Day 3 content which expands on Conclusion and personal thoughts

1. UK response to
COVID-19
A point of view (22 April 2020)

2. Contents
UK plans01
UK response02
Conclusions03
Numbers04
Political and moral dilemmas05

3. Conclusions
Nobody expected a virus so highly deadly to the old.
Timelines & Personal Thoughts

4. UK – January 2020
(Low Threat)
Dec 31: WHO was informed of pneumonia cases (unknown
cause) in China.
Jan 7: The Chinese identified the new virus.
Jan 13: WHO reported China report “no evidence of
significant human to human transmission”
“UK scientists agreed the risk to the UK population was “very
low.” Reuters
Jan 20: WHO announced the virus outbreak to the world.
Jan 30: WHO said “There is no need for travel and trade
restrictions”
First case in the UK. “The [UK] government raised the threat
level to “moderate”. Reuters

5. Recap: Risk identification and planning?
A pandemic has been the
number 1 risk in the UK’s
National Risk Register
since 2008.
So, the UK’s NHS and
scientists have been
modelling and planning
for a flu-like pandemic for
more than decade.
But it turns out COVID-19
is unlike flu, we are
having to react to the
data as it arrives.
Did the scientists
assume from WHO report
on SARS that a
coronavirus could be
suppressed?
Did the scientists
underestimate the impact
of a virus more
transmissable and deadly
than flu?
Nobody expected a virus
so highly deadly to the
old.

6. Recap:
Risk
mitigation?
There was a stock pile of PPE and ventilators enough for
while, but…
In March, Jenny Harries (Deputy Chief Medical Officer) well-
nigh admitted that they underestimated supply chain
logistics issues.
Not only within the NHS to c1,000 hospitals but also to
c16,000 care homes.
More than 8 billion PPE items delivered so far.
Nobody expected a virus so highly deadly to the old

7. Recap: risk containment?
Some containment actions have been speedy and successful
But it appears planned containment actions did not include
mass testing or lock down.
Presuming the virus cannot be stopped, the plan was to ensure
everybody who needs hospital care will get it.
The strategy has always been to protect the NHS first and
foremost.
As late as March 9th, when the risk was still rated as moderate,
SAGE recommended not locking down.
It seems planners underestimated the need to find and use
resources outside the NHS.
Nobody expected a virus so highly deadly to the old.

8. Conclusions A more
personal
viewUK’s national health service may not be the best in the world,
but it has some of the best virologists and epidemiologists in
the world, and it does do central planning.
For sure, UK gov and scientists could have done better.
But I don’t blame anybody in particular.
Sticking too closely to the long-prepared strategy may be
seen as a system failing.
And centralised “big up front design” tends to inhibit agility
when events happen.
I doubt any UK government would have over-ruled the plan or
scientific advice they have been given since the start of the
outbreak.
Reuters suggest the need for a wider pool of experts, and
wider discussion of their plans.

9. THANK YOU
Keep watching and reading for the next chapter..