Virus second wave warnings ‘rubbish’, says leading expert
One of the UK’S most eminent microbiologists has said it is unlikely there will be a second wave of coronavirus.
Health leaders are calling for an urgent review to determine whether the country is properly prepared for the “real risk” of a second wave of Covid-19.
In an open letter published in the British Medical Journal, ministers were warned that urgent action would be needed to prevent further loss of life.
The presidents of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons, Nursing, Physicians, and GPS all signed the letter.
But Professor Hugh Pennington, emeritus professor of bacteriology at Aberdeen University, said: “I’m a second wave sceptic.
“I think this is a load of rubbish. Why should there be one? Flu is the only virus that has a second wave and this is not flu. In fact the more we learn about this virus the more differences between it and flu we find. Nobody has been able to explain why flu has a second wave - it is intrinsic to it.
“What we are now seeing with new coronavirus cases in a meat plant in Germany and other places is not a second wave. It is just an outbreak just a continuation of the current outbreak. The US has had more than 100 outbreaks in meat plants for example. A second wave would be when the virus has gone away or down to very low levels and then comes roaring back.
“I think that is highly unlikely. I still think this virus could disappear - like Sars - if we do the right things and it could be gone before Christmas.
“There is no reason we can’t knock this on the head by testing and tracking the virus on a ramped up scale. By doing that you will be able to find out where the virus is on a more accurate, localised scale and get people to self isolate etc.
“I also would caution against putting too much hope in a vaccine. We may get one, but it may not be that effective. We have had one for flu for 60 years and it is still a pandemic risk and kills thousands of people in this country each year.
“It is much better at the moment to put more aggressive effort into testing and tracing. That’s the quicker route out of this and have a vaccine, if we get one, in reserve.”
Health leaders have called for a “rapid and forward-looking assessment” of how prepared the UK would be for a new outbreak of the virus.
“While the future shape of the pandemic in the UK is hard to predict, the available evidence indicates that local flare-ups are increasingly likely and a second wave a real risk,” they wrote in the letter.
“Many elements of the infrastructure needed to contain the virus are beginning to be put in place, but substantial challenges remain.”
The authors of the letter, also signed by the chair of the British Medical Association, urged ministers to set up a crossparty group with a “constructive, non-partisan, four nations approach”, tasked with developing practical recommendations.
“The review should not be about looking back or attributing blame,” they said, and instead should focus on “areas of weakness where action is needed urgently”.
The Department of Health said it would continue to be guided by the latest scientific advice and would give the NHS “whatever it needs”. were not appropriate for primary pupils, but were a possibility in high schools he said: “I think there is an issue the older young people become, yes.”
And on perspex shields as protection in the classroom, he said: “Our plans are not predicated on there being any physical distancing between pupils to enable schools to return full time but there may be issues about it between staff and pupils.
“These are all issues that will be explored in detail by the scientific advisers.”
At the Scottish Government’s daily coronavirus briefing yesterday, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon rejected accusations from the EIS that the Scottish Government’s decision to plan for a full time return to school in August was “political”.
The union had criticised the government’s announcement on schools, stating it did not meet the EIS’S three main red-lines to be met ahead of a return to schools.
Ms Sturgeon rejected accusations that the plans were “halfbaked” and said the decision was made because the science had changed rather than due to political pressure.
She said: “It is probably as close to being as unfair a thing as anyone could say. We are dealing with an unpredictable virus so you can characterise it as being half-baked and not having our ducks in a row but actually what it means is we don’t know exactly what we are dealing with in terms of the levels of infection and the transmission of the virus.
“We can do certain things to control the virus but we know that we don’t have 100 per cent certainty or 100 per cent guarantee that we will be able to keep it at a low level.
“If I was to come right now to a fixed and settled plan for what we were doing seven weeks away, if I was to say to you here is the fully baked plan right now and that will not change, then I would not be fulfilling my responsibilities because we are not dealing with a situation that is fixed and unchangeable.
“That flexibility we need in all of our planning right now I am afraid is just a fact of life right now.
“All governments have to plan for the scenario they think they will be in and up until recently we thought that we would be in a scenario with infection levels too high to have full time education, now we think we are in a different place so we are planning for full time education.”