Ian Bolland discusses the lifting of COVID restrictions, and rumours surrounding the provision of lateral flow tests.
So, it was a delayed freedom, but a freedom nonetheless as new health secretary Sajid Javid has basically stripped away any restrictions immediately after his predecessor was caught breaching the one he set in a liaison which I’m sure you have all seen by now.
On the positive side of things, this should mean I should see as many of you as possible at Med-Tech Innovation Expo in late September at the NEC. Hopefully this gamble from the government pays off, but now they are putting the onus on the public to exercise “caution” by taking “personal responsibility” which seems to be not-so-subtle code for shifting any blame if it goes wrong and is contrary to much of the sensible advice from a lot of scientists we have heard throughout this pandemic.
For the record, those who see me on the show floor in September are likely to see me with a mask despite being double jabbed because I feel it is the right thing to do in an attempt to put others at ease if nothing. It’s not just about the individual, it’s about all of us.
Further to this, I have been baffled on one level, though not surprised on another, about one of the government’s actions coinciding with the lifting of restrictions is the reported proposal of winding down the provision of lateral flow tests. This seems to be from playbook of Donald Trump who, during his presidency, took aim at testing as the reason for a surge in COVID-19 cases. Regular readers of my column, and listeners to The MedTalk Podcast, probably have a good idea of my stance on Boris Johnson and his Cabinet’s handling of the pandemic, but even I didn’t think they would go as far as to consider adopting that particular Trump policy.
Burying heads in the sand won’t make the pandemic go away. Johnson said himself it is not over, which makes the downgrading of the importance of face masks and the consideration of winding down the provision of tests a misstep, to say the least. People will still get sick, including children who have yet to be vaccinated, hospitals will feel the strain – which makes me question the real motivation behind all of this.
Not only that, but the reported abandonment of testing seems to make even less sense when there are studies suggesting the rapid lateral flow tests are a more effective tool than previously thought. One study, which included researchers from Queen Mary University of London and Oxford University, showed that in newly symptomatic patients, they can be just as accurate as PCR testing. Not only is this worthy of applause to all those who worked on developing these tests that have been crucial in stopping the spread of transmission, and lately allowing pilot tests to see if certain sections of the economy can re-open safely.
Contemplating withdrawing measures, and indeed support for parts of the industry that have produced effective tools to combat the pandemic when cases are steeply rising seems weird at best, and at worst, reckless.
