scholarly journals How did the UK government face the global COVID-19 pandemic?

2021 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamiris Cristhina Resende ◽  
Marco Antonio Catussi Paschoalotto ◽  
Stephen Peckham ◽  
Claudia Souza Passador ◽  
João Luiz Passador

Abstract This paper aims to analyse the coordination and cooperation in Primary Health Care (PHC) measures adopted by the British government against the spread of the COVID-19. PHC is clearly part of the solution founded by governments across the world to fight against the spread of the virus. Data analysis was performed based on coordination, cooperation, and PHC literature crossed with documentary analysis of the situation reports released by the World Health Organisation and documents, guides, speeches and action plans on the official UK government website. The measures adopted by the United Kingdom were analysed in four periods, which helps to explain the courses of action during the pandemic: pre-first case (January 22- January 31, 2020), developing prevention measures (February 1 -February 29, 2020), first Action Plan (March 1- March 23, 2020) and lockdown (March 24-May 6, 2020). Despite the lack of consensus in essential matters such as Brexit, the nations in the United Kingdom are working together with a high level of cooperation and coordination in decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Foods ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 916
Author(s):  
William Crowe ◽  
Christopher T Elliott ◽  
Brian D Green

The preservative sodium nitrite is added to processed meat with the intention of preventing the growth of Clostridium botulinum, but this also influences product flavour and colour. The World Health Organisation has declared nitrites to be ‘probably carcinogenic’. Use is permitted by the European Union but its addition is limited to 100 mg/kg in all processed meat, except bacon, which is limited to 175 mg/kg. At present, there is no independent peer-reviewed literature assessing the residual nitrite levels in bacon in the United Kingdom. Furthermore, this is the largest study of residual nitrite concentrations in bacon that has ever been conducted. A total of 89 different commercially available bacon samples were collected, and analysed using flow injection analysis to determine their residual nitrite content. The mean residual nitrite concentration for all bacon samples was 10.80 mg/kg. Residual nitrite levels did not differ between smoked and unsmoked bacon. Middle cut bacon (26.00 mg/kg) had significantly higher residual nitrite concentrations than back bacon (8.87 mg/kg; p = 0.027), and medallion bacon (4.47 mg/kg; p = 0.008). This study shows that there is large variation in the mean residual nitrite levels of bacon sold in the UK and all the reported values are within current regulatory limits. Despite this, it appears that many manufacturers could decrease the amount that they are currently using in their products.


2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
JL Best ◽  
G Silvestri ◽  
BJ Burton ◽  
B Foot ◽  
J Acheson

Purpose: To determine the incidence of blindness secondary to idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) in the United Kingdom. Methods: New cases of blindness occurring secondary to IIH were identified prospectively through the British Ophthalmological Surveillance Unit (BOSU) from October 2005 to November 2006. Only idiopathic cases of intracranial hypertension and those meeting the World Health Organisation`s definition of blindness were included. Cases that were already blind or had already been blind registered before the study period were excluded. Results: There were 24 new cases of registerable blindness secondary to IIH reported during the 12 month period. Questionnaires were completed for 19 cases. Of these 19 cases, 3 were not truly idiopathic and 3 cases did not fulfil the strict criteria for blindness. One case was a duplicate report. There were 12 definite cases of blindness secondary to IIH giving a UK incidence of blindness secondary to IIH of 0.6-2% (assuming a UK population of 63.2 million and an incidence of IIH of 1-3/100,000). If the 5 cases reported as blind but without a completed questionnaire are assumed to be true cases then the incidence of blindness would be 1-3%. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that approximately 1-2% of new cases of IIH are likely to become blind in a given year. This contrasts with rates of between 4-10% reported previously in hospital-based studies, but may be a more accurate figure for the population as a whole. Under-ascertainment and improving standards of care may also have contributed to the lower figure than previously reported.


Author(s):  
Jordan Bell ◽  
Lis Neubeck ◽  
Kai Jin ◽  
Paul Kelly ◽  
Coral L. Hanson

Physical activity referral schemes (PARS) are a popular physical activity (PA) intervention in the UK. Little is known about the type, intensity and duration of PA undertaken during and post PARS. We calculated weekly leisure centre-based moderate/vigorous PA for PARS participants (n = 448) and PARS completers (n = 746) in Northumberland, UK, between March 2019–February 2020 using administrative data. We categorised activity levels (<30 min/week, 30–149 min/week and ≥150 min/week) and used ordinal regression to examine predictors for activity category achieved. PARS participants took part in a median of 57.0 min (IQR 26.0–90.0) and PARS completers a median of 68.0 min (IQR 42.0–100.0) moderate/vigorous leisure centre-based PA per week. Being a PARS completer (OR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.61–2.82) was a positive predictor of achieving a higher level of physical activity category compared to PARS participants. Female PARS participants were less likely (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.43–0.97) to achieve ≥30 min of moderate/vigorous LCPA per week compared to male PARS participants. PARS participants achieved 38.0% and PARS completers 45.3% of the World Health Organisation recommended ≥150 min of moderate/vigorous weekly PA through leisure centre use. Strategies integrated within PARS to promote PA outside of leisure centre-based activity may help participants achieve PA guidelines.


2022 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neerja Chowdhary ◽  
Corrado Barbui ◽  
Kaarin J. Anstey ◽  
Miia Kivipelto ◽  
Mariagnese Barbera ◽  
...  

With population ageing worldwide, dementia poses one of the greatest global challenges for health and social care in the 21st century. In 2019, around 55 million people were affected by dementia, with the majority living in low- and middle-income countries. Dementia leads to increased costs for governments, communities, families and individuals. Dementia is overwhelming for the family and caregivers of the person with dementia, who are the cornerstone of care and support systems throughout the world. To assist countries in addressing the global burden of dementia, the World Health Organisation (WHO) developed the Global Action Plan on the Public Health Response to Dementia 2017–2025. It proposes actions to be taken by governments, civil society, and other global and regional partners across seven action areas, one of which is dementia risk reduction. This paper is based on WHO Guidelines on risk reduction of cognitive decline and dementia and presents recommendations on evidence-based, multisectoral interventions for reducing dementia risks, considerations for their implementation and policy actions. These global evidence-informed recommendations were developed by WHO, following a rigorous guideline development methodology and involved a panel of academicians and clinicians with multidisciplinary expertise and representing geographical diversity. The recommendations are considered under three broad headings: lifestyle and behaviour interventions, interventions for physical health conditions and specific interventions. By supporting health and social care professionals, particularly by improving their capacity to provide gender and culturally appropriate interventions to the general population, the risk of developing dementia can be potentially reduced, or its progression delayed.


Author(s):  
Alok Tiwari

ABSTRACTCOVID-19 epidemic is declared as the public health emergency of international concern by the World Health Organisation in the second week of March 2020. This disease originated from China in December 2019 has already caused havoc around the world, including India. The first case in India was reported on 30th January 2020, with the cases crossing 6000 on the day paper was written. Complete lockdown of the nation for 21 days and immediate isolation of infected cases are the proactive steps taken by the authorities. For a better understanding of the evolution of COVID-19 in the country, Susceptible-Infectious-Quarantined-Recovered (SIQR) model is used in this paper. It is predicted that actual infectious population is ten times the reported positive case (quarantined) in the country. Also, a single case can infect 1.55 more individuals of the population. Epidemic doubling time is estimated to be around 4.1 days. All indicators are compared with Brazil and Italy as well. SIQR model has also predicted that India will see the peak with 22,000 active cases during the last week of April followed by reduction in active cases. It may take complete July for India to get over with COVID-19.


Author(s):  
Manuj Kumar Sarkar ◽  
Subhra Dey ◽  
Boudhayan Das Munshi

The first case of SARS-CoV2 admitted on 26th December 2019 in Central Hospital, Wuhan, China. Broncho-alveolar lavage and Polymerase chain reaction of the aspirate showed high abundance of a viral RNA which has 89.1 % nucleotide identity with bat coronavirus previously isolated in China. Soon human to human transmission was observed and the outbreak started spreading. World Health Organisation on 11th March 2020 declared it as pandemic. COVID 19, caused by SARS-CoV-2, a disease we are still struggling to contain. With vaccination drive throughout the world, though the severity in re-infection has come down, but there is still threat by the various variants which are arising from time to time in various countries. The most effective way of preventing the spread of the virus is to keep physical distance from others of at least 1 meter, wearing a well fitted mask, keep hands clean and use hand sanitizer frequently, stay in well ventilated place, avoid crowded place and cough into bent elbow or tissue paper and get vaccinated when once’s turn comes. Therefore, we urge people to follow COVID appropriate behaviour properly. Keywords: COVID 19, SARS-CoV2, COVID appropriate behaviour, Social Distancing


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diego Cantoni ◽  
Martin Mayora-Neto ◽  
Angalee Nadesalingam ◽  
David A. Wells ◽  
George W. Carnell ◽  
...  

One of the defining criteria of Variants of Concern (VOC) is their ability to evade pre-existing immunity, increased transmissibility, morbidity and/or mortality. Here we examine the capacity of convalescent plasma, from a well defined cohort of healthcare workers (HCW) and Patients infected during the first wave from a national critical care centre in the UK, to neutralise B.1.1.298 variant and three VOCs; B.1.1.7, B.1.351 and P.1. Furthermore, to enable lab to lab, country to country comparisons we utilised the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Standard for anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immunoglobulin to report neutralisation findings in International Units. These findings demonstrate a significant reduction in the ability of first wave convalescent plasma to neutralise the VOCs. In addition, Patients and HCWs with more severe COVID-19 were found to have higher antibody titres and to neutralise the VOCs more effectively than individuals with milder symptoms. Widespread use of the WHO International Standard by laboratories in different countries will allow for cross-laboratory comparisons, to benchmark and to establish thresholds of protection against SARS-CoV-2 and levels of immunity in different settings and countries.


Author(s):  
Federico Fabbrini

This introductory chapter provides an overview of the Withdrawal Agreement of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU). The Withdrawal Agreement, adopted on the basis of Article 50 Treaty on European Union (TEU), spells out the terms and conditions of the UK departure from the EU, including ground-breaking solutions to deal with the thorniest issues which emerged in the context of the withdrawal negotiations. Admittedly, the Withdrawal Agreement is only a part of the Brexit deal. The Agreement, in fact, is accompanied by a connected political declaration, which outlines the framework of future EU–UK relations. The chapter then offers a chronological summary of the process that led to the adoption of the Withdrawal Agreement, describing the crucial stages in the Brexit process — from the negotiations to the conclusion of a draft agreement and its rejection, to the extension and the participation of the UK to European Parliament (EP) elections, to the change of UK government and the ensuing constitutional crisis, to the new negotiations with the conclusion of a revised agreement, new extension, and new UK elections eventually leading to the departure of the UK from the EU.


Author(s):  
Averil Price

This article provides some background to the Safe Communities concept and sets out the criteria to be satisfied as an International Safe Community (ISC). It concludes with reflections about Chelmsford Borough Council’s responsibilities as a Demonstration Site within the UK, and how Council has contributed within an International Network.There are currently over 200 communities across the world that have been designated as International Safe Communities by the World Health Organisation (WHO), and in June 2010, the Chelmsford Borough Council became the first local authority area to achieve this recognition in the UK. International Safe Communities is a World Health Organisation initiative that recognises safety as a ‘universal concern and a responsibility for all’. 1 It is an approach to community safety that encourages greater cooperation and collaboration between a range of non-government organisations, the business sector and local and government agencies. In order to be designated as an ISC, communities are required to meet six criteria developed by the WHO Collaborating Centre on Community Safety. The ISC accreditation process provides support for communities and indicates a level of achievement by an organisation within the field of community safety.


1994 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Wodak

Surely alcohol and drug matters in Australia should be regarded as the province of psychiatry? Decades before any other branch of medicine displayed any interest in the subject and long before alcohol and drugs were considered even remotely respectable, numerous Australian psychiatrists provided inspiration and leadership in this Cinderella field. Drs Bartholomew, Bell, Buchanan, Chegwidden, Dalton, Drew, Ellard, Lennane, Milner, Milton, Waddy and Pols are some of the best known among the many Australian psychiatrists who pioneered efforts to improve treatment for patients with alcohol and drug problems. The NHMRC Committee on Alcohol and Drug Dependence, which has a considerable potential for influencing the field in Australia, has always been dominated by psychiatrists. In the United Kingdom and the United States, countries which often serve as models for much of Australian medical and other practice, alcohol and drug matters are determined almost exclusively by psychiatrists. Is there any evidence that they have been held back by a psychiatric hegemony on alcohol and drug's? For many decades (and until quite recently), alcohol and drug matters were handled for the World Health Organisation by its Mental Health Division. Did we suffer globally because WHO placed alcohol and drugs under the control of psychiatry?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document