[ad_1]
Published:
At an early stage, MSB developed a crisis scenario for further corona spread, closed borders, and unrest in global markets.
The Swedish Public Health Agency later warned that ignorant authorities produced incorrect scenarios.
“The challenge is to reassure the authorities who do not have the knowledge so that they do not overreact,” said the survey sent by MSB in early February.
– Your answers made it difficult for us, says Alexandra Nordlander, manager of the operational analysis unit at MSB.
Swedish authorities have previously been criticized for their lack of preparation for the crown outbreak. On February 25, when the virus became widespread in Iran and Italy, the Swedish Public Health Agency still did not believe in a major outbreak in Sweden.
MSB, the Swedish Civil Protection and Emergency Planning Agency, reacted in early February to information about the new coronavirus, which was spreading rapidly in China. It shows documents that blogger and journalist Mats Engström requested and that Aftonbladet has read.
The authority then e-mails a request to various authorities with the aim of mapping the readiness. It describes a potential scenario with some spread of the infection in Sweden, continuing spread in China and around the world. Several countries have restricted travel to and from the primarily affected countries, there are disruptions in world trade and financial market concerns, and there is concern among the general public about the spread of the infection and its handling by authorities.
MSB request for information on the general national situation
“The following scenario is based on an aggravated situation,” you can read.
“No special consequences”
The National Board of Health and Welfare responds in detail that there is a risk of shortage of places of care, technical medical and protection equipment and care personnel.
The Swedish Public Health Agency responds that the preparation is very good. When asked what consequences the scenario may have in the short or long term, the answer is: none and none. Risks related to the supply of goods, services and personnel: without specialty.
MSB criticizes the responses, which were considered outstanding compared to other authorities.
– We understand that it was a pressure situation, but of course it is problematic when we get that kind of insufficient response. We need to get answers we can trust so we can give a fair description to government offices, says Alexandra Nordlander, manager of the operational analysis unit at MSB.
Photo: Tomas Oneborg / SvD / TT
MSB, the Swedish Civil Contingency Agency.
MSB: Contact us
Regarding the challenges related to resources, the provision of information and communication, the response was: “to reassure the authorities not to overreact and not to have knowledge and to deal with the public concerned or disseminating information false “.
MSB then asks what steps the authority can take now to prepare for the scenario. “All measures are based on correctly handling individual cases and informing the outside world in an objective way so that ignorant authorities, regions or political decisions do not make incorrect scenarios”, is the answer.
– We perceived that it was directed at us, but we did not share the image. Our task is to develop scenarios that may occur to awaken the actors to prepare for a crisis. We could have absorbed more, but this was a reasonable level, says Alexandra Nordlander, who later claims they preferred to take the low end.
In the next request, a week later, MSB writes that the authorities should base their analysis on the Public Health Agency’s assessment of the spread of the infection, at the time set as low.
– We saw that there was also a reason to emphasize that they make the assessment of a probable scenario and that we had developed a possible one. And we had already asked questions based on our scenario.
Was your work with crisis preparedness affected by this?
– Not consciously, but I can’t swear it didn’t affect us, says Alexandra Nordlander.
Photo: Björn Lindahl
Anders Tegnell, a state epidemiologist with the Swedish Public Health Agency.
“Be important to mark”
Anders Tegnell, a state epidemiologist at the Swedish Public Health Agency, explains the brief responses by saying that it was partly a pressure situation and partly that they were well prepared for further spread of the infection.
According to him, they did not criticize the MSB scenario, the response was a reaction to a discussion in the media.
– In this context, there were many assessments of how this would affect us. It was important to note that we should primarily do the assessment of the spread of diseases and infections, otherwise there is a risk of spreading a concern.
He writes that it is important that authorities do not overreact and that they report objectively so that ignorant authorities do not make wrong scenarios. Is it appropriate to call other authorities ignorant?
– The reasons were that later we saw that many different scenarios spread from the main players. It was important that we, as an expert authority, introduce them. We do not write anything about ignorant authorities.
You do well.
– Yes, and we are also ignorant in certain areas, but when it comes to the spread of infections, we are an expert authority. It wasn’t aimed at MSBs, we just wanted to emphasize the importance of all sticking to our areas of expertise, says Anders Tegnell.
Responses to the questionnaire of the National Board of Public Health
“All measures are based on handling individual cases correctly and informing the outside world in an objective way so that ignorant authorities, regions or political decisions do not create incorrect scenarios,” writes the Swedish Public Health Agency.
Did you think that was not the case?
– There were tendencies towards such a thing, it was important that each authority returned to its area.
Isn’t it reasonable for an authority that has crisis preparedness as an area of expertise to develop a worst-case scenario to prepare for it?
– Starting from a scenario on our side with possible effects, it is probably reasonable that they can produce it, yes.
The scenario MSB described was pretty good.
– Yes, it is not about whether this was exactly right or wrong, it is about us, as authorities, commenting on our areas of expertise.
Tegnell emphasizes that the survey was a small part of the coronavirus authority’s work in early February and that it had been reported to the MSB on several other occasions.
– You have to be careful not to see only a small part of the puzzle. During this time, we were busy with many other things: we had gone into personal mode, we had an active dialogue with infection control in the regions, and our lab worked to deal with the virus.
Published:
