Letters: Did Bristol really want to see Colston fall?

Hong Kong’s success

Sir: Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson are right to compare the UK’s Covid-19 response with Hong Kong’s (‘Who cared?’, 6 June). We write as UK-trained emergency physicians, who have worked as specialists in both the UK and Hong Kong. In many ways, the economic and healthcare contexts are similar. The majority of care is delivered at minimal cost to the patient at the point of care; we share similar per capita GDP and human development indices. But we responded very differently to Covid.

In Hong Kong, initially all patients with possible Covid were admitted to hospital until they tested negative. No one with suspected Covid was transferred to care homes. Healthcare staff, patients and the public routinely wear surgical masks.

In the UK, suspected Covid patients were routinely discharged straight back into the community without testing. Intensive care support was only requested for those requiring high-flow oxygen, which in itself can cause Covid transmission. Provision of PPE has been patchy, even in hospitals.

These are of course not the only factors involved. But the truth is that Hong Kong faced Covid several weeks before the UK. Despite having various opportunities to apply similar measures, the UK did not.

The UK (population 68 million) has had over 40,000 deaths. Hong Kong (population 7.5 million) has had four. When the next wave comes, lessons must be learned from those who have had better outcomes.
Dr Giles N. Cattermole King’s College Hospital NHS Trust
Professor Colin A. Graham Chinese University of Hong Kong

China’s techno-tyranny

Sir: I can only assume that Lord Howell of Guildford’s caricature of the situation in Hong Kong is purposefully disingenuous (Letters, 6 June). ‘Digital grass-roots empowerment’ is no crime and does not need policing. On the contrary, it is the digitisation of the best of democracy.