Health

A leading architect of the government’s social care reforms said he is “very disappointed” and “uncomfortable” with watered-down proposals for the social care cap that hit less affluent households.Sir Andrew Dilnot told MPs that changes to the Social Care Act, due to be voted on next week, would mean the poorest households in the country will not actually benefit from the cap.He told the House of Commons treasury committee on Thursday that the changes will mean pensioners “will be much less protected against catastrophic risk.”“A very large proportion of the population needing care will find itself materially less protected by the proposals the government has announced then they would’ve been,” he said. Those with less valuable houses but facing significant care journeys will be much less protected against catastrophic risk and the sale of their house if this amendment were made”.Sir Andrew, a former director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said there is likely to be a north-south divide as “people living in northern and other less high house prices are likely to be harder hit.”In 2019 Prime Minsiter, Boris Johnson promised “no one would have to sell their house” to pay for social care. However the new proposals will mean some pensioners will have to use up 80 per cent of their wealth to cover care costs before the threshold kicks in.Sir Andrew said: “That would mean you certainly would have to sell your house.” However, he said that while the current financial settlement for social care was “inadequate,” it would nonetheless “deliver a significant increase in long line spending in social care.”He added: “Now, there is a whole set of areas — particularly yesterday’s announcement — on which I feel very uncomfortable, but it is striking is that it’s the first time it’s happened.” More

Sir Jeremy Farrar has revealed he quit the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) last month, warning of “concerning high levels of transmission” in Britain and vowing to focus on his role as a clinical scientist. The director of the Wellcome Trust was a leading member of the government’s Covid-19 advisory body during the pandemic.He was reportedly pushing for ministers to enforce a so-called “vaccine plus” strategy that includes measures such as mask wearing, ventilation and continued testing, according to Sky News.However, the government has so far declined to enforce stricter measures – which it refers to as plan B – and is sticking with its current, more relaxed guidance. In a statement released on Tuesday night, Sir Jeremy appeared to issue a coded criticism of the government’s stance, warning that “the Covid-19 crisis is a long way from over”.He said he was confident he had “stepped down as a Sage participant knowing ministers had been provided with most of the key science advice needed over the winter months”.“At the end of October 2021, after careful consideration, I stepped down [from Sage],” the statement read.“My focus now must be on our work at Wellcome. This includes supporting the international research effort to end the pandemic, ensuring the world is better prepared for inevitable future infectious disease threats, and making the case so the full potential of science is realised to inform and drive change against all the urgent health threats we face globally.”Sir Jeremy added that throughout the pandemic, Sage has provided “vital evidence and independent, expert, transparent advice to support the UK response, often under huge pressure”. He also said it had been “an honour to have joined the hundreds of scientists who have contributed”, before thanking “[chief scientific adviser to the government] Patrick Vallance and [chief medical officer for England] Chris Whitty for their outstanding leadership”.“I remain, as always, available where I may offer help as a clinical scientist or as director of Wellcome,” he concluded.The Government Office for Science said in a statement: “We can confirm that Sir Jeremy has stood down from the Covid Sage activation, and thank him for his contribution from the very start of the activation. Sage continues to provide government with independent expert scientific and technical advice.”In an earlier message on his personal Twitter, Sir Jeremy said he was taking “a few days break, time away from work, off social media etc”.“Holidays & time off [are] so important for everyone,” he added.In July, he revealed he had “seriously considered resigning” from Sage almost a year before, after Boris Johnson’s government chose not to introduce a lockdown in September 2020. It was this decision that ultimately led to the cancelling of Christmas, when the prime minister advised the British public to refrain from seeing loves ones and staying overnight at their family homes, as normal, over the festive period.Senior ministers, including health secretary Sajid Javid and business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng, have gone on record in recent weeks as saying the government will stand by its commitment to refrain from enforcing lockdown measures over Christmas this year.This is despite the number of lab-confirmed Covid infections and deaths in the UK rising substantially in the last few weeks. Though a peak seen around two weeks ago, when figures returned to levels last seen in March 2020, has since levelled off.On Tuesday, the latest government data showed there had been a further 33,865 Covid cases in the UK within the last 24-hour period. There were also an additional 293 deaths – but this number includes data from NHS England which was not provided in time for Monday’s figures, officials noted. More

Families of children with severe epilepsy are set to protest outside parliament in a call for greater access to medicinal cannabis.Specialist doctors have been allowed to prescribe medicinal cannabis to patients since 2018, when the government changed its rules over the treatment.But the End Our Pain campaign group says patients are facing an “almost total block” on access to NHS prescriptions and families were being forced to go private. The group said they understand only three children with severe epilepsy have been prescribed whole plant extract medicinal cannabis – which has been hailed as “life-transforming” treatment for paediatric epilepsy – on the NHS since it was legalised. Families are planning to gather outside parliament on Tuesday to call for more accessible treatment, with a digital poster van showing physical changes in children taking medicinal cannabis. Parents are also set to stand outside Department for Health and visit No10 to deliver a petition in the day of action. “Our families are at the end of their tether. We have done everything we can possibly do,” Joanne Griffiths, whose son Ben has not been able to get an NHS prescription, said.“We have marched, petitioned, lobbied parliament and met with health ministers countless times, yet three years on we still cannot access the NHS prescriptions for the medicine our children are reliant on. “The mother said she thought their “problems were solved” in 2018, when it was announced cannabis health products would be made available to patients. “Yet here we are in 2021 struggling both financially and emotionally and continuing to be passed from pillar to post by both the government and the NHS,” Ms Griffithsadded. Hannah Deacon says every child with severe intractable epilepsy deserves access to the same treatment as her son Alfie Dingley.“My son is lucky enough to be one of only three children in the UK with an NHS prescription for the type of whole plant extract medical cannabis that has been life transforming in cases of paediatric epilepsy,” she said. “From having up to 150 life-threatening seizures a week, he has now gone over 500 days without a single serious seizure.”Alfie, who has a rare form of epilepsy, was the UK’s first patient to get a permanent license to be prescribed medicinal cannabis on the NHS when he received one several years ago.Ms Deacon added: “It is a total injustice that three children have access to this medicine, while others do not know when their money will run out.”Alfie’s mother wrote to Boris Johnson this summer, urging him to “make access to medicinal cannabis products on the NHS a reality”.A Deparment for Health and Social Care (DHSC) spokesperson said: “Our sympathies are with all patients and families dealing with rare and hard to treat conditions. The government has already changed the law to allow specialist doctors to prescribe cannabis-based products, where clinically appropriate and in the best interests of patients.”They added: “Licensed cannabis-based medicines are funded by the NHS where there is clear evidence of their quality, safety and effectiveness.”No10 has been approached for comment. More

The delay between a second dose of the Covid-19 vaccine and a booster could be cut from six months to five under plans reportedly being considered to speed up the rollout of third doses. Boris Johnson said the time period between jabs was an “extremely important point” and stressed the need to “keep going as fast as possible” to deliver booster vaccines.A media blitz is to be launched to encourage people to take up the booster shots, which ministers hope will drive up demand which has so far failed to match the enthusiasm of the initial vaccination programme.Government officials and ministers said the time interval between doses was a matter for the experts on the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI).But The Guardian said Downing Street sources confirmed the option was being examined, while The Daily Telegraph said the JCVI was showing an interest in the idea of giving booster doses a month early.Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt said: “Does it really matter when it’s only nine weeks until the Christmas holidays if someone has their booster jab after five months?“And should we not look at whether there should be flexibility in that decision so we can get more people in more quickly for their booster jabs?”During a visit to Northern Ireland, the prime minister said: “On the issue of timing, all I will say is I think we just need to keep going as fast as possible.”Mr Johnson stressed that, unlike the early stages of the vaccine rollout, there were no problems with supply of doses, instead “it’s a demand issue”.Speaking on Friday, the care minister told Sky News: “The JCVI look at all the data. They’ve advised us six months. Of course they continually look at the data but they are the only people who can really answer this question.“If they advise us, our job then would be to get ready to do whatever they say. But at the moment it is six months. It is not unknown, the JCVI have changed over periods of time and have reacted.”In a sign that demand may be picking up, Health Secretary Sajid Javid said a record 234,000 booster vaccine bookings were made on Wednesday.“Getting your booster when offered is vital to keep you protected from Covid-19 over winter,” he said. “I urge everyone to book theirs as soon as eligible.”A booster shot of the vaccine developed by Pfizer and BioNTech has a dramatic effect, the firms claimed after a trial.In the trial, a booster dose given to patients who had the initial two jabs showing a relative vaccine efficacy of 95.6 per cent when compared to those who did not receive a booster.The Prime Minister said the findings, which have not yet been peer reviewed, were “great results”.The push to encourage vaccine take-up came as the daily number of cases reported in the UK surpassed 50,000 for the first time since mid-July.But Mr Johnson is continuing to resist calls from health leaders for tighter Covid restrictions despite the rising levels of infections.The Prime Minister acknowledged the numbers were “high” but said they were “within the parameters” forecast by scientists advising the Government.His comments followed calls from the NHS Confederation and the British Medical Association (BMA) for ministers to activate their winter Plan B for England amid fears the health service could be overwhelmed.BMA council chair Dr Chaand Nagpaul said the refusal to introduce supplementary measures – including Covid passports, mask-wearing in crowded public spaces and a return to working from home – amounted to “wilful negligence”. More

Ministers are reportedly considering additional Covid measures that could amount to a “Plan C”, as England prepares for another winter during the Covid pandemic.While the government has so far resisted calls to implement new Covid measures, the health secretary has warned restrictions could return in England in the run-up to Christmas. According toThe Telegraph, Cabinet Office ministers are discussing proposals which could potentially form a “Plan C” involving even tougher measures than the existing “Plan B”. The newspaper reported this extra contigency plan could see a ban on household mixing. But Edward Argar, health minister, denied on Thursday there was a Plan C being considered by the government which would ban the mixing of households at Christmas.Asked about reports on Sky News, he said he was “not aware” of such plans. “That is not a story with foundation,” Mr Argar added. “Of course as a government you look at, as we have done with our Plan B, alternatives and ways that you might – if you needed to – start easing that pressure”, the health minister said.Mr Argar said limiting household mixing was not something being “actively considered”. The government has so far resisted calls from NHS bosses to implement its “Plan B” to tackle coronavirus, amid a surge in cases and fears of a winter crisis.The series of tighter measures has been drawn up as a contingency plan if the NHS comes under unsustainable pressure.It includes the reintroduction of some social distancing measures, compulsory face masks in some settings and an appeal for the public to work from home, as well as the use of vaccine passports.The health secretary said on Wednesday there were no plans to put these contigency measures into place “at the moment”, saying pressures on the NHS were not yet “unsustainable”. More

The government’s early handling of Covid-19 “amounted in practice” to the pursuit of herd immunity, a parliamentary report has found, adding that the delayed decision to lock down in spring last year ranks as one of the “most important public health failures the United Kingdom has ever experienced”.Ministers have repeatedly denied that the government sought to build up population immunity against the virus by allowing it to freely spread in the UK. However, findings from a cross-party inquiry show this was the “effective consequence” of the initial response to Covid, resulting in tens of thousands of avoidable deaths.Rather than seek to suppress the virus at the beginning of 2020, as other nations did, Britain sought to manage its spread through the community by slowly introducing social distancing measures without committing to a lockdown, the report said.More than 50 witnesses have contributed to the 150-page report, including ministers, NHS officials, government advisers and leading scientists. It concludes that:Government experts were fixated on influenza prior to 2020 and did not see coronaviruses as a threat to the UKThe government initially adopted a “deliberate policy” that “amounted in practice” to seeking herd immunity. The decision to manage, rather than suppress, infections proved fatal for tens of thousandsThe abandonment of community testing on 12 March was a “seminal failure” and “cost many lives”NHS Test and Trace has “failed to make a significant enough impact on the course of the pandemic to justify the level of public investment it received”Social care has been overlooked by the government throughout the pandemic, while minority ethnic communities experienced higher levels of death in its early phase. Labour said the report reinforced the immediate need for a public inquiry “so mistakes of such tragic magnitude are never repeated again”, while its authors said it was “vital” that lessons were learnt from the failings of the past 18 months.The cross-party report, led by two select committees for health and science, draws on 400 written statements and accounts from various officials involved in the UK response, including former health secretary Matt Hancock, chief medical officer Chris Whitty, and Dominic Cummings, the former chief adviser to the prime minister.It examines six key areas: pandemic preparedness prior to 2020; lockdowns and social distancing; testing and tracing; the impact of the crisis on social care and at-risk communities; and the rollout of the vaccines.Prior to the emergence of Covid, the UK’s pandemic planning was too “narrowly and inflexibly based on a flu model” that failed to learn the lessons from Sars, Mers and Ebola, MPs heard.Former chief medical officer Professor Dame Sally Davies told the inquiry there had been “groupthink”, with infectious disease experts not believing that “Sars, or another Sars, would get from Asia to us”. She likened it to a “form of British exceptionalism”.MPs concluded that, in the opening months of the crisis, those in power were operating through a “veil of ignorance” that was “partly self-inflicted”, with ministers and scientific advisers unwilling to learn from the experiences and tactics of other countries, notably in east Asia.This was an “inexcusable oversight”, the report said, adding that a culture of “groupthink” had taken hold in Downing Street, which should have been challenged. Rather than “doing everything possible to halt the virus” – like governments in South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong – the government instead adopted a “slow and gradualist approach”.Guided by a desire to protect the economy, and the belief among Sage members that complete suppression of Covid would lead to a later second wave in 2020, the option of lockdown was initially dismissed in favour of gradually introducing social distancing polices that sought to moderate the pace of spread and flatten the curve of the first peak.“This amounted in practice to accepting that herd immunity by infection was the inevitable outcome”, given the lack of a vaccine and the UK’s limited testing capacity, the MPs said, meaning there were no real measures in place to protect the population from catching the virus.Even as late as 12 March, Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, said that it was not possible to stop everyone being infected and nor was that a desirable objective. It was a “deliberate” and “dubious” policy, the MPs concluded, which was seriously mistaken in assuming that an “unknown and rampant virus could be regulated in such a precise way” and which “led to a higher initial death toll than would have resulted from a more emphatic early policy”.Officials leading the response failed to question the prevailing scientific consensus that had been established in government, the report added. Mr Cummings told the MPs he was “incredibly frightened” of challenging the “official plan”, while Mr Hancock said he “bitterly” regretted the failure to overrule scientific advice.Had the government changed tack and implemented lockdown just one week earlier, on 16 March, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented, the inquiry was told.“As a result, decisions on lockdowns and social distancing during the early weeks of the pandemic – and the advice that led to them – rank as one of the most important public health failures the United Kingdom has ever experienced,” the report concludes.It also says that the abandonment of community testing on 12 March was a “seminal failure” and “cost many lives”. NHS Test and Trace was established in May 2020, but its “chaotic” performance throughout the year “hampered” the UK’s response to Covid-19, culminating in the imposition of two more lockdowns.“Vast sums of taxpayers’ money were directed to Test and Trace, justified by the benefits of avoiding further lockdowns. But ultimately those lockdowns happened,” the report adds.Robert West, a professor of health psychology at University College London, said that the “damning” conclusions of the report would typically “lead to resignations” in other countries.The government said it was “committed” to learning lessons from the pandemic and would be holding a full public inquiry in the spring. A spokesperson said: “Throughout the pandemic we have been guided by scientific and medical experts, and we never shied away from taking quick and decisive action to save lives and protect our NHS, including introducing restrictions and lockdowns.“Thanks to a collective national effort, we avoided NHS services becoming overwhelmed, and our phenomenal vaccination programme has built a wall of defence, with over 24.3 million infections prevented and more than 130,000 lives saved so far.” More