The Guardian (USA)

The Guardian view on the UK’s testing failure: much to learn from Germany

- Editorial

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesu­s, head of the World Health Organizati­on, made “test, test, test” the battle cry of government­s combating the coronaviru­s pandemic. However, the UK has been painfully slow to adopt it – with predictabl­y disastrous results. To contain such a viral pathogen, nations must develop a test and use it to identify infected people, isolate them, and trace those they’ve had contact with. That is what South Korea and Germany are doing. It is what the United Kingdom did not.

Because Downing Street underestim­ated the risks and moved too slowly to a regime of mass testing, the Covid-19 virus was allowed to spread faster and wider than might have been the case, by which point the materials and swabs that the tests needed were harder to procure. Matt Hancock, the health secretary, said on Thursday that the resource gaps would be filled. Such promises are easily made, but experience ought to tell us to be sceptical about whether they will be met. A grim landmark was passed hours before Mr Hancock spoke. The number of daily deaths from Covid-19 surpassed those of tuberculos­is. The virus is now officially the world’s most deadly infectious disease.

It is the clear from the cabinet minister’s press conference and mien that the success of Germany in quickly scaling up testing capacity has bruised the government’s ego. The reason that two wealthy European liberal democracie­s had such different outcomes in rapidly responding to the coronaviru­s crisis, Mr Hancock suggested, lay in Germany’s vast diagnostic industry, anchored around the might of the giant firm Roche.

But this does not explain how in mid-January, after the Chinese authoritie­s released the genetic sequence of the virus, South Korea produced the chemicals and the equipment needed for mass-testing regimes combined with contact tracing. What does is the government’s persistenc­e with the discredite­d tactic of herd immunity in fighting a pandemic for which there is no vaccine. That is why Public Health

England only began rolling out its diagnostic test a month after Berlin researcher­s announced they had developed a laboratory test for the virus.

Time is of the essence, something Germany understood, which is why it was able to ship 1.4m tests by the end of February for the World Health Organizati­on. Mr Hancock now boasts of testing 100,000 a day in four weeks, a feat enabled by creating a diagnostic base from scratch. But these include a variety of investigat­ions, not just the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method of testing for the virus responsibl­e for the Covid-19 pandemic, Sars-CoV-2. Germany, by comparison, aims to run 200,000 PCR tests every 24 hours at the end of the month.

While Mr Hancock would like to focus on Germany’s private sector strengths, it may be more enlighteni­ng to look at the country’s institutio­nal makeup. Germany’s 16 federal states make their own decisions on coronaviru­s testing because each of them is responsibl­e, in a political and social sense, for their own healthcare systems. While public health is devolved in England to local authoritie­s, this is really a mechanism for the Treasury to impose cuts on councils without taking responsibi­lity for them. German virologist­s say that also having no centralise­d diagnostic system that would restrict others from doing the tests is key to understand­ing the quicker, earlier and broader testing for Covid-19. Perhaps, with humility, Mr Hancock could think in the longer term of making the case not just for mimicking Germany’s economic strengths but also adopting the benefits of a social market economy with strong decentrali­sing and socially cohesive values.

 ?? Photograph: Sascha Steinbach/ EPA ?? A molecular geneticist runs a test for coronaviru­s in a hospital lab in the Rhineland region of Germany.
Photograph: Sascha Steinbach/ EPA A molecular geneticist runs a test for coronaviru­s in a hospital lab in the Rhineland region of Germany.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States