The UK, Italy and France surely have lessons to learn from Germany and South Korea. The aim here is to understand, not judge, criticise or blame I will share a serialised version of the overall slideshow which records facts that merit attention in the UK - UK plans - UK response - Conclusions - Numbers - Political and moral dilemmas Enjoy!

1. UK response to
COVID-19
A point of view (21 April 2020)

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

3. UK response
“Britain was following closely a well-laid plan.”
Reuters investigation

4. UK –
January
2020 – Low
threat
• Dec 31: WHO was informed of pneumonia cases
(unknown cause) inChina.
• 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. UK –
February –
Moderate
threat - hope
for
containment
• “minutes and interviews show Britain was following closely
a well-laid plan to fight a flu pandemic.” Reuters
• The plan’s “Containment” phase appeared to be working.
• Feb 13: UK chief medical officer “A UK outbreak is
still an “if, not a when,”Reuters Feb 28: First non-
traceable case in the UK
• WHO repeatedly refused to call the virus outbreak a
pandemic.
• “Britain missed a deadline to participate in a common
purchase scheme for ventilators,to which it was invited.
Johnson’s spokesman blamed an administrative error.” Reuters

6. March 3rd:
Science-
led policy
From the start, the UK government took its
direction from scientists and NHS experts.
• March 3, two days before UK’s first virus death
• “Our country remains extremely well prepared,”
Johnson said as Italy reached 79 deaths.
• “We already have a fantastic NHS,” the
national public health service, “fantastic testing
systems and fantastic surveillance of the
spread of disease.” Reuters
• It turned out the testing and surveillance wasn’t
as good as Boris has been led to believe.

7. UK –
March –
move to
High Risk
and Lock
Down
• March 4: The government published their plan to help the NHS by
"flattening the curve”.
• March 5: First death in the UK.
• March 9: “The government’s Scientific Advisory Group for
Emergencies recommended that the UK reject a China-style lockdown…
Tougher measures could create a “large second epidemic wave once the
measures were lifted.”Reuters
• March 11: WHO declared a pandemic.
https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/11/who-declares-the-coronavirus-
outbreak-a-pandemic/
• In retrospect, WHO should have said, a month earlier: “This may not
yet meet our academic definition of a pandemic, but it looks certain
to become one. Every nation’s government should now be acting on
the basis it will become one very soon”.
• March 12 The chief medical officer announced the threat to UK had
moved to“high.”
• March 16: The government urged voluntary social
distancing, stay at homeetc. March 23: Enforced lock
down.

8. Direction set
by UK
scientists in
February and
March
"for more than two months, the scientists whose advice
guided Downing Street did not clearly signal their
worsening fears to the public or the government.
Until March 12, the risk level, set by the government's top
medical advisers on the recommendation of the
scientists, remained at "moderate", suggesting only the
possibility of a wider outbreak." Reuters
“the scientific committees that advised Johnson didn’t
study, until mid-March, the option of the kind of stringent
lockdown adopted early on in China, and then followed
by much of Europe.
The scientists’ reasoning: Britons, many of them
assumed, simply wouldn’t accept such restrictions.”
Reuters
It seems they underestimated the impact on policy and
human behavior of a virus that is much more life-
threatening than flu

9. The
resources
needed?
(status at
April 15th)
• UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy
• “The UK will continue to maintain stockpiles
and distribution arrangements for antiviral
medicines and antibiotics sufficient for a
widespread and severe pandemic.”
• No antiviral medicines fit COVID-19
• “The Government already has in place stockpiles
of facemasks and respirators for health and
social care workers.”
• A projected peak ventilator need was 18,000. The
UK has about 10,000 and more have been ordered.
However, Mercedes F1 engineers have produced
10,000 less invasive CPAP breathing aids. Early
data suggest at least half the patients otherwise put
on a ventilator will not need one.

10. From this Guardian report
“the bulk of pandemic stockpiles consist of PPE,
including masks, gloves and aprons. Stockpiled goods
have shelf lives and so require frequent replenishment.
However, supply chain difficulties seem to have been
underestimated. Not only c1,000 hospitals but c16,000
care homes.

11. I can find no mention of it in UK Influenza Pandemic
Preparedness Strategy
In 2020: “Minutes of technical committees indicate that almost no
attention was paid to preparing a programme of mass testing.”
Reuters
NHS planning was too centralised; it was hoped a few (8?) central
laboratories would up to the job. Belatedly, they are engaging
another (40?) distributed laboratories and private sector ones.
The UK doesn’t have the chemical industry resources of
Germany, and didn’t build up enough stocks of tests ahead of
global demand for them..
Mass testing?

12. It appears the global supply chain logistics
were underestimated up to March.
In the daily briefings, the politician is always
flanked by people such virologists,
epidemiologists, the chief scientist, the chief
medical officer, etc.
Why isn’t the politician flanked by supply
chain logistics experts?
Global supply
chain logistics

13. Political strategy
This virus crisis has challenged what we
normally value in the UK - restrained
government and policing by consensus.
The Swedish strategy (keep things working,
keep old people at home) is interesting.
More totalitarian/authoritarian regimes were
quicker to impose draconian measures. And
some Asian countries were sensitized by
earlier epidemics.

14. About the South
Korean response
UK pandemic plans presumed a flu virus that could not be contained
By contrast, South Korea not only suffered SARS and MERS, they had
contained them.
So, they had already developed people tracking and warning measures
And when COVID-19 emerged, they started out determined to make
containment work. They told 4 laboratories to develop a test, and now
have 100 able to make it.
If a significant minority of the population had rejected surveillance of
them, then SK could not have contained the virus.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/south-korea-coronavirus

15. About the Taiwanese
response (from the Telegraph)
Like SK, Taiwan was sensitized by SARS and
MERS.
“Taiwan is not a WHO member but its national
pandemic plan could have been written after the
current outbreak rather than seven years before it.
Stockpiles of personal protective equipment, the
capacity for mass testing, and plan for
a nationwide quarantine and devices to keep the
economy running are all there.”

16. Exit strategy?
It seems there no certainty about
this – anywhere in the world
Lock downs will be removed
gradually, tentatively, and perhaps
re-imposed
We won’t know for many months
what the outcome of different
strategies will be.

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