Steve Griffin

@profstevegriffin.bsky.social

Professor of Cancer Virology, University of Leeds. Co-Chair, Independent SAGE

We need to separate two distinct failures: 1/Schools stayed closed longer than they needed to bec the govt failed to put in strong mitigation measures to make them safe 2/Johnson failed to invest properly in helping children recover – a failure that led Sir Kevan Collins to resign as “catch‑up tsar”

There are other important factors too. Nearly 40% of pupils are from minority ethnic backgrounds. Many lived in communities disproportionately exposed to covid-19, with higher risks of severe illness and death before vaccines. Children do not live in isolation from their families/grandparents.

But it was never simply a question of “should schools be open or shut?” during the pandemic. The key question pre‑vaccine was: were schools safe enough to be open - for teachers, vulnerable children and whole communities – given the wholly inadequate mitigations the Johnson government put in place.

As someone who sat on the Education Policy Institute’s working group on disadvantage gaps during covid, I’m under no illusions about the enormous educational and psychological harms of school closures – especially for working‑class and BME children. Those impacts are real and must not be downplayed.

4. Support for children in disadvantaged communities, inc devices, connectivity, food, safe spaces to learn, catch-up teaching 5. Dedicated and planned mental health and social support if school closures become necessary 6. Build capacity to generate evidence more rapidly for the next time 11/12

2. Clean indoor air: helpful in a pandemic and good for health and learning at all times (and not just in schools but other buildings too) 3. Effective public health measures: testing, contact tracing, support for isolation, communication, etc 10/12

Keeping schools open is a goal not a policy. A blanket "never close schools" is a bad lesson. I suggest these: 1. Do not prejudge next pandemic which will be a different virus and could have very different age profile of who it attacks 9/12

And covid was not harmless to children. Being at lower risk than adults does not mean harmless. There was acute illness needing hospital, late onset rare but serious inflammatory disease, Long Covid and 13,000 UK children who lost a parent. (more details in substack post at end) 8/12

In fact, modelling on contact and case data estimated that if schools had remained open during the final Jan-March 2021 lockdown, it would barely have brought R below 1. I've already written about that devastating wave in which 87,000 people died. 7/12 christinapagel.substack.com/p/the-uk-cov...

The UK Covid Inquiry has laid bare the avoidable horror of the second Covid wave

It is becoming ever clearer both how devastating the second wave of winter 2020/21 was, and how much of that devastation could have been avoided.

christinapagel.substack.com

We did in fact try lockdown with schools fully open in November 2020. It worked initially, but cases in London & SE started rising again *before* lockdown even ended, because of new variant Alpha. Lockdown with schools open was not enough! 6/12

After 1st wave, we didn't run summer catch up programmes or improve ventilation in schools - we didn't even try until 2021, months after the last school closures. We didn't recommend masks (let alone good masks) in classrooms until after the last school closures. 5/12

Several studies have since shown definitely that children and schools contribute signficantly to transmission. In Sweden (with no formal lockdown), parents and teachers of pupils at school had higher infection rates. Children live with and are taught by adults. Many are vulnerable adults. 4/12

March 2020: no testing, no treatment, no vaccine, admissions doubling every 3 to 4 days. Countries ahead of us closed schools alongside everything else, so nobody had evidence separating the two. We didn't know much about Covid in children and nothing about long term impact 3/12

Almost exactly 6 months ago, RPN was leaked a document presented to STFC staff that said the council had to reduce spending by £162m by 2029-30 That kicked off months of debate on how cuts would be made But only now has it become clear the total cost savings needed over 4 years is in fact £684m 🧵

Andy Burnham wants a “cost of living government” that makes life’s essentials more affordable. Free, independent advice services are essential to delivering that - helping millions every year & easing pressure on public services. Read @adviceuk.bsky.social letter to the PM 👇https://bit.ly/3TeGeVQ

BildBild

I know I've not been about much (sorry, lots going on), but when I see this craven proliferation of outright disinformation targeting our amazing #NHS I make an exception. Proliferation of lies like this should at least be grounds to strip this vile, self-named toad of his title?

Bild

Remember Streeting's review into whether young people are being overdiagnosed with ADHD, autism, and mental health issues? Well, the interim report is out, and there's a reason the media are silent on it (spoiler: it proves what a lot of us have been saying all along)

In others, notably ADHD and autism, rising diagnoses and referrals appear to exceed changes in underlying epidemiological prevalence and are likely to reflect a combination of:

improved recognition
changing help-seeking behaviour
institutional incentives
pressures within existing service pathways
Across both ADHD and autism, best currently available population-based estimates remain relatively stable, while administrative diagnoses, self-identification and recorded service demand have increased substantially. In autism, the evidence also points to particularly rapid growth in identified need within educational systems, including increasing identification among girls and among young people without learning disability.These patterns suggest that rising demand is not simply the result of increasing prevalence, but of several processes operating simultaneously, including:

real increases in distress in some groups
improved recognition of previously unmet need
changing expectations about support
systems that frequently rely on formal diagnosis as the primary route to assistance
Across the system, support is too often accessed through pathways that are slow, fragmented and heavily dependent on diagnostic categorisation. While diagnosis remains essential for some forms of clinical decision-making, the evidence suggests that current arrangements do not always provide the most effective or efficient way of identifying and responding to need. In particular, where access to support depends heavily on formal diagnosis, demand for diagnostic assessment can increase more rapidly than systems are able to respond, generating long waiting times, duplication of assessment and pressure on specialist services.

The next phase of the review will therefore focus on clarifying the relationship between distress, diagnosis and need, and on examining how systems might respond more effectively to these patterns. A central objective will be to identify opportunities for developing more coherent, evidence-informed care pathways that enable support to be provided earlier and more proportionately, while ensuring that specialist services are available in a timely and appropriate manner for those whose needs are most complex.