150,000 COVID-19 deaths: the price of intransigence

Abstract

2022 promises to be a pivotal year. The full effects of the Omicron variant of SARS-Cov-2 will become apparent and, more significantly, the UK government has promised an inquiry into the handling of the pandemic. The level of criticism of the official response has been high, including from non-official inquiries, such as the People’s Covid Inquiry, and interim verdicts from the health and science select committees. Of course, the UK isn’t alone in being criticised. The International Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response has also singled out the mishandling of the pandemic by governments.

The inquiry, then, will be a test of the government’s integrity and its ability to enable and respond to frank critique. It may well criticise politicians and their scientific advisors and advisory committees, a number of whom ‘prematurely’ received state honours.¹ It should examine the appropriateness of public health interventions during the pandemic, and whether a more optimal strategy might have avoided the harmful extremes of lockdown and laissez-faire?²

Another major consideration is the effect of strategies on the health and wellbeing of children, and the part played by widening inequalities. Disruption to schooling has raised major concerns about the effect on children who are socially vulnerable. If this is an issue in rich countries, it is an even bigger one in poorer countries. Education and schooling are important determinants of health, and this month we begin a new series that will explore this relationship.³

Traditional public health and children were, in different ways, overlooked during the day-to-day crisis management of the pandemic. The same might apply to the effect of multimorbidities on mortality, on which we present new data.⁴ But perhaps the greatest failing was that, during the pandemic, politicians and scientists retrenched, continuing to defend their initial position or refusing to adapt as experience and evidence evolved? We already know that researchers, for example, prefer to cite work that supports their own findings or claims – otherwise known as citation bias.⁵ With over 150,000 UK deaths from COVID-19, the price of intransigence is a damning verdict on the decision-making classes.

References

de Matos AAG, Cruz Correia da Silva KV, J°nior JG, Alves RNP, Lima NNR, Sampaio ML et al. de Matos AAG, et al. Social inequalities and extreme vulnerability of children and adolescents affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. J R Soc Med 2022; 115(1): 36–37.

Reynolds EH. How to avoid harmful national quarantines: primary care led local public health: a historical perspective. J R Soc Med 2022; 115(1): 12–15.

Lowry C, Stegeman I, Rauch F and Jani A. Modifying the school determinants of children’s health. J R Soc Med 2022; 115(1): 16–21.

Agrawal U, Azcoaga-Lorenzo A , Fagbamigbe AF, Vasileiou E, Henery P, Simpson CR et al. Association between multimorbidity and mortality in a cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in Scotland. J R Soc Med 2022; 115(1): 22–30.

Gøtzsche PC. Citation bias: questionable research practice or scientific misconduct?. J R Soc Med 2022; 115(1): 31.