Leaked documents from the European CDC meeting of the 18th of February (a week before Italy put some cities in quarantine) show that the ECDC evaluated the risks for the population as "low" and the risk for healthcare systems as "low or moderate".
(thread)
(thread)
2/ Before continuing, here is the source (in Italian: repubblica.it/esteri/2020/05…)
3/ The Danish representative seems to be the only one in the room to remark that hospital beds might become a problem.
Representatives discuss a PPE shortage but make no plan.
Representatives discuss a PPE shortage but make no plan.
4/ The ECDC decides that the testing criteria is "must have traveled to Wuhan".
The Danish representative, again, is the only one saying "it would be logical to look for the virus in severe pneumonia cases" and that we should be "ready and proactive" like Vietnam, but is ignored
The Danish representative, again, is the only one saying "it would be logical to look for the virus in severe pneumonia cases" and that we should be "ready and proactive" like Vietnam, but is ignored
5/ The representatives of Austria and Slovakia alerted of the risk of "stigmatizing" those who get tested
Spanish epidemiologist Fernando Simón alerts of the risk of frightening the population. 5 weeks later he will test positive. While still being Head of the emergency response
Spanish epidemiologist Fernando Simón alerts of the risk of frightening the population. 5 weeks later he will test positive. While still being Head of the emergency response
6/ Here is the source for tweet #5, in Spanish: elpais.com/sociedad/2020-…
7/ A few comments of mine:
- It's not that the people in the room are incompetent. They're competent at optimizing for a political objective, which is different from the expected objective of preventing outbreaks.
- It's not that the people in the room are incompetent. They're competent at optimizing for a political objective, which is different from the expected objective of preventing outbreaks.
8/ - Much is to be done now to fight COVID-19.
But if we want to be ready for the next epidemic, we must answer the question of why were these people chosen (no, incompetence is not the answer), what we want for our institutions, and how we will ensure that we get it.
But if we want to be ready for the next epidemic, we must answer the question of why were these people chosen (no, incompetence is not the answer), what we want for our institutions, and how we will ensure that we get it.
9/ A similar meeting pandemic.substack.com/p/the-2005-dec…
10/ Apparently the notes of the meeting have been uploaded (ht @enorts). It also contains the names of the attendees.
ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/…
ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/…
11/ We learn that on the 18th of Feb, Fernando Simón, the 🇪🇸 delegate, was already "concerned about the risk of importation and how to deal with secondary clusters, given that contact tracing was currently a greater burden on the public health system than actual healthcare."
12/ Contrast this with the public declaration to media at the time.
13/ The Danish delegate noted that "this was a beta coronavirus and there were no examples to date of such a virus having sustained human transmission without an environmental or zoonotic component"
On the 18th of February, less than a week before the first quarantines in Italy.
On the 18th of February, less than a week before the first quarantines in Italy.
14/ The Swedish delegate has a risk-management process analogous to "I will wear the seatbelt after the numbers tell me that the car crashed": 
15/ The Finnish delegate mentions that testing people who traveled from more countries (rather than just Hubei) "would not be sustainable".
But apparently a two-months lockdown of the European economy is.
But apparently a two-months lockdown of the European economy is.
16/ The German delegate, referring to the Chinese outbreak: "75 000 people out of a population of 1.4 billion was not many".
He ignores that China had had lockdowns for weeks.
He cannot even fathom the possibility of the same happening in Europe, soon.
He ignores that China had had lockdowns for weeks.
He cannot even fathom the possibility of the same happening in Europe, soon.
17/ The ECDC chief scientist said that "it had become evident from clusters in France and Germany that the virus transmitted very well."
Duh. As billions of the world population already knew, but they were probably living too far to be acknowledged.
Duh. As billions of the world population already knew, but they were probably living too far to be acknowledged.
18/ That's the end of the notes. Not everything is bad and dumb and reckless, some comments have actually common sense, so I encourage you to read the full notes.
But the picture is dire and shows how centralized institutions are points of failure.
But the picture is dire and shows how centralized institutions are points of failure.
19/ Failing to see the epidemic wasn't a problem of failing to understand biology or exponential growth
It was a problem of empathy
My grandma could have looked at China in January and say "wow, they're locking down, this disease must be a pretty big deal, we should get ready"
It was a problem of empathy
My grandma could have looked at China in January and say "wow, they're locking down, this disease must be a pretty big deal, we should get ready"
20/ The solution is not to put better experts in that room.
It's to devise a system that doesn't relies on centralized expert rooms for its risk management.
A solution is circuit breakers: alternative regulations kicking in automatically during crises luca-dellanna.com/circuit-breake…
It's to devise a system that doesn't relies on centralized expert rooms for its risk management.
A solution is circuit breakers: alternative regulations kicking in automatically during crises luca-dellanna.com/circuit-breake…
