UK Covid-19 Inquiry: Evidence shows a leadership culture that cares even less for science than it does for healthcare worker’s lives

A consortium of healthcare professional bodies, representing 65,000 healthcare workers, has drawn depressing conclusions from the evidence given during Module 3 of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry. 

The COVID-19 Airborne Transmission Alliance or CATA came together early in the pandemic to provide scientific evidence which challenge officials’ stated view that the virus was not capable of being spread by the airborne route, which would have required employers to provide respiratory protective equipment such as FFP3 masks. CATA has been a core participant in the Module 3 Inquiry and provided substantial evidence about the science, but also the bizarre behaviour of healthcare bureaucrats.

“Having followed the evidence in detail, it seems that those who had leadership roles during the pandemic, many of whom have been promoted to even more senior positions and rewarded with national honours, care less for science than they did for the lives of healthcare workers,” says Dr Barry Jones, Chair of CATA and an eminent medic. “They have taken the stand and asked the Inquiry to believe ideas that offend against common sense, let alone science.”

CATA has consistently pointed out the mass of scientific evidence that shows while diseases can be spread by a combination of inhaling airborne particles and being infected by droplets or contact with infected surfaces, Covid-19 has a significant dominant airborne component. CATA’s contentions have been supported by the experts commissioned by the Inquiry, are now no longer denied by the majority of healthcare leaders in the UK and are supported by international organisations including WHO and CDC.

Shockingly, evidence from the most senior health officials and experts in infection prevention and control confirm that they deem that protecting against droplets and aerosols is an either/or choice.

“It’s a bit like saying that your house can be damaged by fire or flood, but your insurance company saying that you can only pick one to be protected against,” commented Dr Barry Jones.

Rather than accepting that difficult decisions needed to be made because of lack of supply of PPE, senior healthcare leaders have taken the view that specially designed PPE might not have worked anyway, so it was not needed.

The Inquiry has heard evidence that there is no plan to stockpile PPE for future pandemics or to have a national supply, despite a global shortage costing the UK millions and resulting in illness and deaths for hundreds of healthcare workers, not to mention almost a quarter of a million UK citizens

The Inquiry has heard of continuing confusion about who was responsible for making critical decisions about how the scientific evidence was used to inform guidance for protecting healthcare workers and patients. 

Read full story

Source: British Occupational Hygiene Society, 21 November 2024

Related reading on the hub:

• Covid-19 : A risk assessment too far? A blog by David Osborn
• Respiratory protective equipment: An unequal solution for healthcare workers? A blog by David Osborn
• The pandemic – questions around Government governance: a blog from David Osborn