[ad_1]
Virologist Andrea Crisanti returns to attack the monitoring strategy launched by the Italian government against the Coronavirus. “In Italy in 5 months we have not built a surveillance network worthy of the name,” he said during a debate organized by DigitalMeet, a digital festival that is currently being held in Padua. “If we find ourselves in this situation – he added – the ‘credit’ goes to the Scientific Technical Committee, which has aligned itself with political expectations.”
The professor, head of the Laboratory of Microbiology at the University of Padua, did not skimp on criticism of the rapid tests, which have a lower efficiency than the molecular ones (but allow to shorten the diagnostic time). “Now there is this spasmodic rush towards these rapid tests – he said – which nevertheless have gigantic problems”. Crisanti has always reiterated that from the perspective of epidemiological control they can be useful, especially in communities (such as schools), but that “these tests have less sensitivity, and some positives escape.”
Regarding the much debated need to impose or not a emergency shutdownCrisanti said that he did not want a Christmas closing, but that, given the way things were going, it was inevitable to expect a similar possibility. “It was in the order of things – he said – if the cases continued to increase with this dynamic. And I must say the truth that I was surprised too.
In any case, thinking of closing everything at the end of the year could “have had some advantages” – albeit partial, since then the situation would worsen again – and in fact would have allowed us to restart. At that time, he explains, the schools were paralyzed “and we had 4 weeks to restart them inside.” Business activities could have been preserved in some way, he added, “perhaps by tightening security measures.” “Certainly – Crisanti concluded – in this way the cases would have decreased.”
Read also:
[ad_2]
