Dear Sir, The Covid age system for assessing individual worker vulnerability has been available for some time, and was adopted as a National system in Scotland shortly before the end of strict isolation. It is good to see its principal authors submitting their thinking in a professional journal allowing discussion. I attempted to stimulate some thinking on susceptibility to occupational disease, and Covid, and from an ethical perspective, proposed requirements for sound science, and the need for extensive dialogue with those that could be affected. I have no doubt whatsoever that the Covid age team undertook major evaluations of Covid science; nevertheless, within weeks of the systems' introduction in Scotland, it was comprehensively revised with major changes in the assessed risk for some individuals. I struggle to understand how such change could be compatible with a process which has its basis in the criminal law responsibilities of employers under Health and Safety legislation. It is also difficult to comprehend in terms of an individual worker having diligently gone through the process, to find their risk transformed from one day to the next in this way. Workers may also wish to review the science themselves, and there are clear differences in certain areas between Covid age and other systems. Simply looking at the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention shows reversal of Covid age risks for types 1 and 2 diabetes and reports that it is systemic and social inequities that account for racial risks. Overall it is questioned whether Covid science is yet robust enough for a very specific system.
展开▼
