It’s not just preparing for the next pandemic whether affecting humans, crops or livestock. In an interview with Channel 4 after Storm Eunice, Baroness Brown stated: “What we’ve dealt with as a crisis needs to be routine.” Indeed, yes.
It appears no-one is taking risk seriously. Instead of using the usual probability/impact matrix, we need use a preparedness/impact.
Firstly, we are still in a Pandemic. Covid has not gone away. It’s still very much here. As the recent summer wave, sho2s us. Also it is still rife in 84 countries. So this proves that uk and world governments, are not taking it seriously. Although latest data shows Covid on the decline in the uk. We are in a gap period, heading towards winter. When Covid traditionally increases, along with other respiratory viruses. There are no mitigation measures, in place. Either in the NHS or wider community. No ventilation, no social distancing, no mask wearing. Also GP Surgeries, are the same. Therefore, increasing transmission, of the virus. Increasing the risk of severe illness. Long Covid is a risk to all! Boosters, are waning. With less uptake in the community now. Also less availability by government, to the boosters. So this means lessons are not being learnt by governments. More people are becoming disabled. Or dying as a result of the virus. Although at lower levels. These are still deaths.
Thank you so much for this, it all makes perfect sense. As Independent Sage scientists repeated time and time again a healthy nation goes hand in hand with economic success, they are not to separate entities. As you say it is important to prepare for emergencies but part of the preparation starts with whole systems planning. It does take time but strategic and operational planning work hand in hand and the relationship between all elements are so closely tied.
All very well, but I have no hope that this Inquiry can assess what went wrong and why, so cannot possibly be in a position to determine comprehensively what should be done with preparedness, except at a general level. To say you can assess the bureaucracy associated with a viral pandemic without understanding the technical mismanagement issues, would be a mistake. How government advisors interface with the bureaucracy and how they lead, is key.
Viral pandemics are highly technical and any inquiry would need to be conducted by people with technical competence. There is no chance that Hugo Keith KC and his team and Lady Hallett would know which closets had skeletons and where the bodies were buried. In fact, there were some 48 experts that gave evidence and appeared in person, yet not one was a practising virologist, let alone one with particular expertise or specialist experience in coronaviruses. This prepared for influenza and not for something else should have been thoroughly ripped apart.
Numerous times the examining KC said, when questioning a witness, they would not get into the technical minutiae now, that would be covered later, but never was. The barristers have no idea whether what they are told is technically correct or not. You might say the experts would be exposed when some, if not all, of their written testimony was in the public domain – but having gone through a lot of it, especially when I heard them say questionable things in person, there are quite a few things they should have been challenged on. At best the KCs might observe inconsistencies across the evidence but little more. Certainly, they struggled to make technical connections of importance across witnesses, and the relevance of what was known when.
Of course, the barristers are more at home questioning politicians or legislators, after all they are bedfellows. And even then, it was a sight to see Hugo Keth KC struggle with the bauld Matt Hancock. Amidst a lot of Mr Keith’s heavy breathing and frustrated sighing, Matt Hancock schooled him on the merits of closed versus open questions. Cringeworthy.
While outside Dorland House, the COVID Bereaved Families for Justice are being manipulated by PR agents and told that the process of the Inquiry is getting the answers and the results they desire.
Britain has a reputation for bureaucracy and officiousness and I have no doubt will eventually be able to mobilise for change, but given the dilapidated condition of so much of its state institutions, services, the burden of a BREXIT handicap and the long list of challenges this new government will face, we can only wait and hope any recommendations don't just collect dust on a shelf, or digital dust somewhere. The new government did not have many bright ideas before the election and so far have not impressed, although we should be grateful there are adults in the room.
In a climate where health settings have abandoned infection prevention and control, pandemic waves continue while infectious disease clinicians are perplexed on how this will end. How we “plan” to finish this one and execute the necessary will be a significant learning in itself.
module 1 is also focussed on preparedness and not what happened once Covid came. Also, the oral sessions are only a small part of the evidence - the Inquiry did receive many very long witness submissions in writing, which included many technical experts.
With global warning, over-population and other issues, I think waves of pandemics may occur. Thus, articles like yours are needed and welcome to help prepare, those who believe in science, for the future. Thank you.
Yes, indeed, 'resilience' in my view is going to be needed more and more in the future. This is a whole lot more than pandemics, inevitable as they are likely to be. A whole pro-social better educated senior political and administrative class would help.
Thanks for going through all the lessons needing learning. One lesson that I learned is how much we rely on lower paid people doing essential work putting them in harms way, with no option but to take any infection back to vulnerable members cared for in their households. I remember only too well the desparation of a local man I talked with, 'socially distanced' outside our house
It’s not just preparing for the next pandemic whether affecting humans, crops or livestock. In an interview with Channel 4 after Storm Eunice, Baroness Brown stated: “What we’ve dealt with as a crisis needs to be routine.” Indeed, yes.
It appears no-one is taking risk seriously. Instead of using the usual probability/impact matrix, we need use a preparedness/impact.
Add in the sheer number of risks facing humanity.
We submitted this Note for the National Preparedness Commission last November, received with deafening silence: https://www.birminghamfoodcouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Note_National-Preparedness-Commission_November-2023.pdf
Firstly, we are still in a Pandemic. Covid has not gone away. It’s still very much here. As the recent summer wave, sho2s us. Also it is still rife in 84 countries. So this proves that uk and world governments, are not taking it seriously. Although latest data shows Covid on the decline in the uk. We are in a gap period, heading towards winter. When Covid traditionally increases, along with other respiratory viruses. There are no mitigation measures, in place. Either in the NHS or wider community. No ventilation, no social distancing, no mask wearing. Also GP Surgeries, are the same. Therefore, increasing transmission, of the virus. Increasing the risk of severe illness. Long Covid is a risk to all! Boosters, are waning. With less uptake in the community now. Also less availability by government, to the boosters. So this means lessons are not being learnt by governments. More people are becoming disabled. Or dying as a result of the virus. Although at lower levels. These are still deaths.
Thank you so much for this, it all makes perfect sense. As Independent Sage scientists repeated time and time again a healthy nation goes hand in hand with economic success, they are not to separate entities. As you say it is important to prepare for emergencies but part of the preparation starts with whole systems planning. It does take time but strategic and operational planning work hand in hand and the relationship between all elements are so closely tied.
Excellent piece. This isn't unique to the UK. The US has to start dedicating funding and real and significant research to this topic.
All very well, but I have no hope that this Inquiry can assess what went wrong and why, so cannot possibly be in a position to determine comprehensively what should be done with preparedness, except at a general level. To say you can assess the bureaucracy associated with a viral pandemic without understanding the technical mismanagement issues, would be a mistake. How government advisors interface with the bureaucracy and how they lead, is key.
Viral pandemics are highly technical and any inquiry would need to be conducted by people with technical competence. There is no chance that Hugo Keith KC and his team and Lady Hallett would know which closets had skeletons and where the bodies were buried. In fact, there were some 48 experts that gave evidence and appeared in person, yet not one was a practising virologist, let alone one with particular expertise or specialist experience in coronaviruses. This prepared for influenza and not for something else should have been thoroughly ripped apart.
Numerous times the examining KC said, when questioning a witness, they would not get into the technical minutiae now, that would be covered later, but never was. The barristers have no idea whether what they are told is technically correct or not. You might say the experts would be exposed when some, if not all, of their written testimony was in the public domain – but having gone through a lot of it, especially when I heard them say questionable things in person, there are quite a few things they should have been challenged on. At best the KCs might observe inconsistencies across the evidence but little more. Certainly, they struggled to make technical connections of importance across witnesses, and the relevance of what was known when.
Of course, the barristers are more at home questioning politicians or legislators, after all they are bedfellows. And even then, it was a sight to see Hugo Keth KC struggle with the bauld Matt Hancock. Amidst a lot of Mr Keith’s heavy breathing and frustrated sighing, Matt Hancock schooled him on the merits of closed versus open questions. Cringeworthy.
While outside Dorland House, the COVID Bereaved Families for Justice are being manipulated by PR agents and told that the process of the Inquiry is getting the answers and the results they desire.
Britain has a reputation for bureaucracy and officiousness and I have no doubt will eventually be able to mobilise for change, but given the dilapidated condition of so much of its state institutions, services, the burden of a BREXIT handicap and the long list of challenges this new government will face, we can only wait and hope any recommendations don't just collect dust on a shelf, or digital dust somewhere. The new government did not have many bright ideas before the election and so far have not impressed, although we should be grateful there are adults in the room.
In a climate where health settings have abandoned infection prevention and control, pandemic waves continue while infectious disease clinicians are perplexed on how this will end. How we “plan” to finish this one and execute the necessary will be a significant learning in itself.
Many good points but we've only had the report on Module 1 so far. Hopefully the technical details will be addressed more fully in subsequent modules.
module 1 is also focussed on preparedness and not what happened once Covid came. Also, the oral sessions are only a small part of the evidence - the Inquiry did receive many very long witness submissions in writing, which included many technical experts.
With global warning, over-population and other issues, I think waves of pandemics may occur. Thus, articles like yours are needed and welcome to help prepare, those who believe in science, for the future. Thank you.
Yes, indeed, 'resilience' in my view is going to be needed more and more in the future. This is a whole lot more than pandemics, inevitable as they are likely to be. A whole pro-social better educated senior political and administrative class would help.
Thanks for going through all the lessons needing learning. One lesson that I learned is how much we rely on lower paid people doing essential work putting them in harms way, with no option but to take any infection back to vulnerable members cared for in their households. I remember only too well the desparation of a local man I talked with, 'socially distanced' outside our house