is soon to be the lived experience of many. 

As this appallingly oppressive and tragically incommensurate bill turns from a nightmare to reality, it is worth remembering the French philosopher Albert Camus’ words: “democracy is not the law of the majority but the protection of the minority.”

References

Caravan Sites Act 1968 c. 52. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1968/52/pdfs/ukpga_19680052_en.pdf (Accessed 25/01/2022/)

Friends, Families & Travellers (2021). ‘New research shows huge unmet need for pitches on Traveller sites in England’. Available at https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/planning/new-research-shows-huge-unmet-need-for-pitches-on-traveller-sites-in-england/ (Accessed: 25/01/2022).

Gilmore, V., Kirkby, A. and Dolling, B. (2020). ‘Police renew calls for more Gypsy and Traveller sites in opposition to the criminalisation of unauthorised encampments’. Available at: https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Full-Report-Police-repeat-calls-for-more-sites-not-powers-FINAL.pdf (Accessed 25/01/2022).

Hamilton, S. (2021). ‘Police crime bill “is harmful to democracy,”’ The Times, 05/07/21. Available at  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/policing-bill-is-harmful-to-democracy-ft9dg6r3x (Accessed: 06/01/2022).

Nuttal, E., Gilmore, V. and Buck, T., (2020). ‘No place to stop: Research on the five year supply of deliverable Gypsy and Traveller sites in the South East of England’. Available at https://www.gypsy-traveller.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Research-on-the-five-year-supply-of-deliverable-Gypsy-and-Traveller-sites-in-the-South-East-of-England.pdf (Accessed 25/01/2022).

Office for National Statistics. (2014). ‘’2011 Census analysis: What does the 2011 Census tell us about the characteristics of Gypsy or Irish travellers in England and Wales?’. Available at  https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/whatdoesthe2011censustellusaboutthecharacteristicsofgypsyoririshtravellersinenglandandwales/2014-01-21 (Accessed: 25/01/2022).

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill (2021). Parliament: House of Commons. Bill no. 268 (2019-2021). Available at https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/44739/documents/1259 (Accessed: 06/01/2021).

The Guardian. (2021). ‘The Guardian view on the police bill: a fight for the right to protest,’ The Guardian, 19/12/2021. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/dec/19/the-guardian-view-on-the-police-bill-a-fight-for-the-right-to-protest (Accessed: 06/01/2022).The Traveller Movement. No date. ‘Gypsy Roma and Traveller History and Culture’. Available at: https://travellermovement.org.uk/gypsy-roma-and-traveller-history-and-culture/ (Accessed: 25/01/2022).

Holly Dobbing, Year 2

For decades, women have made up over half of the world’s medical students. However surgery still remains extremely male dominated (Singh et al., 2020). Women are less likely than men to enter and complete surgical training, and even fewer are seen in roles of leadership. This may be due to a plethora of reasons and may differ from hospital to hospital and doctor to doctor, but many studies have concluded that this issue lies not with encouraging women into the specialty, but in making the specialty a more equal, understanding place in which women would want to work.  

Medical careers as a whole were designed with only men in mind. In 900AD, the first medical school in Europe was founded to train solely men in the art of healing (Nelson, 2015). These training programmes didn’t consider or account for women because women couldn’t even attend university, so maternity leave and having time off to raise children were distant, far-fetched ideas. Because of this, surgical careers have little flexibility in the way of taking time out or working less than full-time. This also means that women are somewhat forced into lower paid career paths because male doctors are likely to have been practicing longer. 

Women are also deterred from surgical careers because they are significantly more likely to experience misogynistic attitudes and discrimination from patients and colleagues throughout their training and career (Singh et al., 2020). In fact, a study by Harvard medical students found that women are far more likely than men to be verbally discouraged towards surgical careers exclusively because of their gender (Giantini Larsen et al., 2019). This ingrained misogyny also breeds further problems. For example, women are judged more harshly than men when applying for surgical positions (Singh et al., 2020), and in an independent review of the gender pay gap in medicine, the DHSC (Department of Health and Social Care) found that currently in the UK, women doctors earn 18.9% less an hour than men (BMA, 2020). IT IS 2022! Not only are these statistics completely shocking and are likely to discourage women from advancing in a career that they would otherwise excel in, but they are absolutely, unquestionably, unequivocally, totally and utterly unacceptable. Women SHOULD NOT be limited in their career progression or earnings simply because they are women.

But why is it we allow medicine to continue like this? Is it the old, traditional white male doctors who turn a blind eye? Is it the fact that the majority of people who run the NHS are not even medically qualified? Is it just that we are so used to misogyny that we hardly even pay attention? I don’t know. But what I do know is that it NEEDS to change. It is absolutely imperative that hospitals take a tougher stance on misogynistic behaviour to address and tackle this issue head on. Sexism and gender discrimination should be taken incredibly seriously with a zero-tolerance policy to empower women to speak up if this happens. Plus, surgical training and careers should be more flexible with a better work-life balance and shorter, more accommodating hours to give women the freedom they need to live the life they desire alongside the specialty they are committed to. Women are a vital and necessary part of our NHS and should be treated with understanding, inclusivity and equality throughout their careers. 

Now I know these changes may seem completely unreasonable and frankly unrealistic given the state of the NHS, and you may be thinking ‘and what exactly is ranting about it on The Worsley Times going to do?’, but this is where change can start. We are tomorrow’s doctors and dentists and nurses, and soon we will have the platform to be able to call out and stand up for what is right. 

References

BMA 2020. BMA commentary on Mend the Gap: The Independent Review into Gender Pay Gaps in Medicine in England.

GIANTINI LARSEN, A. M., PORIES, S., PARANGI, S. & ROBERTSON, F. C. 2019. Barriers to Pursing a Career in Surgery: An Institutional Survey of Harvard Medical School Students. Annals of Surgery, Publish Ahead of Print.

NELSON, H. 2015. The History of Medicine and Public Health [Online]. Available: https://mrhnelson.wordpress.com/2015/03/02/medical-training-medieval-style/ [Accessed 11 April 2021].

SINGH, C., LOSETH, C. & SHOQIRAT, N. 2020. Women in surgery: a systematic review of 25 years. BMJ Leader, leader-2019-000199.