The T&T budget is massive, and it's right that it has scrutiny. The vast majority (perhaps around 80%) has gone on testing and the achievements here are pretty significant.
Regularly >5% of population are tested for a disease that we didn't know existed around a yr ago. 2/
But by the same token relatively little has been spend on the contact tracing and isolation support.
We can't test our way out of the pandemic - it has to go hand in hand with tracing contacts and ensuring people have the support they need to isolate. 3/
The weekly T&T data don't tell us who doesn't get tested despite having symptoms (COVID Social Study suggests that only around 1/3 regular test if symptomatic)
and who struggles to adhere to isolation guidance (CORSAIR study suggests perhaps as little as 1 in 5 fully adhere). 4/
We address these specific points around testing, contact tracing, isolation, and inequalities in our original @HealthFdn submission to the @CommonsPAC.
The PAC report usefully highlights that local gov should have been more directly involved early on & recommends more engagement with public health and local stakeholders.
And whilst a lot has changed since T&T launched, local gov and community engagement will remain critical 6/
COVID's exposed and exacerbated inequalities across society.
Moving forward, test/trace/isolation policies need to be co-designed with the local authorities and communities that have been most impacted by COVID, and who have the most to gain from the reopening of society. 7/
This needs to happen alongside a coordinated cross gov approach to the deep structural drivers of inequalities & enduring transmission across more deprived parts of the country.
With local gov/regional flexibility & resource to address their ongoing local challenges. 8/
Without this, the parts of the country that are least able to cope will have ongoing transmission, more lockdowns, more economic and social isolation, more direct and indirect harm, more variants, and more inequalities.
As a society, this shouldn't in any way be tolerable. 9/
So while the report makes some very helpful T&T-specific recommendations, the success of NHS T&T and the broader COVID response also depends on the gov meaningfully engaging in the wider structural drivers of inequalities in England 10/
And many of the necessary policy actions and investments required are dealt with here: health.org.uk/publications/b… 11/11
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Case numbers and percentage testing positive (positivity) still falling across community testing (pillar 2) and health care worker/those in clinical need tests (pillar 1).
The steep drop in P2 positivity is due to the massive jump in LFD use (lateral flow devices for rapid testing among people without symptoms)
2.8m done between 1st-7th March, with a positivity of 0.17% compared with 1.7m done the week before. LFD use will rise further next wk.
And check out how rates in 80+y/o were tracking with those aged 20-60yrs
but over the last few weeks the rate of decline has accelerated to track more closely with those aged 60-80yrs.
After positivity went a bit wild last week (half term and therefore far fewer LFDs being done) reassuring it's back to similar trends to the week before.
Having said this, pillar 2 positivity is really hard to interpret now as includes LFDs and PCR.
Latest REACT-1 study now published suggesting prevalence of COVID in England of 0.5% between 4th-23rd Feb (round 9).
Two-thirds lower than the 1.6% reported over the same period in Jan (round 8).
But big variation by region, ethnicity, and deprivation. 1/4
Higher chance of infection among Asian ethnic groups, if more deprived, bigger households, and if health/care worker. 2/4
And whilst still declining everywhere, higher prevalence in NE, London, East Mids, with some signs that falls are stalling in London, West Mids, and SE.
Finally, lowest prevalence in 65+ but big drops across the board. 3/4