London (AP) — The British government took too long to impose a blockade early in the COVID-19 pandemic, missing out on the opportunity to contain the disease and causing thousands of unnecessary deaths, a parliamentary report Tuesday. I concluded.

According to a joint report by the House of Commons, the minister’s failure to question the recommendations of scientific advisers resulted in a fatal delay, resulting in a dangerous level of “groupthink” that rejected the more aggressive strategies adopted in Southeast Asia. “Has occurred. House of Commons Science and Health Committee. The conservative government of Prime Minister Boris Johnson finally ordered the blockade only when Britain’s National Health Service risked being overwhelmed by a rapidly increasing number of infectious diseases.

“There was a desire to avoid the blockage because it would cause enormous damage to the economy, regular medical services and society,” the report said. “Without other strategies such as strict case isolation, meaningful testing and tracing operations, and robust border control, a complete blockade was inevitable and would have come sooner.”

According to Johnson, a report from the British Parliament is dissatisfied with the official hearing schedule for the government’s response to COVID-19.

Legislators clarify why their investigation showed “significantly worse” performance than many other countries in the early stages of the pandemic, and the UK responded to the ongoing threat from COVID-19. He said it was designed to improve and prepare for future threats.

The 150-page report is based on testimony from 50 witnesses, including former Health Minister Matt Hancock and former government official Dominic Cummings. It was unanimously approved by 22 members of the Conservative Party, the Opposition Labor Party and the Scottish National Party, the three major political parties in Parliament.

The Commission praised the government’s initial focus on vaccines as the ultimate method from the pandemic and the government’s decision to invest in vaccine development. With these decisions, the UK vaccination program was successful and nearly 80% of people over the age of 12 were completely vaccinated.

“Ultimately, millions of lives will be saved as a result of the global vaccine efforts that Britain has played a leading role in,” the Commission said.

But they also criticized the government’s test-and-trace program, saying that its slow, uncertain, and often chaotic performance hampered Britain’s response to the pandemic.

The government’s strategy during the first three months of the crisis reflected official scientific advice that widespread infections were unavoidable given the limited testing capacity. There was no immediate outlook for the vaccine. According to the report, there is a belief that the public will not accept a long-term blockade. As a result, the government did not try to stop the virus completely, but simply to control the spread of the virus.

The report described this as a “serious early mistake” that Britain shared with many countries in Europe and North America.

“Accountability in democracy depends not only on the advice of elected decision makers, but also on investigating, asking and challenging them before making their own decisions,” the Commission said. rice field. “It was a rapidly changing situation, but given the large number of deaths predicted, it was initially fatal that the virus could not be suppressed until it became clear that the NHS would be overwhelmed. It was amazing that I didn’t disagree with the assumption. “

Trish Greenhalgh, a professor of primary care medical services at Oxford University, said the report suggests an “unhealthy” relationship between government and scientific organizations. With COVID-19 still killing hundreds of people each week in the UK, the advisory board continues to discuss exactly what is considered “sufficiently definitive” evidence, she said. rice field.

“Uncertainty is a decisive feature of the crisis …” said Greenhalgh. Do we replace “follow science” with “consider what to do when the problem is urgent but certainty escapes us”? This report suggests that we have to do unless we want to keep repeating the mistakes of the recent past. ”

Even senior officials like Cummings and Hancock told the Commission that they were reluctant to oppose the scientific consensus.

As early as January 28, 2020, Hancock said he found it difficult to promote extensive testing of people who did not show symptoms of COVID-19 because scientific advisers said it was useless.

“I didn’t have solid evidence that decades of global scientific consensus was wrong, but I was in a situation where I had the instinct that it was wrong,” he testified. “I regret not dismissing that scientific advice.”

___

Follow all AP stories about the coronavirus pandemic at https://apnews.com/hub/coronavirus-pandemic.