Thread by @globalhlthtwit

I respect Susan Hopkins but this troubles me. Watch from 37.04 when she is asked on isolation. She says people when contacted are already isolating and that if people have got a test the vast majority do the right thing. But the evidence is different (1) bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod…

1. No. of contacts for each COVID-19 case is 17 per case in Taiwan, 2 in the United Kingdom.
2. China had 1 LOCAL contact tracer per 1200 population in Wuhan. UK has less than one per 10,000.
3. Successful countries test contacts and use apps to monitor isolation. We don't. (2)

4. The CORSAIR study showed self-reported adherence to test, trace and isolate behaviours was very low (selfisolation) 18.2%, 95% CI 16.4% to 19.9%. gov.uk/government/pub… (3)

5. 'Intention to share details of close contacts' 76.1%, 95% CI 75.4% to 76.8%;
6. 'Quarantining' 10.9%, 95% CI 7.8% to 13.9%)
7. Non-adherence associated with: men, younger age groups, having a dependent child, lower socioecon grade, greater hardship, + work in a key sector.(4)

'Practical support and financial reimbursement is likely to improve adherence.' Our support is miserable compared with many other countries. nuffieldtrust.org.uk/chart/internat… (5)

And even if you are eligible and claim for the £500 payment you are more than likely to be rejected. (6)

The five million people in the UK on zero hour contracts must choose between getting a test (and being asked to isolate) or feeding their family. In Liverpool's pilot of mass testing 'take-up was as low as 4% in the most disadvantaged parts of the city'(7) scottiepress.org/articles/mp-sa…

Isolation of cases and contacts is the fundamental route to control of spread if you want to avoid another lockdown. Not the number of tests. Our isolation policy is full of holes because the Treasury won't support it. Senior health advisers and SAGE know this. (8)