Email: 20/12/20
Dear [INSERT MP]
I am writing to request your help towards highlighting the need for urgent revisions to the current PHE UK Covid-19 infection prevention & control (IP&C) personal protective equipment (PPE) policy for all “front line” health & social care staff.
To-date, three UK-based reports demonstrate significantly greater risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and/or death in non-ICU UK patient-facing healthcare workers (HCWs):

The most recent (28th October) is from the BMJ (doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3…), with data on 158,445 Scottish HCWs...
...(1st Mar – 6th June 2020) indicating that: "patient facing HCWs compared with non-patient facing HCWs, were at higher risk [of SARS-CoV-2 infection] (HR 3.30, 2.13-5.13)...after sub-division of patient facing HCWs into…front door, ICU, non-ICU aerosol generating settings...
...and other, those in front door roles were at higher risk (HR 2.09, 1.49-2.94).”
The second report was released as a medRxiv preprint in June 2020 (doi.org/10.1101/2020.0…, n=9,809 HCWs), in which an Oxford research team demonstrated: “Risk of Covid-19 infection varied...
...by specialty, even accounting for working in a Covid-19 facing area. Those working in acute medicine were at increased risk, (aOR 1.5, 95% CI 1.05 – 2.15, p=0.03), while ICUs were at lower risk (0.46, 0.29 – 0.72, p=0.001).”
Finally, a report into 106 HCW deaths from Covid-19
...dating to 22nd April 2020, described how none of the deceased medical or nursing staff were anaesthetists, intensivists, or worked on intensive care (hsj.co.uk/exclusive-deat…).
These findings can be understood when considering that presently, front-door (non-ICU) HCWs involved with Covid-19 patient care are in a ‘perfect storm’ of greater SARS-CoV-2 infection risk, yet with sub-optimal PHE UK guideline-directed PPE:

Compared to ICU staff...
...front door (non-ICU) HCWs are exposed to patients with significantly higher Covid-19-associated viral load:

- The median time from onset of Covid-19 symptoms in the community to presentation at hospital is 4 days (inter-quartile range 1-8, ISARIC A4, n=20,133 patients...
...doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1…).
- The median time from symptom onset to severe hypoxaemia and ICU admission is approximately 7–12 days (thelancet.com/journals/lanre…).
- “The greatest viral load, and thus infectiousness, is observed during the first week of symptoms (especially day 0-5), declining after that.” (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…).
- The typical non-ICU working environment (i.e. non-isolation wards) is subject to lower ventilation standards compared to the ICU: i.e. 6 air changes per hour (AC/hr) is permitted on general wards, half of which may be passive (i.e. requiring windows to be open and subject to...
...important external environmental fluctuations), while 10 AC/hr is mandated on the ICU, all of which must be mechanical (gov.uk/government/pub…).
Airborne / aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is now acknowledged by WHO, CDC, ECDC, SAGE (UK), and latterly, the ‘PHE (UK) Transmission Group’ (October 2020), with speaking recognised to be an important aerosol-generating activity (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…).
Front door (non-ICU) HCWs triaging or caring for Covid-19 positive patients are not permitted to wear respiratory PPE providing aerosol protection (i.e. FFP3 or hood), since present PHE UK guidelines only permit such protection in staff working in high risk areas...
... “when undertaking AGPs [aerosol generating procedures] on confirmed or suspected covid19 patients/individual.” (assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl…).
Moreover, providing novel insights into the present designation of intubation and/or extubation as high-risk AGPs through “real-time, high-resolution environmental monitoring”, investigators from Bristol in a manuscript accepted 2nd October 2020 (…-publications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.111…)...
...concluded: “The study does not support the designation of elective tracheal intubation as an aerosol generating procedure. Extubation generates more detectable aerosol than intubation but falls below the current criterion for designation as a high-risk...
...aerosol-generating procedure.” This was based on the finding: “Using the quantity & concentration of aerosolised particles generated by volitional coughs as a reference, we have shown that both intubation & extubation sequences produce less aerosol than voluntary coughing.”
While it is technically impossible to rapidly re-engineer ventilation systems within all healthcare premises to achieve ICU-equivalent levels, the provision of FFP3 (or equivalent) respirators to all UK HCWs in Covid-19 facing roles could be readily achieved...
...at the necessary scale and pace to help reduce the significantly greater risk of HCW-associated SARS-CoV-2 infection otherwise experienced as a result of inappropriate PHE UK guidelines. Therefore, I would be extremely grateful for your help towards...
...initiating PHE UK IP&C SARS-CoV-2 PPE guideline change, allowing all UK Covid-19 patient-facing HCWs to benefit from the additional protection afforded by FFP3 (or equivalent) respiratory PPE.
In keeping with General Medical Council UK ‘Duties of a good doctor’ and recognising this important threat to public health, I have already contacted PHE SW – email sent 12th November, but have received no reply.
On 19th November Prof Peter Horby responded to my email requesting help from NERVTAG, and he directed me to PHE/DHSC. DHSC is yet to respond to my enquiry via the web portal.
As a GMC registered clinician with a responsibility to protect the health of the public, my concern over this public health issue is genuine. I would be extremely grateful for your urgent help in this matter, please.
Many thanks.
Yours sincerely
David R. Tomlinson
GMC 4213048
Outcome?

MP: Trying to help, but no joy yet. Meanwhile:

22/12/20 DHSC: You need PHE (diff email)
24/1/21 PHE: You need NHSE

NHSE: Guess what they said (next tweet)...
103 days after I emailed:

'I understand that your query has been escalated by your MP to Mr Hancock's special advisor and in addition Greg Clark MP has also been contacted by Lucy Bailey, one of his constituents on the same matter.
Greg Clark MP was going to discuss this with Sir Simon Stevens.

In light of the above, it would seem that all the escalation routes have already been exhausted and you should wait for a response from your MP.'
@trishgreenhalgh @microlabdoc @mjb302 @YouAreLobbyLud @NjbBari3
'IN LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, IT WOULD SEEM THAT ALL THE ESCALATION ROUTES HAVE ALREADY BEEN EXHAUSTED AND YOU SHOULD WAIT FOR A RESPONSE FROM YOUR MP.'

Asad, I'm right with you at the rage end of the spectrum.
@AnthonyMangnal1, thanks for trying.
@LABailey @GregClarkMP @MattHancock
@threadreaderapp unroll please. 💙

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David R Tomlinson 💙

David R Tomlinson 💙 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DRTomlinsonEP

14 May
“What we have got to do is work out some balance which actually keeps [Covid] at a low level, minimises deaths as best we can but in a way that the population tolerates..,” @CMO_England 1/4/21

137 HCW deaths since 08/20

HCWs tolerate FFP3 but only ICU teams get them: why?
'Dynamic CO-CIN report to SAGE and NERVTAG
Includes patients admitted after 01 August 2020
There are 104666 patients included in CO-CIN. Of these, 21177 patient(s) have died & 18043 required ICU. 62747 have been discharged home.'
@trishgreenhalgh
Read 6 tweets
13 May
Panel suggests WHO should have more power to stop pandemics independent.co.uk/news/world/ame…
Necessarily abbreviated! 👆

Full quote: As a healthcare worker, my overwhelming impression of the response of WHO teams to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is that they failed on the most fundamental aspect: i.e. truthfully describing its transmission characteristics.
/1
Through actively & persistently denying that SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurred via the airborne route, WHO teams have *amplified* the pandemic, caused huge waste in surface cleaning measures & allowed nation states' IPAC policies for HCWs & their population to remain...
/2
Read 5 tweets
13 May
'Our estimates are that in the post-intervention [FFP3] period there was a 37% reduction in staff off sick with Covid-19 even accounting for immunity. The effect of this multiplied across the entire NHS in avoiding staff sickness, long Covid, & even death would be enormous'
'In our study it is reassuring that the overwhelming majority of staff members (79%), following eight weeks of enhanced respiratory protection with FFP3, stated their preference to continue their use'

Not even 'DEATH BEFORE ACNE' here, @YouAreLobbyLud
Another notable finding: 10/11 HCWs who knew the reason for changing to FFP3 (i.e. increased @CUH_NHS staff sickness) wanted to continue using FFP3 after the study period.

I'm guessing you didn't even need to show them an IPAC 'disaster graphic' like this @mjb302? @microlabdoc
Read 4 tweets
12 May
Catch me if you can: Superspreading of SARS-CoV-2
Highly readable: recommended.
h/t @microlabdoc cell.com/trends/microbi…
Theoretical mechanisms - differential glycosylation: 'SARS-CoV-2 produced in individuals with distinct blood groups may differ in their glycosylation patterns, which could impact the binding and susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2 in respiratory epithelium and subsequent transmission'
And just for you @MicrobiomDigest: 'These observations suggest that nasal microbiome communities can influence efficient airborne transmission of respiratory viruses'.
Read 8 tweets
12 May
'The [WHO] process of developing evidence-based guideline documents for clinicians, public health experts & policymakers follows rigorous, standardized procedures, making sure that their compilation is transparent & based on evidence, & that any potential COIs are made explicit' Image
'The organization aims at making guidelines, when applicable, close to “real-time”, which it believes would be possible by using a “living guidelines” approach based on living systematic reviews and living recommendations' @microlabdoc Image
Dear @WHO IPC teams,
Based on recent [negative] peer review, I am looking forward to you revising the scope of the @F1000Research 'SARS-CoV-2 & the role of airborne transmission' living systematic review.
💙 @trishgreenhalgh @DFisman @kprather88 @jljcolorado @zeynep ImageImage
Read 4 tweets
5 May
I am sorry I can only copy two lead authors directly, but I would like to thank all authors for acting on their high sense of responsibility towards improving public health.

I am also sorry I could not reply within the 7-day window you provided for 'stakeholder feedback'.
I hope you don't mind a Q?
Given:
- Epidemiological studies support airborne transmission
- Presence of virus RNA in the air, air vents/exhausts/ducts/filters
- Presence of virus RNA in exhaled breath
- Airborne viability up to 16 hours
- Presence of live virus in the air
...
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(