Category Archives: Public Health

Jeremy Corbyn wrote a long letter to Boris Johnson on 31st March.
As well as wishing him a speedy recovery, Jeremy made some strong points about aspects of the current crisis, and asked for immediate action on:

  • Full PPE now for Health and social Care workers
  • Test Test Test
  • Expand Social Care
  • Enforce Social-distancing and Protection
  • Bolster Support for Workers
  • Lead a Global Reponse

(the 4  pages of the letter are attached)

Posted by Jean Smith on behalf of SHA member Diane Jones.

Leave a comment

PROTECT ALL FRONTLINE HEALTHCARE WORKERS

31/03/2020 cllralanhall BlogPress Leave a comment

Personal Protective Equipment, known as PPE is in demand. There are reports that there is a shortage in hospitals and care facilities.

The Daily Mirror reports that hospitals listed as having shortages include Rotherham General Hospital, Bristol Children’s Hospital, Hillingdon Hospital in Uxbridge, Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital and at St Thomas, Lewisham and two other unnamed hospitals in London.

“The correct PPE must be made available at every site that might require it. This is vital in order to protect our patients but also to protect the lives of the life-savers.”
DAUK’s Dr Natalie Ashburner in @DailyMirror @nashburner#COVID19 #testNHSstaffhttps://t.co/Mhd2UISZeF

— The Doctors’ Association UK (@TheDA_UK) March 19, 2020

The view from the NHS frontline is explained here:

https://youtu.be/WphmagWsCUI

Dr Samantha Batt-Rawden, an intensive care doctor and president of the Doctors’ Association UK, told Nick Ferrari that more doctors will die unless they get proper equipment.

In a further twist, healthcare workers who raise their concerns are facing being “gagged”. Helen O’Connor, GMB says in The Guardian “It is scandalous that hospital staff speaking out publicly face being sacked by ruthless NHS bosses

who do not want failings in their leadership to be exposed. Suppression of information is not just a matter of democracy, it is now a major public health issue.”

The Local Government Association has sent a letter to the Secretary of State for Health, Matt Hancock MP. It says that there is an urgent need for Government to move faster in making PPE available for the adult social care sector. Sufficient supplies that are of acceptable quality are needed immediately. Councils and their provider partners also need concrete assurances about ongoing supplies for the days and weeks ahead.

Councillor Alan Hall has written to the Director of Public Health for Lewisham seeking reassurances for both hospital and social care staff locally. The full letter is below:

Catherine Mbema
Director of Public Health – Lewisham

Dear Catherine,

I have been informed that the lack of Personal Protective Equipment for cleaning staff at Lewisham Hospital is a real concern. Trade Unions say that there is a shortage of supply and that staff are very worried. It has been described as “a total nightmare”.

As the Public Health Lead across Lewisham, I would be very grateful if you could raise the shortage of supply with the NHS and the Hospital and reassure us that PPE will be available.

Whilst I write, personal carers have reported shortages and inadequacies nationally. Can an assurance that all Lewisham Council and NHS staff have been provided with effective PPE?

May I take this opportunity to thank you and your team for all the incredible work that has been placed upon you. I have always campaigned against Public Health cuts and the short sightedness of this is surely been borne out now.

Kind regards,

Alan

Cllr Alan Hall

In an article on the United Nation’s website, there is a chilling message:

“COVID-19 will not be the last dangerous microbe we see. The heroism, dedication and selflessness of medical staff allow the rest of us a degree of reassurance that we will overcome this virus.

We must give these health workers all the support they need to do their jobs, be safe and stay alive. We will need them when the next pandemic strikes.”

Please help: NHS Staff need adequate PPE now https://t.co/XLsLDNaz5g via @socialisthealth

— Alan Hall (@alan_ha11) April 1, 2020

Leave a comment
Britain’s charities and voluntary organisations urgently require a financial support package from government so they can play their part in the coronavirus fight  and help some of the most vulnerable affected by the pandemic.
The call came from Unite, Britain and Ireland’s largest union, today (Tuesday 31 March), which represents tens of thousands of not for profit workers, as charities experience a dramatic slump in funding at a time when demand for their services, from housing to mental health, is soaring because of the virus.
Unite has joined forces with the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) in calling for emergency funding for the sector. The NCVO has estimated that the sector could lose £4.3bn in income over the next three months.
Unite national officer for the community, youth and not for profit sector Siobhan Endean said: “Our members are keen to play their part in combating the coronavirus which will impact on some of the most vulnerable in society. Demand for charities’ services, from housing to mental health, has greatly increased.
“The voluntary sector is facing a crisis in funding, while meeting an unprecedented demand to support our communities. Our members are working incredibly long hours, with a lack of personal protective equipment and under immense pressure.
“We need urgent action from the government to ensure that the voluntary and not for profit sector and those employed in it are protected amidst the current crisis we find ourselves in.
“That’s why Unite has joined forces with the NCVO to call for a comprehensive financial package to underpin the sector at this extraordinary time.
“Government has rightly identified our members as ‘key workers’ and that’s why chancellor Rishi Sunak must unveil specific measures to assist the sector as a matter of urgency.”
Unite and the NCVO are making these key demands:
  • Emergency Mobilisation funding for frontline charities and volunteers supporting the response to the coronavirus crisis in the UK and globally through grants with a swift application process.
  • A ‘stabilisation fund’ for all charities to help them stay afloat, pay staff and continue operating during the course of the pandemic which would be  administered through the National Lottery.
  • Confirmation that charities should be eligible for similar business interruption measures announced by the chancellor for businesses and access to government rescue schemes.

Unite senior communications officer Shaun Noble

 

Leave a comment
Health visitors and community nurses going into the homes of families with children and babies urgently require personal protective equipment (PPE), Unite, Britain and Ireland’s largest union, said today (Tuesday 31 March).
Unite also wants PPE to go to the thousands of staff working in social care settings, such as care homes, who feel forgotten by ministers.
Unite assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail said: “Health visitors and community nurses need PPE equipment today as they offer high-level professional advice on home visits to the parents of tomorrow’s generation of adults.”
Unite, which embraces the Community Practitioners’ and Health Visitors’ Association (CPHVA), has joined the chorus of frustration from unions and professional organisations over the slow roll-out of PPE to NHS staff.
Unite assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail said: “The government needs to provide urgently an immediate, adequate and free-flowing supply of PPE to the hospital and community sectors of the NHS.
“And ministers should not ignore the forgotten army of thousands of dedicated workers employed in social care settings, who are often low-paid.
“We urge a redoubled effort by ministers to cut through the logistics’ logjams and get this equipment to the frontline where our brave doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals are risking their health to save others.
“It is sometimes forgotten that health visitors and community nurses are out there every day visiting parents in their homes offering excellent advice on new born babies and young children.
“And while it is generally accepted that children are relatively immune from Covid-19, they or their parents may unwittingly have picked up the virus.
“The health visitor and community nurse role is particularly important now as parents are, quite rightly, extra anxious about their own health and that of their children.
“The least we can do is to see that the community nurse workforce has the right protective equipment.”
Unite lead professional officer for health visiting Obi Amadi said: “Our community practitioner members are working really hard to provide services in the community. In many areas, they have been struggling to keep themselves and those they are visiting safe because of the lack of PPE.  There is also a reported lack of hand sanitisers.
“The health and care staff working in the community play a vitally important  role, but feel they have not had access to enough PPE, nor been sufficiently recognised for their tireless below-the radar efforts at this time of national emergency.”

 

Unite senior communications officer Shaun Noble

Leave a comment

The Socialist Health Association (SHA) published its first two Blogs on the COVID-19 pandemic on the 17th March and 24th March 2020. A lot has happened over the past week and we will address some of these developments from our political perspective.

  1. A global crisis

The pandemic continues to spread around the world and we are seeing that while Europe remains a global hotspot the epicentre is now shifting to North America. It remains to be seen how the Trump administration ‘handles’ the situation but global leadership and best practice will not emanate from the White House and we will need to look to those progressive State and City level leaders in New York City and California for examples of political leadership in a crisis.

The astonishing successes in tackling the pandemic seen in the Far East should still be sources of practical evidence of good practice. Despite the concerns about transparency in the Chinese system it remains an extraordinary achievement to have controlled the spread from the centre of Wuhan (population 11m) to be contained within Hubei Province (population 58m). A bit like London and the rest of the UK! The 1.4bn population of China have so far been exposed to relatively minimal spread. Some of the urban populations in China are huge such as Shanghai’s 24m people and the density and housing would be vulnerable to the spread of C-19. Our government talk of ‘contain’ and ‘delay’ and ‘suppress’ the coronavirus – well there is much to learn from Asia.

Whenever we see TV footage of the Chinese control measures, staff in public places are gowned, have masks and/or goggles and gloves. Clearly there is no shortage of PPE in China! Frequently you see officials challenging people in the streets and checking temperatures with the thermal imaging meters. Of course these screening measures are imprecise and the scientific evidence to support them is thin but we were told in the UK that the two key questions were – have you got a fever or a dry cough? We know that many people are symptomless when they first contract the virus and can be infectious but this does not rule out basic questions such as these delivered by lay workers to protect others in the streets/shops/surgeries/workplaces? People who have symptoms of a cough or fever are referred to diagnostic pods for advice and further testing. This does seem to be good public health control and is also used at airports and seaports, which have been pretty absent in the UK.

Test, test, test was the refrain from WHO leader Dr Tedros A. G. and one of the countries that has shown success in controlling the spread of C-19 is democratic capitalist South Korea where the population of 52m has had 9,583 confirmed cases with only 152 deaths by the 29th March. They have led the world in PCR testing for the presence of the virus with an estimated 316,000 tests done by 20th March. Germany is close behind with 167,000 tests done and the UK trails behind at 64,000 by the 19th March. It is basic communicable disease control methodology to identify probable cases by the history (symptoms/signs) and then have a test to confirm the case. If positive then there is contact tracing and cases are quarantined. It is still not clear why the PCR testing capacity was not scaled up in the UK during the time between the middle of January when the RNA code of COVID-19 was shared worldwide and March when demand for testing and containment accelerated. This is one of the key questions for the enquiry after the pandemic is over.  The relative lack of testing capacity has made the control measures here more difficult. The cases recorded here have, since abandoning the contain phase, been those presenting to hospitals rather than measuring the incidence in the community.

Attention is now moving towards rolling out the second test – the ‘have you had it?’ antibody test. This will not help in the early stages of the illness but will help confirm that people have actually had C-19 and will in most cases have immunity to the virus. This will give more confidence for NHS and Social Care and other essential workers to return confidently to their workplaces. This is in the evaluation stage but should be available soon and hopefully will not be held up. Getting scarce NHS and Social care workers, and other essential workers back to work is extremely important as is protecting them at work from contracting infections.

The pandemic is gradually spreading to India and down the African continent too. This will expose more at risk populations living on the edge economically, often in poor and unsanitary housing. We know that infection control measures will be difficult to undertake and the health services remain relatively weak in LMICs. As ever, social determinants of health and wellbeing will emerge as factors and the mortality will reflect the global inequalities we already know about.

So it was good to learn on the 25th March that the G7 countries have stated their support for the UN and WHO and committed some resources to help tackle the pandemic. The UK has offered £240m which if mirrored by other G7 countries will not get very far towards the WHO target of £71 billion for the immediate public health response and priority research. Lets hope that sufficient resources will flow but sadly the richest country in the world (USA) has had a recent track record of disinvesting from global organisations such as the UN and WHO.

As in the previous Blogs we support the research into novel treatments and the development of a vaccine but not to let that divert us from trying to delay the spread of the virus across our country by enforcing the stay at home and lockdown measures. We should continue to apply basic public health control measures, even within households, of isolating symptomatic people, strengthening hand washing and hygiene measures.

We also welcome the action that has been taken by some Local Authorities to provide accommodation for the homeless and rootless and also providing them with food and places to stay during the day, which reduces spread amongst this very vulnerable population. Lets make some of these initiatives set the pattern for tackling this issue in the post pandemic age.

 

  1. 2. The NHS and Social Care

The NHS has been ramping up their preparedness and we welcome the use of private facilities as part of the national response although we prefer that this is seen as requisitioning and not a favourable commercial contract for the private sector. We also welcome the creation of the emergency Nightingale Hospitals built in Conference centres and sports stadia in London, Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow, Belfast and Cardiff . These new beds will be purpose built for COVID-19 caseloads but we note that they will need to be staffed by trained nurses and doctors. These new beds must be seen alongside the closure of an estimated 33,000 beds since 2008/9, which has weakened the NHS resilience and made the UK one of the European countries with the lowest beds/1000 population. For example Eurostat data for 2017 identifies ‘curative beds/100K population’ and shows that Germany had 601, France 309, Italy 262, Spain 242 and the UK 211. It is no surprise then that we see intensive care patients being airlifted from Italy and France to Germany. Germany’s testing control measures and its hospital bed capacity is part of the explanation for them appearing more in control of the situation with currently a comparatively low death rate.

We have seen a massive shift in the way that GP services are provided and how GPs and patients are adapting to telephone and videoconferencing. GPs are also playing a vital role in advising and supporting those receiving community care and have long term conditions. These vulnerable patients will be well known to their primary care teams and reliant on being able to get advice. It goes without saying that out of hospital care will be vital during the time when local acute hospitals are stressed with redesigning services to deal with acutely ill COVID-19 patients.

In terms of overall preparedness one does wonder whether the NHS was more prepared for Brexit than a pandemic!

The social and residential care sector in the UK will be a vital player as the pandemic rolls out with its particular risk for older people. The dynamic between social care and the NHS will be important as the NHS struggles and the transfer/admitting/discharge criteria change. Already the NICE guidance on criteria for intensive care has identified frailty explicitly as an issue to assess suitability to admit a patient.

As with other key services social and residential care staffing will be a challenge as recruitment and retention issues increase and staff stay off work to self isolate. The guidance on personal protective equipment (PPE) is being actively reviewed and both NHS and Social Care staff in the Community must be provided with appropriate protective equipment to match the cases that they are assessing in the community or actually caring for. This will become more important for primary care clinicians as well as social care staff asked to look after acute COVID-19 patients or those discharged for hospitals.

 

  1. Jobs and income

Clearly the pandemic has driven a coach and horses through the economy. The Chancellor’s proposals have been helpful and the proposals for the self -employed has moved a long way toward providing some security for this sector. The gig economy however is more difficult and the benefit system has been shown to be inadequate as a place to go for this group of workers. The SHA still feels that there is an opportunity to trial universal basic income as a mechanism to provide all citizens with assurance of having enough income for their health and wellbeing.

There are also concerns that without close Parliamentary scrutiny there are risks that the Tory government will award contracts to their people and the State revenues will be subject to fraudulent claims from off shore companies and global players who have been able over the years to duck paying tax. The SHA has always viewed a progressive tax system to be the route to funding necessary services and that tax dodging should be rooted out.

There may be a case now for a form of  Parliamentary scrutiny so Labour Shadow Ministers have sight of the details around awarding such huge amounts of public money to companies run by the Bransons and Dysons of this world. There is a positive movement underway shown by the selfless work of health and social care services and other essential workers. It is also exhibited by the clapping applause last Thursday and the 750,000 volunteers.

There should be an opportunity as we come out of this crisis to lay the foundations for a different type of society in the same way that after WW2 the incoming Labour party brought in such great reforms as creating the NHS and introducing State Education.

 

On behalf of the Officers and the Vice-Chairs of the SHA.

2 Comments

COVID-19 and the NHS – “a national scandal”, comments the Lancet.

“The gravity of that scandal has yet to be understood.” Reports Richard Horton in the Lancet 28 March 2020 :

“When this is all over, the NHS England board should resign in their entirety.” So wrote one National Health Service (NHS) health worker last weekend. The scale of anger and frustration is unprecedented, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is the cause. The UK Government’s Contain–Delay–Mitigate–Research strategy failed. It failed, in part, because ministers didn’t follow WHO’s advice to “test, test, test” every suspected case. They didn’t isolate and quarantine. They didn’t contact trace. These basic principles of public health and infectious disease control were ignored, for reasons that remain opaque. The UK now has a new plan—Suppress–Shield–Treat–Palliate. But this plan, agreed far too late in the course of the outbreak, has left the NHS wholly unprepared for the surge of severely and critically ill patients that will soon come.”

Please read the full article here. You can download the pdf at this link.
1 Comment

I sent this letter to the Scottish First Minister and health spokesperson with the PQs attached and and copied it to Welsh First Minister and Health spokesperson.

21 March 2020

Dear Nicola and Jean,

I am writing as a public health physician who is increasingly concerned about the apparent failure to implement fundamental public health measures to address the COVID-19 outbreak – specifically, community contact tracing and testing – and about what seems to be one of the knock-on effects of this failure, namely the blanket closure of schools.   

Tracing and testing of contacts, isolation and quarantine are the classic tools and approaches in public health to infectious diseases. According to the WHO, they have been painstakingly adopted in China in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, with a high percentage of identified close contacts completing medical observation; and they have been strongly recommended by the WHO for other countries.

In England, there are a lack of data – contact tracing appears to have been adopted only initially. According to modelling conducted by the authors of one of the papers published by the government yesterday, ‘The Efficacy of Contact Tracing for the Containment of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) (Keeling et al.) they expect that it would enable the outbreak to be contained :
“Aggregating across all individuals and under the optimistic assumption that all the contact tracing can be performed rapidly, we expect contact tracing to reduce the basic reproductive ratio from 3.11 to 0.21 – enabling the outbreak to be contained (figure 2). Rapid and effective contact tracing can therefore be highly effective in the early control of COVID-19, but places substantial demands on the local public-health authorities.”

The basic reproductive ratio, R0, is a standard epidemiological construct for understanding the epidemic potential of an infection; the higher the ratio, the more difficult it will be to control its spread. Ideally, R0 should be 0. If R0 is less than 1, an infected person will transmit the infection to less than one other person, and so the epidemic potential is critically reduced. On the basis of this modelling, if contact tracing is not being rigorously conducted now, the possibility of critically reducing the epidemic would be missed. The Keeling paper when taken together with the New York academics Shen et al  critique  raises serious questions about the validity of  Prof Fergusson’s  model (whose apocalyptic numbers were was used by the Westminster government to justify its approach.)  

I am truly concerned that contact tracing, testing, quarantine and isolation have not been exhaustively carried out before taking the blanket decision to close all schools. I have sent the opposition spokespeople for health at Westminster some suggested PQs that my colleague Peter Roderick and I have drafted, which I attach.

It is important to note that many areas in Scotland and elsewhere have a low number of cases and so at this stage by taking an area approach to vigorous and meticulous contact tracing and testing it should be possible to contain the disease – in Singapore, the BBC reports that the army has been called in to help with this. This would in time, with other measures, allow local areas on a school-by-school basis to safely consider reopening – and uphold each child’s right to education.

One of the major differences in this outbreak is that the outbreak is being managed centrally rather than being coordinated centrally, with insufficient foot soldiers on the ground. In England local authorities and Directors of Public Health cannot tailor responses to the local situation and are subject to central policy decisions. My colleagues in public health in local authorities say they have received very little information. This, combined with the devastating cuts to community-based communicable disease control and the changes wrought by the HSC Act 2012 which carved out public health from health services in England and then further fragmented communicable disease control by removing it to PHE have created a perfect storm.

I urge the Scottish government immediately to institute a massive centrally-coordinated, locally-based contact tracing and testing programme; and to discuss with local authorities, health boards, trade unions, public health and communicable disease control experts, schools and colleges and universities how this tried-and-tested classic approach would, with other measures, enable the blanket school closure decision to be modified in favour of a locally-based strategy.    

Scotland has been a pioneer for public health measures –it is important to reassert its expertise.
 
Yours sincerely,
Allyson Pollock

Professor Allyson Pollock, Professor of Public Health, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University



Suggested draft PQs to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on contact tracing and testing

Summary

Contact tracing, testing of contacts and isolation are the classic tools and approaches in public health to infectious diseases. They have been adopted in China in response to the COVID-19 outbreak, and have been strongly recommended by the WHO. In England, there is a lack of data – contact tracing appears to have been adopted only initially, whilst the authors of one of the scientific papers published by the government today state that they expect that it would enable the outbreak to be contained.  

China

In February 2020, 25 experts from China, Germany, Japan, Korea, Nigeria, Russia, Singapore, the US and WHO undertook a 9-day Joint Mission on COVID-19 to China.
It stated the following on contact testing:

“China has a policy of meticulous case and contact identification for COVID-19. For example, in Wuhan more than 1800 teams of epidemiologists, with a minimum of 5 people/team, are tracing tens of thousands of contacts a day. Contact follow up is painstaking, with a high percentage of identified close contacts completing medical observation. Between 1% and 5% of contacts were subsequently laboratory confirmed cases of COVID-19, depending on location.

For example:
• As of 17 February, in Shenzhen City, among 2842 identified close contacts, 2842 (100%) were traced and 2240 (72%) have completed medical observation. Among the close contacts, 88 (2.8%) were found to be infected with COVID-19.

• As of 17 February, in Sichuan Province, among 25493 identified close contacts, 25347 (99%) were traced and 23178 (91%) have completed medical observation. Among the close contacts, 0.9% were found to be infected with COVID-19.

• As of 20 February, in Guangdong Province, among 9939 identified close contacts, 9939 (100%) were traced and 7765 (78%) have completed medical observation. Among the close contacts, 479 (4.8%) were found to be infected with COVID-19” (pp.8/9).

During the second stage of the outbreak, “[m]easures were taken to ensure that all cases were treated, and close contacts were isolated and put under medical observation” (page 15).

It is not clear from the report whether all contacts were tested, though they were apparently quarantined. Contacts have been both tested and quarantined in Singapore, where the army has been called in to help with tracing, according to the BBC.

In considering next steps for other countries, the report states (emphases added):
“3. Much of the global community is not yet ready, in mindset and materially, to implement the measures that have been employed to contain COVID-19 in China. These are the only measures that are currently proven to interrupt or minimize transmission chains in humans. Fundamental to these measures is extremely proactive surveillance to immediately detect cases, very rapid diagnosis and immediate case isolation, rigorous tracking and quarantine of close contacts,and an exceptionally high degree of population understanding and acceptance of these measures.

Achieving the high quality of implementation needed to be successful with such measures requires an unusual and unprecedented speed of decision-making by top leaders, operational thoroughness by public health systems, and engagement of society.

Given the damage that can be caused by uncontrolled, community-level transmission of this virus, such an approach is warranted to save lives and to gain the weeks and months needed for the testing of therapeutics and vaccine development. Furthermore, as the majority of new cases outside of China are currently occurring in high and middle income countries, a rigorous commitment to slowing transmission in such settings with non-pharmaceutical measures is vital to achieving a second line of defense to protect low income countries that have weaker health systems and coping capacities. The time that can be gained through the full application of these measures – even if just days or weeks – can be invaluable in ultimately reducing COVID-19 illness and deaths. This is apparent in the huge increase in knowledge, approaches and even tools that has taken place in just the 7 weeks since this virus was discovered through the rapid scientific work that has been done in China.”

The mission recommended countries outside China with imported cases and/or outbreaks of COVID-19 to “[p]rioritize active, exhaustive case finding and immediate testing and isolation, painstaking contact tracing and rigorous quarantine of close contacts” (page 21).
England

Blogs by PHE CEO (Duncan Selbie) and PHE’s Deputy Director, National Infections Service (Nick Phin) in mid-February state that contact tracing was being undertaken:
“PHE now has a very extensive and complex contact tracing operation underway with health protection teams around the country diligently talking to people that might have been in close contact with carriers of the virus to assess their risk, provide advice and ultimately prevent further spread.”
“So far in the UK we’ve seen a small number of novel coronavirus cases.  At the moment we undertake contact tracing to prevent the infection spreading further. Contact tracing is a fundamental part of outbreak control that’s used by public health professionals around the world.”

There was no statement that those traced would be tested, isolated or quarantined, and apparently this would be done only if the contact developed symptoms:
“When we get in touch with a contact we provide them with advice on what to do if they become unwell or develop certain symptoms.  This way they can speak to the right health expert, so that the right advice can be given and right action taken.
If we believe a contact is at higher risk of infection they may be asked to self-isolate, remaining in their home and staying away from work, school or public places and we contact them daily until they can be given the all-clear.
If the person being monitored does develop symptoms, we would test them and provide them with specialist care if they have the novel coronavirus.”
There is also an implication in Nick Phin’s blog that as more cases develop, less contact tracing might be undertaken (emphasis added):
“Our experts have considerable experience at using contact tracing to prevent and contain outbreaks and to keep the public safe.

However, it does involve a lot of resources so as part of our comprehensive approach to tackling novel coronavirus in the UK, we’re putting extra resources into our contact tracing efforts. If the virus becomes established in the UK then we mayneed to move to a different phase of the response which focuses less on containment – but we are a long way off that.”

Concern has been expressed about the UK’s approach to contact tracing and testing – see, for example,  Martin Hibberd, professor of emerging infectious diseases at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, quoted in The Guardian on 12/3/20 as saying that “the UK’s response ‘has clearly not been sufficient’. He and other experts called for much more extensive testing and tracing of the contacts of those diagnosed with Covid-19”.

The government published today the scientific evidence supporting its COVID-19 response. According to modelling conducted by the authors of one of the papers published, entitled ‘The Efficacy of Contact Tracing for the Containment of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) (Keeling et al.) :
“Aggregating across all individuals and under the optimistic assumption that all the contact tracing can be performed rapidly, we expect contact tracing to reduce the basic reproductive ratio from 3.11 to 0.21 – enabling the outbreak to be contained (figure 2). Rapid and effective contact tracing can therefore be highly effective in the early control of COVID-19, but places substantial demands on the local public-health authorities.”

The basic reproductive ratio basic reproductive ratio, R0, is a standard epidemiological construct for understanding the epidemic potential of an infection; the higher the ratio, the more difficult it will be to control its spread. Ideally, R0 should be 0. If R0 is less than 1, an infected person will transmit the infection to less than one other person, and so the epidemic potential is critically reduced. On basis of this modelling, if contact tracing is not being rigorously conducted now, the possibility of critically reducing the epidemic would be missed.  

We have not been able to find any data on contact tracing, the testing of contacts, isolation or quarantine in any part of the UK, and have not been able to find any PQs on the subject so far (despite the hundreds already tabled).

Draft PQs (1) and (2) below are therefore aimed at obtaining those data for England.

Draft PQ (3) directly addresses the government’s response to the expectation of the Keeling et al. paper published today.

Draft PQ (4) has been prompted by personal knowledge and conversations with other public health professionals, and concern that public health expertise in infectious diseases and in disease control more generally has been disappearing in local areas. 

Draft PQ (5) is wider than testing of contacts, but cost may very well be a factor that might have contributed to a lack of testing, and so we have suggested framing the question more broadly.

Draft PQs


(1) To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care if he will specify, by local authority area, the contact tracing that is currently underway in England in relation to those who have been, or are suspected as having been, infected or contaminated with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), including (a) the number of personnel carrying out such tracing and (b) the number of close contacts (i) identified and (ii) traced.

(2) To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care if he will specify, by local authority area, the number and percentage of close contacts of those who have been, or are suspected as having been, infected or contaminated with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus  2 (SARS-CoV-2), who (a) are undergoing testing (b) have tested positive and (c) have been isolated or quarantined.

(3) To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care whether he is ensuring rapid and effective contact tracing in relation to COVID-19, in light of the authors of the Keeling et al. study entitled ‘The Efficacy of Contact Tracing for the Containment of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) published by the government on 20thMarch 2020, stating that “we expect contract tracing to reduce the basic reproductive ratio from 3.11 to 0.21 – enabling the outbreak to be contained”; and if not, why not.

(4) To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care if he will publish the latest data for the numbers of (a) consultants in communicable disease control and (b) community infection control nurses, and c) their location by local authority area.

(5) To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care if he will specify (a) the public bodies and/or (b) the companies which are carrying out the tests for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and explain the sensitivity and specificity of each test and their cost .
 
Allyson Pollock, Professor of Public Health, Newcastle University
Peter Roderick, Principal Research Associate, Newcastle University
20/3/20

Leave a comment

We have now launched another collaborative petition with the people at Change and have support from Health Campaigns Together and Socialist Health Association. 

It is likely other campaigns will support too in the next few days. Here is the link 

Change.org/NHS4all

Please sign and share widely. Please not only post on your own social media networks (though this is vital) but please include in your local group newsletters and prominently on your local group facebook and twitter pages – it might even be an idea to pin the post to the top of your timelines or facebook walls.

Also please take the time to write an email to your colleagues, fellow campaigners and friends asking them to sign too…

We’ve put together a model email for you to use here so it won’t take you long, it reads: 

 

“Dear ____

Keep Our NHS Public is helping launch a new petition putting six key demands to the government around its response to the Coronavirus pandemic. These demands cover a cross-section of our campaigning priorities, applied to the current moment of crisis  click here to read in full!

In the current climate, this petition could become absolutely huge, so we definitely need to get out the gate fast with sharing it. Please sign your name and share the petition to all possible contacts! SIGN HERE

On Twitter, we’re using the hashtags #NHS4All, #6Demands, #Covid-19, #SafetyFirst, #Coronavirus with #NHS4All as the main one.

Best”

 

Remember our last petition with Change received 1.3 million signatures and helped the organisation widen its reach, recruit unprecedented numbers and raise much-needed funds – so the bigger this is the better for all of us. And in this moment of isolation and likely imminent lockdown – it’s time at last to embrace, social media and digital campaigning!

Good luck and thank you from all the team.

In Solidarity

Tom Griffiths

Keep Our NHS Public

Campaigns Officer

Leave a comment

Fire and rescue service personnel must receive priority testing and vaccination for coronavirus, the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) has said after some brigades reported losing hundreds of staff to self-isolation.

In a letter to ministers in Westminster and the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the FBU has said that without testing, firefighters and control staff could be self-isolating unnecessarily, when they could be on hand to protect the public.

The union also says that testing could help reduce the risk of frontline staff transmitting the infection to vulnerable members of the public.

London Fire Brigade has at least 280 personnel in isolation, 5% of its overall staff; West Midlands Fire Service, which covers Birmingham, has 105 staff in self-isolation, 5.5%; Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has 285 staff in isolation, 3.75%; Essex County Fire and Rescue Service has 61 staff in isolation or 4%.

Fire and rescue services across the UK are operating with 11,500 fewer firefighters than in 2010, and, unless services are able to test their employees, they could face dangerous shortages.

Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary, said:

“In this time of national crisis, every emergency service worker has an important role to play. The NHS is an obvious priority, but any testing regime needs to address all key public services.

“Without proper testing, the number of fire and rescue personnel available could drop to dangerously low levels. Fires and other non-virus related emergency incidents won’t wait for this crisis to subside and ministers need to consider that carefully.

“It is vital for public safety that firefighters and control staff, like their colleagues in the NHS, receive priority testing and, once available, vaccination.

“We’re pushing for measures to limit our members’ exposure to the virus, but some interaction with the public cannot be avoided and ministers need to manage that risk.”

While the FBU has called for firefighters to cease all non-essential, non-emergency interactions with the public, they will continue to come into contact in emergency situations, placing them at greater risk of infection.

Emergency fire control staff handle 999 calls and provide vital fire survival guidance for areas of up to 5 million people from a single room. Should one member of staff contract the virus, the emergency call infrastructure for an entire region could be at risk.

Media contact

Joe Karp-Sawey, FBU communications officer

Leave a comment

20/03/2020

 

OPEN LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER FROM THE SOCIALIST HEALTH ASSOCIATION

Dear Mr Johnson,

The pandemic has exposed the steady destruction of our public services and welfare state which has happened over the last 10 years.

This is the most unprecedented health challenge in 100 years which is complex and difficult – but as voiced by many experts in the field, we have significant concerns about the way the UK government has hitherto been approaching this national emergency. We hope from now on this will be better co-ordinated. We support frontline staff at this worrying time.

However the public is finally waking up to the fact that, as a result of government austerity and privatisation policies, we are ill-prepared – with too few ICU facilities, NHS beds, healthcare staff and equipment – to offer a safe and effective response to the virus. Those most at risk also have to use a threadbare social care system which is already bending under the strain.

The UK should be in a relatively strong position on public health with a comprehensive service, considered one of the best in the world. However, Tory reforms in England destroyed the health authority structure below national level and has slashed budgets but at least Public Health England has a regional organisation and Local Government have Directors of Public Health. We wish to make some key points:

  1. You are placing staff at risk

There is not enough personal protective equipment (PPE) for clinicians/frontline staff who are now personally at risk every time they go to into work.

There is insufficient testing of staff who, having been put off work with minor illness and then return to the front line, do not know whether they have had the virus or not.

  1. You are placing patients at risk

There are too few beds and too few trained intensive care staff and equipment such as respirators. The government appears to have acted too late. We should be requisitioning beds from the private sector, not paying them £2.4 million a day.

Covid-19 testing has been wholly inadequate. It appears that a combination of inadequate preparation and misguided policy is responsible.

  1. You are placing communities at risk

Undocumented people, for instance migrants and refugees, have long felt unable to use the NHS for fear of being referred to the police or the Home Office. This will increase risk. Legislate on charging and reporting undocumented migrants must at least be suspended.

Those precariously employed, particularly gig economy workers, are still not financially protected and may be compelled to continue working inadvertently spreading infection.

Thousands of excess deaths have occurred in the last few years as a result of the slowdown and reversal in life expectancy. Austerity policies have been a significant cause. It confirms international evidence that cutting the welfare state while at the same time introducing austerity, kills people.

This pandemic is likely to add to that grotesque toll.

  1. You are placing the NHS at risk

Government policy has split hospitals from general practices and from each other. It has created an industrial approach to care where staff and patients are increasingly seen as economic units. The newest redisorganisation has opened up the English NHS planning process to the private sector and to the US, especially if we have a trade deal. In addition, it has the potential to split the English NHS into 44 independent units – exactly what we do not want as we fight a global pandemic. If your government’s Long-Term Plan had already been fully implemented doing exactly that, we would not have been capable of a well-coordinated national response to the Covid-19 crisis.

  1. You are placing Social Care at risk

Too little funding for Local Authorities has put social care on life support. Those most at risk receiving personal or residential care appear to receive the least advice and the least support to combat the virus. Those with Direct Payments, organising their own care with Local Authority funding, appear to be entirely on their own if their carers get ill.

  1. You are placing democracy at risk

The most recent reorganisation of the NHS has made both formal and informal democracy more difficult. Just when we need all communities to collaborate and contribute to responding to this global challenge, NHS organisations have become more distant and poorly responsive.

It has been frustrating and confusing to have changing government advice without any formal presentation of the data and evidence behind it. It was patronising and did not inspire confidence.

 

WE EXPECT YOUR GOVERNMENT TO:

  • Treat us like adults – show us the evidence on which you base your decisions
  • Protect frontline staff right now with clinically appropriate protective gear and systematic testing. Bring testing in line with the WHO recommendations.
  • Protect the population of the UK by permanently increasing NHS staff in hospitals and primary care, increasing hospital beds, increasing respirators.
  • Roll back privatisation and austerity across public services.
  • Seize the opportunity of this pandemic to invest for the long-term in the welfare state, recognising that a thriving society requires a thriving state.
  • Suspend now legislation on the charging and reporting of undocumented migrants.
  • Invest permanently in social care, making it free at the point of use, fully funded through progressive taxation, promoting independence for all and delivered by a workforce with appropriate training, career structure, pay and conditions.
  • Protect those in precarious employment from financial meltdown from the pandemic. All those who should not be at work should have an living income.
  • Ensure that people across the UK have equitable access to the help they need, through their Devolved Administrations
  • Review the Long Term Plan

 

Faced with this international emergency, we need to combine medical expertise – including support from abroad, with technical investment with practical solutions and community engagement along with emergency economic measures to fight this together.

 

Chair SHA

Dr Brian Fisher, London

Vice-chairs SHA

Dr Tony Jewell

Tony Beddow, Swansea

Norma Dudley, London

Mark Ladbrooke, Oxford

Secretary

Jean Hardiman Smith, Ellesmere Port

Treasurer

Irene Leonard, Liverpool

Co-Chair KONP

Dr Tony O’Sullivan, London

 

Co-signatories

Dr John Carlisle, Sheffield.

Terry Day, London

Carol Ackroyd, London

Corrie Louise Lowry, Wirral

Caroline Bedale, Oldham

Hazel Brodie, Dumfries

David Taylor-Gooby, Newcastle

Peter Mayer, Birmingham

Dr Alex Scott-Samuel, Liverpool

Dr Jane Roberts, London

Dr Judith Varley, Birkenhead

Vivien Giladi, London

John Lipetz, London

Jane Jones, Abergavenny

Dr Kathrin Thomas, Llandudno

Dr Louise Irvine, London

Dr Jacky Davis, London

Dr Coral Jones, London

Dr Nick Mann, London

Dr John Puntis, Leeds

Brian Gibbons, Swansea

Anya Cook, Newcastle,

Alison E. Scouller, Cardiff

Punita Goodfellow, Newcastle upon Tyne

Parbinder Kaur, Smethwick

Gurinder Singh Josan CBE,  Sandwell

Jos Bell, London.

Steve Fairfax Chair SHA NE, Newcastle upon Tyne

 

The Socialist Health Association is a policy and campaigning campaigning membership organisation. We promote health and well-being and the eradication of inequalities through the application of socialist principles to society and government. We believe that these objectives can best be achieved through collective rather than individual action.

4 Comments
Unite, which has 100,000 members in the health service, strongly supports the call for retired nurses, those who have left the register and students in the last stages of their undergraduate training to volunteer for the fight against the coronavirus.
The Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), chief nursing officers of the four UK countries, and the Council of Deans of Health as well as health trade unions issued the call today (Thursday 19 March).
The two key requests are for:
  • Nurses and midwives who had left the profession in the last three years to join the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) Covid-19 temporary emergency register so they can return to practice
  • For students in the final six months of their undergraduate course to work under supervision in hospitals wards and other parts of the NHS.
Unite lead officer for regulation Jane Beach said: “We are facing the worst public health emergency in the UK since the ‘Spanish’ flu at the end of the First World War. This is the supreme public health battle of our generation.
“Unprecedented events demand flexible and rapid responses, that’s why we are strongly supporting this call by the chief nursing officers of the four UK countries, the NMC and the health trade unions.
“We know that making changes to the way student nurses are educated in the last few months is an extreme measure, but we believe it is commensurate with the challenge we, as a society, face and so is the right thing to do.
“We thank our student nurse members for their feedback, which has informed our response to the discussions.
“We will be communicating with our members who have recently retired or left nursing to encourage them to consider coming back to help out during this national emergency.
“It is important to stress that for all, this is a choice. The detail will be in the guidance and we will continue to be involved in the development of this and in monitoring the implementation.”
The NMC has published the attached final joint statements and they are linked to its website which can accessed here www.nmc.org.uk/covid19
For more information please contact Unite senior communications officer Shaun Noble on 020 3371 2060. Unite press office is on:  020 3371 2065
Twitter: @unitetheunion Facebook: unitetheunion1 Web: unitetheunion.org
Unite is Britain and Ireland’s largest union with members working across all sectors of the economy. The general secretary is Len McCluskey.

 

2 Comments

COVID-19 Pandemic

The SHA wants to contribute to the tremendous national and international debate about controlling and mitigating the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. We will base these thoughts through the lens of a socialist society, which advocated politically in the 1930s to create the NHS in the UK and for other socialist policies, which see the social determinants of health being as important as the provision of health and social care services as we strive for a healthier and fairer society.

This blog will be the first of a series and will cover

 

  1. A global crisis
  2. The Public Health system
  3. The NHS, Local Government and Social Care
  4. Funding for staff and facilities
  5. Staff training, welfare and support
  6. Vulnerable populations
  7. Assuring Universal Basic Income

 

  1. A global crisis

This COVID-19 pandemic has already been cited as the greatest public health crisis for at least a generation. The HIV/AIDS pandemic starting in the 1980s had a much slower spread between countries and is estimated to have caused an estimated 25-30m excess deaths so far.  The potential scale of this type of respiratory viral infection pandemic with a faster spread means we should probably look back to the 1957 Asian flu pandemic and indeed the 1918 post war ‘Spanish flu’. The 1918 pandemic led to an estimated 40-50m global deaths and was when there was also no effective vaccine or treatment for the new variant of flu. So basic public health hygiene (hand washing), identifying cases and quarantining (self isolation) are still important. We recognise this as a global challenge, which requires global solidarity and the sharing of knowledge/expertise and advice.

The WHO, which is part of the United Nations, needs our support and is performing a very beneficial role.  This will be especially important for those Low Middle Income Countries (LMICs) who often have unstable political environments and weak public health and health systems. Remember the Democratic Republic of the Congo who have only just seen off their Ebola epidemic, war torn Syria and the Yemen.

The USA and other high-income countries should be unambiguous about recognising this as a fundamental global pandemic requiring collaboration between countries along the principles of mutual aid. The UN and WHO need our support and funding and we look to international financial organisations such as the IMF/World Bank to rally around in the way that the world banking system showed they could in their own self inflicted 2008 financial crash. The WHO has recently referred to Europe as the epicentre of the pandemic and we urge the Government to put aside their ideological objections and co-operate fully with the EU and our European partners.

 

  1. The public health system

The UK itself is in a relatively strong position with a national public health service, which has focus at a UK level (CMO/PHE), scientific advisory structures (SAGE), devolved governments, municipalities and local government. The NHS too still has national lines of control from NHSE to the NHS in England and the equivalents in devolved countries. The Tory ‘Lansley’ reforms in England destroyed the health authority structure below national levels (remember the former Strategic and District Health Authorities) but at least PHE has a regional organisation and Local Government have Directors of Public Health. We regret the fact that the 10 years of Tory austerity has depleted the resources in PHE and Local Government through not funding the PHE budget adequately and not honouring the public health grant for local authorities. We hope that the recent budget will mean that the public health service and local government does receive the financial and other resources required to help lead the pandemic response. Pandemics have always been high up in the UK risk register.

 

  1. The NHS, Local Government and Social Care

We are grateful that despite the privatisation of many parts of the NHS in England we still have a recognisable system and a culture of service rather than profit within our one million or so staff and their NHS organisations. We were pleased to hear the open ended funding commitment from the Chancellor at the last budget and urge that leaders within the NHS in England and the devolved countries use this opportunity to try to mitigate the underfunding over the last 10 years and implement the emergency plans that exist and calibrate them to deal most effectively with this particular viral threat. Any debates about further privatisation of the NHS needs to be taken off the agenda and let’s not use the budget money to prop up the private sector but requisition capacity if that is what is needed and compensate usage on an NHS cost basis. We want to protect the NHS from the risk that the NHS Long Term Plan proposals for 44 Integrated Care Schemes opens up the risk of US styled private insurance schemes.

 

  1. Funding for staff and facilities.

It will of course be difficult as a result of the staffing crisis that has been allowed to drift over the past 10 years with shortages of NHS workforce of 100,000 of which 40,000 are nurse vacancies but also includes doctors and other key staff. We and our Labour Party colleagues have been reminding Tory Ministers  that it takes 10 years to train a medical specialist so you cannot whistle them up or poach them from other poorer countries. The government needs to abolish their proposed points based immigration regime and indeed the compulsory NHS insurance of £650 per adult which is a huge disincentive to come here and work in the health and social care system.

Hospitals and other health facilities in the UK take time to plan, build and commission. We can of course learn from Wuhan in China where they built a 1000 bedded hospital in weeks! Our own war preparation in the late 1930s when industry shifted production rapidly from civilian to military supplies is another exemplar. Despite the negative impact of 10 years of Tory austerity we urge the NHS to embrace this opportunity to invest in staff, supplies and facilities needed to manage the effects of the pandemic. Creating strategic regional NHS bodies will ensure that capital and revenue resources committed from the centre are used optimally and equitable to meet population needs in collaboration with local authorities.

 

  1. Staff training, welfare and support

Front line NHS and social care staff will need our support over this time. We must ensure that working practices protect staff as much as possible from the risks in the workplace. Training and provision of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is vital and employment practices will need to adapt to the changing situation. Lets not forget social care workers, dentists, optometrists and district nurses who are part of our front line. Staff will need retraining if doctors and nurses are to be diverted to unfamiliar roles as we will need A&E, pandemic pods and intensive care unit capacity to be enhanced. Sadly, we now have a significant workforce who work for private contractors as part of the Tory privatisation of the NHS. We need to ensure that they have the same employment safeguards, minimum pay levels, sick pay and the health and safety entitlements as NHS staff. This is the time to renationalise such services back into the fold.

 Patients with existing long-term conditions remain in need of continuing care as will patients presenting with new life-threatening conditions such as cancers, diabetes and circulatory diseases. NHS managers will need support to organise these different services and decisions to postpone non-urgent elective surgery to free up resources. What also makes sense is testing novel ways of supporting people digitally and by teleconferencing to reduce attendance at NHS premises. This can be rolled out for Out Patient provision as well as GP surgeries. The NHS 111 service, and other online services  and the equivalents in the devolved nations can easily be overwhelmed so pushing out good health information and advice is being done and needs to continue. The public and patient engagement has always been at the heart of our policies and can be rolled out in this emergency utilising the third sector more imaginatively.

 

  1. Vulnerable populations.

In our assessment of what needs to be done we must not bypass the urgent needs of some of our most vulnerable populations. The homeless and rootless populations, many of whom have longstanding mental health conditions and/or substance dependency, are particularly at risk. They need urgent attention working closely with the extensive voluntary sector. Also those populations with long term conditions who will feel at risk if services are withdrawn due to staff redeployment or staff sickness need planning for. Primary care needs to be the service we support to flag up those in need and ensure that their medications and personal care needs continue to be met even if we need to involve volunteers and good neighbours to help out with daily needs such as shopping/providing meals and other tasks.

Undocumented workers such as migrants and refugees are often frightened to use health services for fear of police intrusion. The government needs to make it clear that there will be no barriers to care for this population during this crisis and beyond.

Social care is in need of particular attention. It was virtually ignored in the budget. This sector is at risk in terms of problems with recruiting and retaining staff as well as the needs of the recipients of care and support.. While business continuity plans may be in place there is no question that this sector needs investment and generous support at the time of such an emergency. They will be a vital cog in the wheel alongside home-based carers in supporting the NHS and wider social care system. Those most at risk seem to be the most neglected. Disabled people with care needs have received little advice and no support. Already carers are going off sick and can be replaced only with great difficulty. Those paying for their own care with Direct Payments seem to get no support at all.

With the COVID-19 virus we are seeing that the older population and those with so called ‘underlying conditions’ are at particular risk. We must ensure that this large population do not feel stigmatised and become isolated. Rapid assembly of local support groups should be encouraged which has been referred to as ‘local COBRA groups’. Local government can play a key role in establishing local neighbourhood centres for information and advice on accessing support as we move toward increasing quarantining and isolated households. Again wherever possible the use of IT and telephone connectivity to share information and provide remote support will make this more manageable.

 

  1. Assuring universal basic income.

Finally the SHA recognises that the economy will be damaged by the pandemic, organisations will go to the wall and staff will lose their jobs and income stream. We have always recognised that the fundamental inequalities arise from the lack of income, adequate housing and the means to provide for everyday life. This pandemic will last for months and we think that the Government needs to ensure that we have systems in place to ensure that every citizen has access to an adequate income through this crisis. We pay particular attention to the 2m part time workers and those on zero hours contracts as well as the 5m self-employed. There have been welcome changes in the timely access to the insufficient Statutory Sick Pay but this is not going to be the answer. People will be losing their jobs as different parts of the economy go under as we are already seeing with aviation, the retail sector and café/restaurants. The government needs to reassure those fearful of losing their jobs that they will stand by them during the pandemic. It may be the time to test the Universal Basic Income concept to give all citizens a guarantee that they will have enough income for healthy living. We already have unacceptable health inequalities so we must not allow this to get worse.

 

  1. Conclusion

The SHA stands ready to support the national and international efforts to tackle this pandemic. We assert our belief that a socialist approach sees universal health and social care as an essential part of society. That these systems should be funded by all according to a progressive taxation system and meet peoples needs being free at the point of use.  We believe that a thriving state owned and operated NHS and a complimentary not for profit care sector is essential to achieve a situation where rich and poor, young and old and citizens in towns, cities and in rural areas have equal access to the best care.

We recognise that the social determinants of health underpin our health. We agree with Marmot who reminds us that health and wellbeing is reflected by ‘the conditions that people are born, grow, live, work and age and by the inequities in power, money and resources that influence these conditions’.

The pandemic is global and is a major threat to people’s health and wellbeing. Universal health and public health services offer the best means of meeting this challenge nationally and globally. Populism and inward looking nationalism needs to be challenged as we work to reduce the human suffering that is unfolding and direct resources to meet the needs of the people at this time.

On behalf of officers and vice chairs

Leave a comment
%d bloggers like this: