THE SNP’s Dr Philippa Whitford has said the UK Government is acting like a child “blinded by gimmicks” and “shiny beads” in seeking to maximise testing figures while ignoring more effective epidemic strategies.
She also accused the Health Secretary Matt Hancock of “burning through money” chasing headline-grabbing Covid testing figures rather than pursuing a policy which would better suppress the virus.
The SNP MP and medical professional told The National: “The problem is that the UK Government, and particularly Matt Hancock, is obsessed with numbers. ‘Oh, look at how many hundreds of thousands of tests we are doing.’
“The way to manage a pandemic is to test, trace, isolate, and support. [Hancock]’s never looked at this in a systematic way, he’s never talked about isolation, and people need support to be able to isolate.”
Whitford highlighted reports that the UK Government is aiming to spend £43 billion on its mass Covid-19 testing vision using lateral flow tests.
READ MORE: Matt Hancock accused of 'patronising mansplaining' of Covid testing to SNP MP
Stressing that this figure is about one third of NHS England’s £148.8bn annual budget (in 2019/20), Whitford argued that this money could be much better spent elsewhere. She asked: “What else could you achieve if you spent that £43bn in a better way?”
The MP for Central Ayrshire said that using the money to pay “people better to isolate would be the number one thing to reduce transmission”.
Whitford went on: “Test, trace and isolate is very traditional. Public health teams have been doing this for a century or more. Why are you so blinded by gimmicks? It’s like shiny beads to a child.
“This may not be sexy, it may not be a big headline, but this is a systematic approach to managing an epidemic. Test, trace and isolate.
“That’s what you should be focusing on, not gimmicks, which is what the lateral flow test is.”
The UK Government has championed the use of lateral flow tests for a variety of reasons, including visiting care homes, returning to work or school after coming into close contact with a Covid-positive person, and taking part in sporting events.
However, Whitford warned that these tests “are clearly not designed to be used for asymptomatic people, it basically says that on the packet”.
Westminster claims these tests are 77% accurate, but Whitford explained that this figure is misleading.
She said: “77% [was] when you had a clinician do the test to you. That drops to 58% if you were doing it to yourself but you were a nurse or somebody with a lot of knowledge. The real world [study] was only 48%.”
Lateral flow tests are cheaper and faster than Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests, but they are also significantly less accurate.
PCR tests, which detect the presence of coronavirus gene fragments, need to be sent to a laboratory in order to return a result. Lateral flow tests, which test for SARS-CoV-2 antigens, can be self-administered and return a result in 30 minutes.
With lateral flow tests returning a false negative 52% of the time in real world studies, and 33% of the time when people are carrying a high viral load, Whitford stressed: “You cannot assume that a negative result from a lateral flow test means you are not carrying Covid.”
The “false reassurance” given by false negatives led the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to reject Westminster’s plans to mass test English school pupils on Thursday. The MHRA cited fears students would attend class and spread the virus when they should be self-isolating.
Lateral flow tests were also the focus of a recent opinion piece in the British Medical Journal which accused the UK Government of misleading the public over the efficacy of its testing programme.
READ MORE: Public being 'misled' by Westminster over Covid testing accuracy, BMJ says
The respected medical journal said: “Low test accuracy would be less dangerous if people being tested and the public at large received accurate information about the risks and implications of a false negative result. Instead they are being misled.
“Results from government studies have been selectively reported and some have not been reported at all. Letters to schools and parents have wrongly stated that the Innova tests were ‘as accurate in identifying a case as a PCR test’.”
It added: “In the face of so much potential for harm and so little evidence of benefit, why is the government pushing the roll-out?”
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said the use of lateral flow tests had allowed the Government to find 26,992 Covid-19 cases so far, adding: “Every positive case detected and told to self-isolate is another transmission chain broken, helping stop the spread of the virus.”
The spokesperson went on: “Lateral flow devices (LFDs) go through a rigorous evaluation by the country’s leading scientists. This means they are accurate, reliable and successfully identify those with Covid-19 who don’t show symptoms and could pass on the virus without realising.
“With up to a third of individuals not displaying symptoms, broadening asymptomatic testing is essential. LFDs detect cases with high levels of virus, making them effective in finding individuals who are the most likely to transmit the disease, including those not showing symptoms.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel