THREAD 1/5 Superb report on UK much of which could be applied word-for-word to the pre-March French situation: Special Report: Johnson listened to his scientists about coronavirus - but they were slow to sound the alarm | Article [AMP] | Reuters https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-britain-path-speci-idUSKBN21P1VF">https://www.reuters.com/article/u...

Both countries have similar populations & centralised top-down healthcare systems. Both had well-developed pandemic plans (largely related to interhuman transmission of H5N1 avian flu). Having been involved on the French version, I agree with the assessment that these plans...2/4

...were close to what we have been going through. People who now say this couldn& #39;t have been foreseen are wrong: it was. But we failed to maintain adequate stocks of PPE (France built up a stockpile early on but didn& #39;t renew it) & both failed dismally in our testing strategy 3/4

In both countries, the tapping of scientific expertise was appropriately systematic but too narrowly focused. Once a disease becomes a pandemic, understanding it has as much to do with the social sciences (incl intl relations) as it does with virology, medecine or health care 4/5

I understand the UK scientists& #39; assumption that home confinement wasn& #39;t practicable. Indeed, ditto in French H5N1 pandemic planning. But such judgment calls properly belong to political leaders (hopefully with advice from social scientists) not to the health care community 5/5