select search filters
briefings
roundups & rapid reactions
before the headlines
Fiona fox's blog
The government has announced that more than 60,000 fans will be permitted to attend the UEFA Euro 2020 semi-finals at Wembley Stadium.
Prof John Drury, Professor of Social Psychology, University of Sussex, & Member of SPI-B, said:
“The possible risks for fans attending live events were discussed in a SPI-B analysis I was part of back in August, when re-opening was being planned the first time around: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spi-b-consensus-statement-on-the-reopening-of-large-events-and-venues-19-august-2020. Live events where people feel psychologically close to and safe with others – including music and sports events – pose risks of transmission via known routes (shared air). The dangers of transmission in crowds have been long known – research on transmission in mass gatherings grew from research on the Hajj and the Olympics, events which bring people together from all over the world – people who are not normally in the same space together. The SPI-B analysis identified travel to and from the venue as potentially a greater risk than behaviour at the venue itself (where behaviour can be more regulated). However, the other key point made in the analysis was that risk behaviours – i.e. proximity, touching etc. – are driven by psychological processes that are subject to change. It’s true that there are very strong norms, for example at football around proximity being ok. But there are other group values and norms that could mitigate this – such as caring about our fellow fans and therefore adopting the mitigation behaviours (masks, distancing) to protect them. As part of this, it’s really important that key information is provided to fans – such as the importance of not breathing others’ air. The public are only just being told the importance of ventilation; they need to understand the importance of this as a key mitigation.”
Prof Jon Deeks, Professor of Biostatistics and head of the Biostatistics, Evidence Synthesis and Test Evaluation Research Group, University of Birmingham, said:
“Use of a negative result from a lateral flow test to allow entry to an event is using the test as a “green light test” which is contrary to the MHRA exceptional use authorisation for its use. The Government are authorising themselves to use the test for this purpose at Wembley by labelling the Euro 2020 semi-final as a research study.
“Whilst it is reasonable to undertake research studies to evaluate the use of the test for use as a “green light test” (under a research use only derogation), many such “pilots” have now been undertaken and the data must now exist to evaluate whether it is a reasonable purpose for it to be put. However, no results from the pilots have been published by the Government Departments involved.
“Results from the Liverpool pilots have been released by the local Public Health team to the media, which have shown that five cases were excluded because of positive lateral flow test results, but that PCR testing of around one third of those at the events found four people with false negative lateral flow results had attended. Accounting for the proportion tested with PCR, this suggests that lateral flow tests found only 5 of 17 infected cases – so around 70% would have been missed. These are small numbers as Covid-19 was very rare at that time in Liverpool (which is what made the event safe), but the detection rate is very much as expected from previous research, and further demonstrates that negative lateral flow tests do not indicate that you are neither infected nor infectious.
“Negative lateral flow tests will not make Wembley safe. The risk will depend on the numbers who attend who are infected – which is now likely to be higher than at the Liverpool events due to the spread of the delta variant. For the sake of Public Health safety, the government needs to pay attention to the MHRA authorisation, and the evidence that exists of the failure of these tests to detect many with infection a fair of whom are likely to be infectious.”
Prof Lawrence Young, Virologist and Professor of Molecular Oncology, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, said:
“This is all a bit worrying and confusing. We still have significant personal restrictions in place in relation to social distancing, the size of outdoor and indoor gatherings and the wearing of facemasks. There has been limited data released from the government’s Events Research Programme which started in April. 60,000 fans crowded into Wembley Stadium with all the pinch points around transport, entering and exiting the venue, and inevitable opportunities for the virus to spread in enclosed spaces like lavatories is a recipe for disaster – particularly given the more transmissible delta variant. We are so close to getting on top of this virus with the success of the vaccination programme – why put the end of lockdown on July 19th at risk?”
All our previous output on this subject can be seen at this weblink:
www.sciencemediacentre.org/tag/covid-19
Declared interests
Prof John Drury: “is a participant of SPI-B (not a member) and this comment is in a personal capacity.”
Prof Jon Deeks: “JD is an external advisor to the MHRA and the WHO, and leads the Cochrane reviews of the accuracy of tests for SARS-CoV-2 supported by funding from the Foundation for new Innovative Diagnostics.”
None others received.