๐จDame Kate Bingham๐จ
Dubbed the "hero in a pink jacket ๐"
On Evusheld:
"I felt very strongly [.]. We were following a very clear 2 tier strategy where the CV immunocompromised were being deprioritised [.] I felt that was *manifestly* wrong both ethically and morally [.]"
1/๐งต
The above video was taken out of sequence. The below should give more context...
KB "So actually, the first goal was around protecting the UK population."
CTI [Hugo Keith KC]
"Do you think you succeeded on securing or making available those monoclonal antibodies?"
KB "No!" 2/
Kate goes on to make the argument that by not protecting this population, we were also promoting viral mutation and the evolution of variants.
3/
On funding, clinical trials, and onshore manufacturing. We need long-term planning and strategy.
KB "We don't have that level of capability or long-term thinking in government."
4/
On the inclusion of therapeutics within the remit of the Vaccine Taskforce:
KB "It was quite clear that there was 'open warfare' between BEIS [Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy] and the Department for Health"
5/
CTI "If you had brought [.] therapeutics within the remit of the VTF, you might have ended up dividing your attention [.] You would have been less able to focus ruthlessly on the question of identifying, procuring, and making available vaccines [.]"
KB "Correct" 6/
KB "I felt strongly that we should have governance over the neutralising antibodies because there are a portion on people in the UK who are immunocompromised."
"It was part of our original mandate."
"to protect all those people *including* the immunocompromised."
7/
She goes on to explain the difference between the antibodies and how Evusheld was designed to last longer to dose every 6m minimum. Other antibodies, designed as treatments, only last around 1 month.
8/
If the VTF had taken on antivirals, Kate believes that they could have made treatments available more rapidly, and they might have been more effective. However, she would have required a larger team.
9/
CTI "Did you ever get the impression during your time in the VTF that the issue of prophylactic development was being left behind, being made to be a second-class citizen?"
KB " I absolutely felt that, yes. From late October 2020."
10/
The JCVI identified *30 MILLION* people who were deemed to be Clinically Vulnerable (at that time):
๐All adults over 50
๐Those under 50 with severe underlying disease
Kate described it as an "enhanced 'flu cohort"
11/
"Immediately" in May 2020, the VTF were aware of the development of Evusheld.
12/
KB "We initially signed a [.] letter of intent, but non-binding for a million doses of their long acting antibody cocktail [.] expected to have a 6m effect."
13/
1 million doses of Evusheld =
2 doses spread over 1 year
OR
1 dose per winter for 2 winters
"The numbers of immunocompromised people [500k] were data that had come from the Department of Health."
14/
AZ couldn't supply this order, as they had 2.5M doses for the world.
They then asked what was the minimum order to protect the immunocompromised population.
15/
The CMOs suggested no more than 50,000 if there was a political will.
Ultimately, no prophylactic treatment has *ever* been purchased to protect this, our most vulnerable, population.
16/
KB "I felt very strongly [.]. We were following a very clear 2 tier strategy where the CV immunocompromised were being deprioritised [.] 1 felt that was *manifestly* wrong both ethically and morally [.]"
17/
KB " It did not follow the goal that we had been set, which was to protect the entire population."
18/
Important comparison between the attitude to procuring vaccines vs. prophylactic treatments for people who are not sufficiently protected by vaccines.
19/
CTI suggests that the cost of Evusheld was not the reason for the decision against.
Kate quotes JVT, "I consider cost, including cost effectiveness and practicality considerations to be entirely rational factors when making decisions on neutralising Ab procurement."
20/
๐งจ๐ฅ
Thank you ๐ @katebingham2 ๐
"The fact that the vaccine rollout had been effective doesn't stop people without an immune system getting infected."
21/
The decision about purchasing Evusheld was ultimately with ministers.
22/
Kate Bingham on that lack of purchase of Evusheld:
"I just think that it was the wrong decision."
23/
โข โข โข
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
โ ๏ธโ ๏ธโ ๏ธ
Don't scroll past without ๐ + โป๏ธ... ๐
๐๐๐
- Can you help us to help you?
If you value our work at the Cโvid Inquiry and beyond, your continued support is vital.
1/
It is hard to explain how much effort has gone in over the past few years to raise understanding and awareness of issues amplified the emerge of Cโvid.
2/
We have participated in NICE as stakeholders and the inquiry as Core Participants (as the only group representing Clinically Vulnerable people).
๐๐ We have collected evidence as data and thousands of ๐ฌ impact statements from people.
Their response dodges the point.
Because the problem really wasnโt that โI didnโt get the jokeโ.
The problem is who the joke is aimed at and what it encourages most people to laugh at.
2/
If the punchline is โPPE / precautions = anxious / ridiculousโ then people who still need precautions (Clinically Vulnerable people) are the collateral damage.
So it is not about โoffenceโ but creating stigma.
We need to talk about the new @Dawn_French โcomedyโ series that implies that infection control is a joke.
This is a serious issue, particularly for Clinically Vulnerable people who remain at increased risk, and we are not laughing. 1/
In the first episode, a GP appears in a dramatic โprotective outfitโ and face shield, and weโre told itโs because โsince Covidโ theyโve developed โvery, very, very bad health anxiety.โ
2/
Then the doctor refuses to get close to the patient, barely touches a wrist, and incorrectly declares them dead.
It invites audiences to mock precautions (during the current flu wave) and suggests that doctors who take measures are less competent.
As a consequence of our advocacy, national voting guidance has been updated to:
โ Improve ventilation
โ Add air filters
โ โSee a mask, wear a maskโ
* VERY IMPORTANT THREAD *
PLEASE SHARE! 1/
6 years since Covid emerged, we are finally making important changes... thanks to your help!
The new guidance not only recognises our needs - due to heightened health risks - but also the risks posed by mask removal.
2/
Why is this so important?
- It is the first national guidance to address our issues directly.... and it sets an important precedent that we plan to build on!
๐งต This autumn the UKHSA is rightly worried, as 'flu is a real risk...
TLDR:
Clinically Vulnerable people ALL need 'flu vaccines + antivirals this year (if symptomatic or exposed) + confused infection control guidance.
If you are Clinically Vulnerable, please read on...
1/
This year's strains aren't looking good:
The infections have started earlier.
A(H3N2) strains are dominant - and linked to worse outcomes.
A shifted strain (slightly different to vaccines) is also doing the rounds.
2/
If you have been invited for a vaccine, or live with a Clinically Vulnerable person (but don't qualify) please consider getting a vaccine - they can be as cheap as ยฃ9.95.
Everyone benefits from 'flu vaccines and children (up to 16) are offered them for free in school.