Skip to main content

Testing is key to beating COVID-19

The sad truth is that the UK was strategically poorly prepared for COVID-19. We seem to have learnt very few lessons from previous virus pandemics. South Korea learnt those lessons, and they also followed the WHO advice to "test, test, test."

We are not alone in acting too little too late.  Most European countries and also the USA appear equally ill-prepared.  Our strategies are led more by panic than clear thinking.   To fight a virus such as COVID-19 preparedness matters.  To save lives, we have to be ahead of the curve.  Most authorities are behind it.



We seem to be at that point in a game, when the enemy is coming so fast that we really can't keep up with it and so we shoot, shoot, and shoot, only to find we have run out of ammunition.  The lesson is that we need the resources if a strategy is to work. A plan without resources just isn't worth the paper it is written on.

Logistics matters.  We should not have frontline medical staff crying out for the kit they need to protect themselves.  Logistics must be a crucial part of preparedness.

Consistency matter.  While it is right, the response must be adaptable to a particular virus, the inconsistency of message and purpose is damaging.  

But let us not despair.  It is late, but we can still put in place a more joined-up strategy.  

We need to get ahead of the curve, rather than simply respond to it.  Social isolation will flatten the curve, but that will be to little avail if we cannot then test for its effectiveness.  We need to check for immunity.  

The government/authorities in the UK appear not to have understood that getting ahead of the curve meant the population had to be targetted.    That, after all, is the main hunting ground of the virus.  

All effort must be put into testing the public so we know who might have gained immunity.  With that, we can more easily maintain critical social infrastructure by tracking key workers. Keeping the frontline safe must be a priority.

The Archbishop of York,  I think made a good point on BBC Question Time, when he advised the government to "promise less, and deliver more."

We should no longer hear statements promising kit in "two to three days", or "by the weekend".  The government needs to be honest in ist appraisal.  Promising what cannot be delivered will destroy trust.

We need now to think through the next stage: how we bring people out of lockdown.  That can only be acheived with testing for immunity.  But that may be a more difficult task given the problems with the testing kits.  Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, tells us that so many of them are found to give false positives.  That would be a disaster if rolled out.

The Health Secretary also says that production in the UK isn't as easy as in, say, Germany, because, while we have top scientific expertise in diagnostics, our pharmaceutical industry is not geared to diagnostics.

Surely, with the expertise and with cooperation from the pharmaceutical industries, this could be changed.  It needs to because testing for immunity must be the key priority.








Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

The secret life of Giant Pandas

Giant pandas, Ailuropoda melanoleuca , have usually been regarded as solitary creatures, coming together only to mate; but recent studies have begun to reveal a secret social life for these enigmatic bears.  GPS tracking shows they cross each others path more often than previously thought, and spend time together.  What we don't know is what they are doing when together.  Photo by  Sid Balachandran  on  Unsplash For such large mammals, pandas have relatively small home ranges. Perhaps this is no surprise. Pandas feed almost exclusively on bamboo. The only real threat to pandas has come from humans. No wonder then that the panda is the symbol of the WWF.  Pandas communicate with one another through vocalization and scent marking. They spray urine, claw tree trunks and rub against objects to mark their paths, yet they do not appear to be territorial as individuals.  Pandas are 99% vegetarian, but, oddly, their digestive system is more typical of a carnivore. For the 1% of their diet

Work Capability Assessments cause suffering for the mentally ill

People suffering from mental health problems are often the most vulnerable when seeking help. Mental health can have a major impact on work, housing, relationships and finances. The Work Capability Assessments (WCA) thus present a particular challenge to those suffering mental illness.  The mentally ill also are often the least able to present their case. Staff involved in assessments lack sufficient expertise or training to understand mental health issues and how they affect capability. Because of  concerns that Work Capability Assessments will have a particularly detrimental effect on the mentally ill,  an  e-petition  on the government web site calls on the Department of Work and Pensions to exclude people with complex mental health problems such as paranoid schizophrenia and personality disorders. Problems with the WCA  have been highlighted in general by the fact that up to 78% of 'fit to work' decisions are  being overturned on appeal. It is all to the good that they