Read on Twitter
One thing that I've been v interested in since reading the UK pandemic plan was how did it compare to other countries? So I read a few
The first one I read was New Zealand's. And I was *really* impressed. What really stands out is a) how much more of an actual *plan* this is than ours b) how well cross-referenced it is and c) how clear it is. Look at the 6 stage outline below. Crystal clear
Also the NZ plan is explicit about the need to actually *test* their plans on an on-going basis.
What also stands out is they have specified upfront what the triggers are for moving from one stage to the next and what the objective of that phase is. The UK plans had nothing like this level of detail
Where NZ also differs is that given the disruption of a full blown pandemic they will throw *everything they have* to "keep it out" or "stamp it out". They realise the evidence behind measures isn't great BUT, in contrast to the UK, feel like any benefit is worth having
And again, look at how joined up their response is. The education ministry has a plan, it is cross-referenced here and the supporting material and required legislation is also provided.
As someone who is just coming off some of supply chain work for Covid this *really* stood out. NZ not only stockpiled equipment but also *raw material* - this is brilliant. Responsive manufacturing is probably a better idea than stockpiling and NZ got there already
HOWEVER look! Another country that felt that once the outbreak is out of control widespread testing would be of little use. The UK was certainly not an outlier in this regard
NZ has a civil defence infrastructure already, that is one of the things I think the UK really needs. Building off the Good Sam app and really thinking about how to protect us from these types of disasters rather than just "call in the army!"
Also look! NZ Comms are pretty explicit you should already have a stockpile! Far from being told not to stockpile they tell people to always have one
BUT NZ is a small country with few entry points. This plan is interesting as it suggests a well functioning government NOT b/c we should copy it. In terms of direct lessons from plans I think Australia is a better bet.
And initially it looks like they have the same response to us - the flexible proportional response developed in response to the 2009 flu
But there is a *crucial* difference! Australia recognised that with a novel virus they won't know how bad it is at the start. They will therefore always overreact *first* then as more data becomes available ease restrictions if needed. They also explicitly discuss downside risks
Another crucial difference is that Australia agrees with us that boarder measures won't stop the *arrival* of the novel virus - but they then take another subtle difference in approach and say they will do border control to *minimise the number of entries of the virus*
Given what we now know about how Covid came to the UK this looks like a v sensible idea! https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-52993734
Also an interesting discussion about SARS - this is the only reference Incan find in *either* plan to anything that isn't flu. Which is important as it shows its not just the UK that "only planned for flu and this is why we did badly". That's just not true
Finally the Australian plan summaries the quality of evidence on each intervention. This is similar to what the UK plan said. The crucial thing I want to stress though is *all* of these make a *minor* contribution on their own to disease control. The effect comes from combination
Also though - the Australian plan does recommend masks for high severity outbreaks! Despite the low strength of evidence. Because they recognise the big issue is a lack of research NOT evidence of now effect.
Then I tried to review the US plan and it was ... Impossible. There wasn't a single clear document anywhere, there were links going in all directions and I gave up. Which...seems appropriate?
And obviously this is all only about the *initial* repsonce to the virus. But the point of all this is to show that other English speaking Anglophone countries developed IMO much better plans for pandemic response off much the same evidence as the UK
I think this points out institutional issues across the UK government and *this* is what I hope we focus on once all this is over (and a note we are still v early in this current pandemic). We tend to blame individuals for deeper seated issues. I hope we don't do that this time
