The way @MichaelMarmot is pointing the finger exclusively at the government for the deaths of 29 London bus drivers of Covid-19 is outrageous. Read the @UCL IHE report, not just the PR, you'll see it does not establish that late lockdown was *the main factor* at all. 1/n https://twitter.com/MichaelMarmot/status/1287680517576495104

The IHE Phase 1 report claims "the study reinforces the point that lockdown is the most effective measure for reducing mortality among bus drivers.” But it made no effort whatsoever to look at measures that could have been taken by @MayorofLondon Mayor and @TfL but were not. 2/n

Nor did the IHE Phase 1 report examine whether the bus companies rigorously instituted Covid-19 safety measures when they claimed they did. Nor did it look at the effectiveness of measures taken to protect drivers by other cities around the world. 3/n

All the IHE Phase 1 report establishes is that the drivers who died probably got infected before lockdown. I don't dispute that an earlier lockdown might have saved lives. But so would earlier and more aggressive actions by the @MayorofLondon, @TfL and the drivers' employers. 4/n

Had so many bus drivers not had prior health problems - in particular hypertension - IHE finds fewer of them would have died too. But the report fails to draw the link with their working conditions, which we know from the Loughborough fatigue research were appalling. 5/n

Maybe IHE didn't bother to look at @MayorofLondon and @TfL actions (or inaction) to protect drivers because they thought they were only allowed to do follow Public Health England guidance. But the whole saga of banning and unbanning front door loading shows that is nonsense. 6/n

In fact, in its response to the @MichaelMarmot @UCL IHE review, @TfL admits that in more than one case bus companies actually wanted to go beyond the PHE guidance and it was @TfL which advised them not to do so. This is absolutely shocking. 7/n

We know that by 16 April the @MayorofLondon was saying: "the evidence around the world is that [wearing masks] is effective". So why did he not act immediately, instead of telling drivers masks were ineffective and pressuring bus companies not to require drivers use them? 8/n

Just to be clear: PHE should have recommended protection measures for transport workers and masks for passengers much earlier than it did. But the Mayor and TfL had all the information and powers that they might have needed to take these steps themselves, but didn't do so. 9/n

The introduction to the @UCL IHE report says: “we then look at the relationship between the timing of illness of those who died, the progress of the epidemic, those actions taken *by TfL* and bus companies.” Except that nowhere in the report do they look at TfL's actions. 10/n

It's a shocking omission. According to the specification for the @MichaelMarmot report, @TfL promised to provide the data required to do this, but it looks like they didn't do so. Subsequent Mayoral Questions show TfL does not actually have the data it promised to @UCL IHE. 11/n

One thing the @UCL IHE @MichaelMarmot Phase 1 report does do is analyse what measures bus companies eventually implemented to protect drivers, when. But it made no effort to verify whether they were done diligently. Nor did TfL, at any point. No spot checks, no inspections. 12/n