When I started training, TB was around but in most areas was at pretty low levels and drug resistant TB, which makes it very hard to treat, was not a thing. Times have changed however, multi-drug and extremely drug resistant TB are increasingly common. TB itself, which is a disease strongly correlated with social deprivation, is something we see with increasing regularity. All of this means that TB is definitely not a disease of the past, it is having a resurgence within the UK (13.6% case increase from 2023 to 2024). So I was super happy that Dr Eleanor Senior offered to write me a guest blog linked to a book on the topic that offers a non-Eurocentric narrative on the disease.
Eleanor got in touch after I posted on LinkedIn a few weeks ago with a call for anyone who wanted to try their hand at blog writing, she volunteered to contribute a guest blog. If you are reading this and interested in giving it a go too then please email me on elaine@girlymicrobiologist.com.
I really want to use the platform I have to give opportunities to others, as I have been fortunate enough to benefit from those opportunities myself. Writing a guest blog can be useful if you are putting together training portfolios, or just want to try and develop your writing style. So, if you’re interested send me a 300 word pitch about what you’d like to write a blog on and I’ll see whether it is something I can support you with.
Eleanor is a Clinical Scientist in Microbiology at the Countess of Chester Hospital. She has a background in Infection and Global Health (PhD), Clinical Microbiology (MSc) and Biological Sciences (MSci).
Guest blog by Dr Eleanor Senior
Tuberculosis has been entwined with humanity for millennia. Once romanticized as a malady of poets, today tuberculosis is a disease of poverty that walks the trails of injustice and inequity we blazed for it
The book
I was first introduced to this book, surprisingly, by my sister-in law. She isn’t a scientist, she a writer, and usually doesn’t have much interest in microbiology. However, when she said ‘I had to read it’ I knew it was going to be an interesting read.
The book mainly centres around the narrative of ‘Henry’s story’, a young boy from Sierra Leone who the author John Green meets. Henry develops TB at age 6, which then becomes multi-drug resistant. He goes through several course of treatment, including at Lakka Government hospital. The book focuses of key barriers for people, such as Henry, to effective treatment. This includes inaccessibility of treatment centres, financial cost of treatment, mistrust of the medical community and general racism. For instance, TB was at one time considered to be a ‘White man’s plague’ as black people ‘weren’t smart enough’ to catch it. TB still continues to be a stigmatised disease in many communities, leading to suffers being shunned. This stigma can lead to people not seeking out treatment or follow-up care. A key message of this book is that TB, broadly speaking, is treatable and the main barriers to its eradication are societal and based on health inequalities.
It also shows how the impact of TB can be seen everywhere in modern day life. For example, Pasadena, in California was a TB treatment hub, and TB ‘tourism’ led to increases in its economy. Additionally, Adirondack chairs were designed for patients in sanitoriums.
What is TB?
Tuberculosis is a highly infectious disease. It is an ancient disease and has been estimated to have killed 1 in 7 of all people who have ever lived. It has been around for thousands of years, killing numerous people including John Keats, Chopin, Anne Bronte, Henry VII and Eleanor Roosevelt. Evidence has also been found as the cause of death in Egyptian mummies (2400 BC) and in the Neolithic period (5800BC).
It is caused by a bacterium called Mycobacterium tuberculosis and spread through the air by the coughs and sneezes of infected people. There are 2 forms of the disease: active and latent. Active TB can cause a variety of symptoms, including a chronic cough, night sweats and weight loss. In this way it was often known as ‘consumption’ or ‘wasting disease’. Latent TB does not cause symptoms and is not infectious, but the bacteria are still present.
Multi-drug resistant TB (MDR-TB)
TB is typically treated with a cocktail of several antibiotics for several months. For the microbiology/pharmacy nerds it is usually a cocktail of Rifampicin, Isoniazid, Pyrazinamide and Ethambutol (RIPE).
However, due to several reasons, including mismanagement of TB treatment, some strains of TB are becoming resistant to this treatment. This means that the normal treatment will not work and longer, more complex, courses of different antibiotics (sometimes 18-months or longer) are required. These can have cost implications and can have a variety of side effects. The complexity of cost of this can then lead to more people not completing their treatment, further compounding the issues.
Estimated number of people who developed MDR/RR-TB (incident cases) in 2023, for countries with at least 1000 incident cases (World Health Organisation)
Health inequalities
Henry’s story shows that the chances of survival from this disease are often based on where a person lives. As mentioned, TB was considered a ‘white person’s disease’ and so it was able to be rife in non-white communities. However, it was later decided that it was a ‘black disease’ and one reason to prevent the abolition of slavery was because it would increase the spread of TB.
The cure for TB is here, however, due to issues with healthcare and economic systems, the treatments and assistance are not provided equitably to the societies that need them most. A range of socioeconomic factors can increase risk for TB, including poverty, language barriers and limited access to health care and housing.
Even now, TB disproportionately affects racial and ethnic minorities. In 2023 it was estimated that 90.1% of TB cases occurred amongst minorities (https://www.cdc.gov/tb/health-equity/index.html). Currently, there are many different initiatives to attempt to remove these barriers, including communication and outreach events, policies to identify ‘at risk’ groups, highlighting personal stories and collaborations between different international bodies, such as the CDC.
Conclusion
TB is a highly interesting disease; it has been around since history began and has shaped out modern world. Even know, it continues to be a challenge for healthcare professionals around the globe. Finally eradicating this disease will require a multifaceted approach, including effective drug regimens, education and removing barriers to equitable treatment.
Last week I wrote about the challenges of the current Ebola virus outbreak, talking about some details linked to the virus itself, and also some challenges that mean this outbreak may be more challenging to manage. I was involved in previous outbreaks, but definitely in a peripheral support capacity, because of my underlying autoimmune condition I did not travel to Sierra Leone. Context and learning from previous events is important however, so I tapped my good friend and colleague Ant De Souza, who was directly involved in supporting diagnostics, to write me a guest blog of his experiences.
Anthony De Souza is an award-winning Healthcare Science educator with over a decade of experience as Biomedical Scientist in microbiology. He was the first Healthcare Scientist to gain a permanent Practice Educator post, a post he has only continued to develop and expand since its inception. Ant’s transition into strategic education leadership has empowered the Healthcare Science workforce to improve patient outcomes based on his approach; which links strengthening multidisciplinary collaboration, expanding clinical capabilities, and elevating the profile of the healthcare science workforce to ensure they are invited to have a seat at the table. The impact of this has been recognised not just by me, but by him being named on The Pathologist’s Power List for his outstanding contributions to the field.
Ebola Deployment, Sierra Leone – A Personal Reflection
In 2015, when an urgent appeal was issued by Public Health England (now UKHSA) for scientists to support the Ebola crisis in West Africa, I didn’t hesitate—I knew I had to go.
In the past, I’d seen similar calls for volunteers and questioned whether my skills were enough to make a meaningful contribution. The last thing I would ever want was to become a burden on a mission of such importance. But this time felt different. For the first time, my experience, confidence, and mindset aligned with what was needed. I was working as a Band 6 Biomedical Scientist at Watford General Hospital, in a busy microbiology department delivering a 24/7 service. I was used to working under pressure, and I felt ready to contribute.
Before committing, I spoke with my colleagues. A five-week deployment would mean they would take on additional workload, and it was important to me that I had their full support. With their encouragement, I signed up.
Preparation and training
Preparation for deployment was thorough and, at times, intense. I travelled to Porton Down in Salisbury for specialist training, where we learned how to work safely with high-risk pathogens such as Ebola. This included simulation exercises in a laboratory environment designed to mirror the Kerrytown facility, where we practised managing realistic scenarios, including equipment failures and power outages.
We also completed security awareness and hostage survival training, alongside a series of vaccinations for diseases such as yellow fever, cholera, and typhoid. Anti-malarial medication was essential. The preparation highlighted not only the scientific challenges ahead, but also the environmental and personal risks we would face.
The journey
Getting to Sierra Leone was a journey in itself. We travelled by plane, transferred in Morocco, then boarded another flight to Freetown. From there, the journey continued by minibus to a port, a boat crossing, and finally another minibus to the site.
It was a strange experience travelling with a group of people I had never met—yet over the course of five weeks, these individuals would become a close-knit team.
Arrival and first impressions
On arrival, small behavioural changes immediately became part of daily life. Handshakes were replaced with elbow taps, a simple but important measure to reduce transmission risk. Regular temperature checks became routine, particularly at checkpoints when travelling to and from the treatment centre.
We were based at the Ebola Treatment Centre (ETC) in Kerrytown, outside of Freetown—a facility built by the British Army Royal Engineers and funded by the Department for International Development. The scale of the operation was impressive, and there was a strong sense of shared purpose. People from different organisations and backgrounds worked together with a single goal.
The ETC was divided into zones based on risk, from green (low-risk areas) to red (high-risk patient areas). Full personal protective equipment (PPE) was mandatory in higher-risk areas.
Working in the laboratory
Our laboratory was located centrally within the site, shared with the Ministry of Defence. After donning PPE, we met the outgoing team and received a rapid but essential handover. For a few days, we worked alongside them before taking full responsibility.
Our role was to test blood and swab samples from individuals suspected of having Ebola. We operated six days a week, with two teams of six covering shifts from 06:00 to 22:00.
Many samples came from community settings, including remote villages. A significant proportion were post-mortem samples, taken to determine whether Ebola had caused the death. The high number of samples from children and infants was particularly difficult to process emotionally.
Specimen reception took place outside the lab. Samples were placed into chlorine solution for decontamination before being handled further. Wearing full PPE in the heat of the sun was physically exhausting, and the need for constant vigilance—checking for incorrectly packaged samples or hidden sharps—added to the pressure.
Inside the lab, resources were basic but functional. The space had sealed cement benches, limited air conditioning, and no negative pressure system. Testing was carried out using PCR techniques for Ebola, alongside POCT testing for malaria. A flexible film isolator was used to safely inactivate the virus before analysis.
Life beyond the lab
Outside of the laboratory, the scale of the public health response was visible everywhere. Posters, radio messages, and community outreach efforts aimed to educate people about Ebola transmission, safe burial practices, and how to protect themselves.
Strict measures were in place:
Large gatherings were prohibited
Schools and religious services were disrupted
Curfews were enforced
Checkpoints monitored movement and health status
Movement restrictions between districts
Daily life, as it once was, had largely come to a standstill.
Cultural challenges and adaptation
One of the most striking aspects of the outbreak was its impact on traditional burial practices.
In Sierra Leone, burial rituals are deeply rooted in cultural and religious beliefs. Traditionally, families wash, dress, and physically say goodbye to loved ones. However, in the context of Ebola, these practices posed a significant risk, as the virus remains highly infectious after death.
To reduce transmission, specially trained burial teams were introduced. These teams worked closely with communities and religious leaders to adapt traditions safely. While physical contact was removed, efforts were made to preserve dignity—allowing families to view the body from a distance, limiting attendees, and involving community leaders in the process.
This collaboration was essential. Without it, there was a real risk that families would carry out burials in secret, increasing the spread of the virus.
Reflections
There is much I could say about my time in Sierra Leone—far more than can fit into a single blog. The work was challenging, both physically and emotionally. There were moments of exhaustion, uncertainty, and sadness.
But above all, what stays with me is the resilience of the people.
In the face of immense hardship, communities adapted their traditions, supported one another, and worked alongside international teams to combat the outbreak. It was a powerful reminder that effective public health is not just about science or medicine—it is about trust, collaboration, and cultural understanding.
This experience reshaped my perspective on global health, teamwork, and the role we each play in times of crisis. It remains one of the most challenging and meaningful periods of my career.
Infectious diseases have been in the news a lot over the last few months, between Hantavirus, Listeria and raw milk, and even Screwworm in cattle, it is hard to ignore the headlines, and after the pandemic it feels like every news article declares a risk to all human life. Ebola is, however, an incredibly difficult virus to manage, with devastating consequences for both countries and communities and so despite the instinct to hide from the reporting we need to continue to engage with the information that is coming out.
From an infection point alone this outbreak is worth discussing, but it is especially pertinent because aside from the impact it has locally, is the fact that the number of people currently dying and infected has likely been directly impacted by global policy choices linked to de-funding United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Combine this with the US decision to pull out of the World Health Organisation (WHO) reducing funding for international health responses, has resulted in a public health emergency that took longer to detect, and now requires managing with both less resources, and less available expertise of previous pandemics. All of which lead to making an already difficult and dangerous situation considerably more challenging.
We live in a global community, and the idea that you can step away from global responsibilities without consequence is more than delusional, it is dangerous, so ‘sorry, not sorry’ for the politics in this one, I think it’s too important to ignore.
Previous outbreaks
There have been a number of Ebola outbreaks since the Ebola virus was first identified in 1976. The initial outbreak included two near-simultaneous outbreaks in Central Africa: one in Yambuku, Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), near the Ebola River, and the other in Nzara, Sudan (now South Sudan). The largest outbreak, and the one many of us will remember due to both the substantial media coverage and global health response, occurred in and around Sierra Leone. This 2014–2016 outbreak had more than 28,600 cases reported.
The Centres for Disease Control (CDC) figure show these outbreaks, and the causative Ebola virus (see Ebola virus section below for more details on viral species).
The key takeaway is that the virus causing this outbreak, the Bundibugyo virus, is a rare cause of Ebola virus outbreaks, with considerably less know and understood about how the virus is transmitted, and how it can be detected and managed. This leads to an even greater need for a rapid global response, both in terms of public health, but also in terms of research focus. Making the delay in both even more impactful, and the need for us to get on top of it even more urgent. Some of our prior learning can be ported, but so much of it cannot.
On the 17th May the WHO declared the current scenario in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Uganda a public health emergency of international concern, but what does this mean? Well, the WHO defines it as of an extraordinary, sudden, or unexpected public health event with a risk to other countries through the international spread of disease, potentially requiring a coordinated global response.
On the 5th June the African Centres for Disease Control and WHO launched a joint Ebola continent preparedness and response plan of $518 million to support African countries to prepare for, rapidly detect, and respond to the outbreak.
Ebola virus has a number of different variants, and the current outbreak is caused by the Bundibungyo virus. As of the 6th June there have been 515 confirmed cases, with 91 deaths (17.7%). Uganda has 19 confirmed cases and 2 deaths (10.5%). It is worth considering that these numbers are likely to be a significant under estimate, as laboratory backlogs, plus some level of distrust in healthcare systems, are likely to lead to a reduction in confirmed cases, but I’ll discuss the difference between confirmed, probably, and possible cases later. At the moment, all onward cases are still linked with travel to DRC, but patients are currently being treated or followed up in a number of countries outside of Africa, including in Brazil, Germany, and Italy.
Well, the first thing to realise is that it is not a single virus. Ebola viruses are part of the filoviridae family, most commonly referred to as Filoviruses. They are zoonotic pathogens (associated with animals) that survive in what are known as reservoir species. These are non-human reservoirs, possibly bats, where the virus can circulate without harming the host and leads to occasional spillover into humans where disease is then detected. Ebola disease (EBOD) is a rare and often severe illness in humans that is frequently fatal.
Ebola disease is caused by a group of viruses that belong to the Orthoebolavirus genus of the filoviridae family. Six species of Orthoebolaviruses have been identified to date,with 4 causing disease in humans, three of which are known to cause large outbreaks: Zaire Ebola virus, Sudan virus and Bundibugyo virus. The zoonotic reservoirs are not well understood for Ebola viruses, unlike those for Marburg viruses where a host reservoir has been established by direct isolation from bats.
NB Marburg disease (MARD) caused by Marburg virus was the first filovirus to be discovered in 1967 and also causes disease in humans, but is not an Ebola virus. Ebola Reston virus (RESTV), is another Ebola virus that has been detected in humans but appears to infect them sub-clinically i.e. with no symptoms, and so transmission routes and impacts are not well understood. It does however cause EBOD disease in non-human primates and has been detected in animals such as pigs in the Philippines and China, so there may be a zoonotic reservoir for this virus similar to other members of the genus. This is the virus that featured in The Hot Zone book by Robert Preston, based on the New Yorker article Crisis in the Hot Zone (1992).
Filoviruses are enveloped, non-segmented, negative-sense RNA viruses. The genomes between Bundibugyo and Zaire Ebola species differ by about 30%, and the pathogenesis and clinical outcomes also appear to differ, but there is still limited information regarding the viral mechanism/s that lead to these differences. Importantly, it is worth noting that the cause of the current outbreak, Bundibugyo Ebolavirus, behaves differently in terms of mortality than the more commonly detected outbreak species. Vaccines and other targeted therapy are also not yet established, as the virus has been seen much less frequently.
What are the symptoms?
Patients usually have an initial non-specific presentation which includes fever with malaise (discomfort/unease), fatigue, and myalgia (muscle pain). A few days after this, patients may develop gastrointestinal infections that can include anorexia (loss of appetite), nausea, vomiting, and diarrhoea. Although many people associate EBOD with haemorrhagic fever (i.e. temperatures and bleeding), bleeding abnormalities actually occur in less than half of patients. If bleeding is present, it is usually linked to bleeding from the gums, subconjunctival haemorrhage (broken blood vessels in the eye), and blood in vomit and stool.
The incubation period is between 2 to 21 days (typically, 6 to 10 days) and probably depends on the Ebola virus, as well as the exposure dose and route.
Diagnosis and patient management
Diagnostic testing for Ebola is mainly via reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) targeting the RNA of the virus, but it is made more challenging because it can only be detected in blood once symptoms appear. It is also possible to use Antigen-Capture Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) tests, these are often less sensitive but easier to implement. Point of care tests, finger prick tests, can also be used but they again have much lower sensitivity than PCR. Many of these tests have been designed for the main outbreak strains of Ebola, and so modification may be needed to allow detection of the Bundibugyo virus, or test sensitivity may be further reduced.
Once patients have developed symptoms, especially during this outbreak as there is a lack of specific treatment options, the main response is linked to supportive care:
Fluid & electrolyte resuscitation as patients have severe fluid loss from diarrhoea and vomiting
Cardiovascular support as patients frequently go into shock
Respiratory support, as patients enter respiratory failure, using equipment such as ventilators
Symptom management as patients may end up needing dialysis for renal failure
Most of which require complex medical equipment which may not be available, or available in large enough numbers within local treatment centres. Lack of equipment availability and access to supportive treatments directly impacts clinical outcomes. The mortality (death) rates without treatment also show a great disparity between Ebola viruses:
Ebola Zaire: 90% (20 – 40% with early treatment and supportive therapy intervention)
Sudan virus: 50% (no approved vaccines or specific antiviral therapeutics available)
Bundibugyo virus: 30% (no approved vaccines or specific antiviral therapeutics available)
Although there isn’t currently an established treatment for Bundibugyo virus, Peter Stafford, the US doctor who contracted Ebola in DRC and was flown to Germany, has been treated with an experimental antibody MBP-134. The BBC has also reported that three vaccines are currently in development which would target the glycoprotein of the Bundibugyo Ebola virus.
Each vaccine aims to train the body to spot the same structure on the surface of the virus but each uses a different technology in order to support an immune response. All three still require testing using clinical trials, and so although it is good that vaccines are being developed, their ability to influence the outbreak is currently still unknown.
For patients that recover, post infection morbidity (long term effects) have not always been well captured due to the devastating impacts of the outbreaks themselves, but during the 2014–2016 EBOV epidemic caused by Ebola Zaire, musculoskeletal pain, headache, encephalitis, and ocular problems were noted in survivors and were referred to collectively as the “post-Ebola syndrome.” Recovery, therefore, can be a protracted process and is likely to vary by causative species.
One challenge for outbreaks on this scale, and for Ebola viruses in particular, is the fact that cases occur throughout communities as well as in healthcare settings. Some of the people most needed to stop spread and to care for patients are the ones at the highest risk of acquisition. Those caring for the living, and the dead, as well as those who are going into homes and other environments to make them safe again for others. The level of selflessness required is huge, especially when you are having to step up knowing that the equipment and support you need to keep you safe may not be there.
During this outbreak there have been numerous reports of people putting themselves at risk to do their roles as items like personal protective equipment (PPE) are just not available. This happens because, although Ebola is spread by close contact with blood and bodily fluids, those infected produce significant amounts of excretions that are also likely to be heavily viral loaded. I talked in the patient management section that one of the biggest challenges is fluid loss via diarrhoea and vomiting and all of those fluids contain risk for those caring for them, or their environment.
Some of the additional challenges that occur during Ebola outbreaks are linked to how it impacts communities. Traditional burial practices often require kissing or interacting with the dead. In many Congolese communities, physical contact with the body is seen as a vital, respectful “final farewell”. This isn’t just a ‘nice to have’ it’s part of embedded in ritual and is highly significant as a way of saying goodbye to loved ones. There are also components that include family members washing the deceased. This is obviously a significant risk moment for transmission.
During significant outbreaks bodies may be disposed of using safe and dignified burial protocols, meaning funerals are undertaken using no touch protocols (the family cannot see or touch the body), bodies are sealed and specially transported, and bodies are buried in deep graves of at least 2 meters deep. Funerals themselves are events where people gather, which may be impacted public heath regulations, so at a time where people are most vulnerable they may expected to manage without support of friends and family, or the rituals traditionally used to help process loss. This can cause to distrust of authority and can lead to clashes between communities and those enforcing the protocols.
On final thing to consider for filovirus spread is that they have been detected in multiple body fluids, including breast milk and semen, in survivors of infection. The persistence in semen, with the potential for sexual transmission has been noted for more than 500 days after disease onset, amd is a serious concern for recovering individuals. However, onward transmission this long after disease onset is very rare with undetermined effects. Even so, this means that survivors and communities may need to consider transmission for protracted periods post recovery and it can represent a source of anxiety.
How is it managed differently?
Ebola is classified as a Risk Group 4 (or Biosafety Level 4, BSL-4) pathogen, meaning that is requires the highest level of biological containment This impacts everything from the way patients are diagnosed and managed in clinical environments, to what kind of laboratory facilities are required to work in developing vaccines and other treatments.
Within the UK it is referred to as a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) which is defined based on the following criteria:
Requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely
Acute infectious disease
Typically has a high case-fatality rate
May not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
Often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
Ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
Local guidelines for those managing these kinds of outbreaks evolved a lot as a results of the 2014 – 2016 Ebola Zaire outbreak, where the CDC modified guidance, in part due to the number of healthcare worker acquisitions early in the process.
As it is not just those in hospitals that require PPE to protect staff, the WHO have also released guidance to aid decision making about what kind of PPE is needed for different workers and interactions across the patient pathway. This obviously has a caveat that if the PPE is not available you are not able to wear it.
Key infection prevention and control measures in the World Health Organization (WHO) guideline for Ebola Willet V et al. BMJ 2024; 384 :p2811
There are also some fantastic design solutions that can enable patients to be cared for in a way that limits the exposure of those undertaking that caring. These solutions also support patients having continued access for families, where they can be seen and communicate. This is also important as families may be expected to continue to provide food, even during hospitalisation, meaning they need to ve able to visit safely.
From the videos that I have seen, these facilities do not seem to be widely accessibly within the DRC, but the scenario might quickly change with the increasing recognition of the need for a global response to the outbreak.
Although it would be nice to imagine that everyone is being cared for in facilities, like those pictured above, many of the reports I have seen are much more similar to the New York Times video pictured below, which is really night and day to what we would wish for patients, staff, and families in terms of infrastructure access.
The world cup has just started. People are travelling from all over the world to the USA, Canada, and Mexico. The report below shows some of the challenges that this kind of travel can lead to.
Events like these have led to places like the European Centres for Disease Control (ECDC) to issue guidance on what to think about if a passenger develops symptoms on a flight. This is so crucial because, as discussed, the initial symptoms are pretty non-specific, and if someone has a possible contact history it can be difficult to separate EBOD from a number of other infections that could initially present the same way.
They have also issues guidance about who might need to be followed up after an exposure event. Anxiety can drive extreme responses to having a probable/confirmed case, and so having guidance in these circumstances is key. As Ebola is transmitted by direct contact it is important to be able to differentiate those who are contacts from others who will have just been in the same space but are not at minimal to no risk (contact free exposure has a risk if <1%).
Terminology is key
As I’ve been talking about possible/probably/confirmed cases I thought it was important to include what those definitions actually mean within the UK health setting at least:
Confirmed case
An individual (alive or dead) with a positive laboratory test result (real time polymerase chain reaction (PCR)) from a blood or other body fluid sample.
Probable case
An individual for whom no laboratory results are available (for example waiting for testing or results), who meets both of the following criteria:
Clinical illness compatible with EBOD including any of the following symptoms:
fever (temperature greater than 37.5°C)
severe weakness
severe headache
myalgia
abdominal pain
sore throat
vomiting
diarrhoea
unexplained haemorrhage
PLUS
Contact with an Ebola virus in one or more of the following ways in the 21 days before the onset of symptoms:
contact with an identified potential source of EBOD (for example, direct contact with a probable or confirmed case without wearing adequate PPE or where there were breaches in PPE
exposure to an Ebola virus-infected body fluids or tissues without wearing adequate PPE or where there were breaches in PPE
direct handling of bats, antelopes or primates, from Ebola affected areas without wearing adequate PPE or where there were breaches in PPE
Possible case
A possible case is a deceased individual with epidemiological risks for EBOD
OR
An individual for whom no laboratory results are available (for example waiting for testing or results), but who meets both of the following criteria:
Clinical illness compatible with EBOD including any of the following symptoms:
fever (temperature greater than 37.5°C)
severe weakness
severe headache
myalgia
abdominal pain
sore throat
vomiting
diarrhoea
unexplained haemorrhage
PLUS
One or more of the following epidemiological criteria in the 21 days before the onset of symptoms:
history of travel to EBOD affected areas
direct contact with a confirmed case of EBOD,
or their body fluids (including laboratory staff), but trained and wore appropriate PPE, and had no known breaches in PPE
direct contact with a confirmed case of EBOD, or their body fluids (including laboratory staff), but trained and wore appropriate PPE, and had no known breaches in PPE
For someone arriving into the NHS, the application of these terms in linked to the flow chart below (https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/ebola-virus-disease-clinical-management-and-guidance) with the guidance last updated 4 September 2025. This also helps to remind people to go through steps such as ruling out other possible causes for the symptoms present, such as malaria.
Being able to use precise case definitions means that healthcare staff can ensure that the level of PPE and other protections are matched to the likelihood of risk being present.
As discussed at the start of this post, returning travelers or healthcare workers are already being monitored in numerous countries outside of the outbreak zones, and this is only likely to increase within the next 21 days, linked to the incubation period of the virus.
Until the infrastructure is present to support prevention of onward transmission the risk of global spread will continue to be present. Let me be honest here, I don’t think this is turning into a pandemic. I think there may be risk of acquisition to a small number of healthcare workers if for any reason communication linked to prior travel history fails. This isn’t the point though. We should not just mount public health responses because of a fear that they may impact us personally. I think we have an obligation to utilise the knowledge, experience, and resources available to help save, potentially, thousands of lives.
The time of it taking months of sea travel to get from point A to point B are far behind us. You can be anywhere in the globe in 24 hours, far shorter than the shortest incubation period for most infectious diseases. If the COVID-19 pandemic taught those of us working in the world of infection anything it was that global networks can make a real difference. A difference is the time it takes to recognise that there is a problem to be addressed. A difference in the number of people who are impacted. A difference in the time it takes to take a possible solution to an infectious problem, like vaccines, to a state where they are ready to be implemented.
We cannot live in a world where we think in terms of them and us. Where we think something isn’t happening in our back yard and therefore we don’t need to get involved. The truth is so far from this. Global health has the word global in it for a reason, and the eco systems we live in are global. We need to make networks and connections stronger, not let them be degraded.
So let’s put the pressure on where we can, use what influence we have, and try to ensure that the outcome of this outbreak is not determined by what resources are lacking and who makes the expertise available to help. Let’s behave as we hope someone else would in return, step up and be counted in order to save lives. Let’s be the global family that the pandemic showed us we could be if we tried.
Cruise ships and cruise ship outbreaks have been in the news a lot this month. So much so, that I’ve already posted about the Hantavirus outbreak that was associated with a cruise ship in South America:
There have also been headlines, however, linked to 48 passengers displaying symptoms consistent with gastrointestinal illness, as well as one crew member, that has led to another cruise ship asking passengers to isolate.
This second kind of cruise ship outbreak isn’t all that unusual, and I wonder if it would even have reached the headlines if it hadn’t happened during the same month as everyone was talking about Hantavirus. Cruise ships are mobile cities, with large numbers of people confined within a limit space, usually drawn from all over the world. Places where everyone is outside of their ‘normal’, eating different food together, spending time in close quarters with strangers, and sometimes reticent to lose holiday time if they start to feel unwell. That’s without throwing in sea sickness as an alternate reason for nausea and vomiting, which may mean people don’t realise they are ill with something infectious as early as they may do at home.
I’ve always sworn, for all of these reasons that I would never go on a cruise. I’ve spent way too many hours in lectures listening to outbreak stories related to ships, and yet, due to a birthday surprise, I went on my first ever cruise in 2025 and it surprised me, so I thought I would spend this week talking about a few of the reasons why, but first some outbreak context.
Multi-Year Outbreak Comparison (2019–2026)
According to historical Centres for Disease Control (CDC) data tracking of official gastrointestinal outbreaks across major cruise lines, the frequency of notable incidents varies dramatically by cruise line brand:
Princess Cruises: Highest frequency with 14 outbreaks
Holland America Line: 13 outbreaks
Royal Caribbean International: 10 outbreaks
Celebrity Cruises: 6 outbreaks
Carnival Cruise Line: 2 outbreaks
Disney Cruise Line: 1 outbreak
It’s worth noting, however, that different cruise lines not only have very different numbers and types of ships, with wildly different passengers numbers, but they also have very different passenger profiles. Some, like Virgin, host adult only cruises. Others, like Viking, serve older passenger demographics and undertake river cruising rather than ocean based cruising. Then you have lines like Disney, that focus on family centered cruising, and so will have a high proportion of families and young children as part of their passengers. Some cruises are also much longer than others, with cruises over six months becoming more common, and some cruise ships now consisting of passengers who have permanently brought cabins as their primary homes. All of which is to say, that numbers alone may not tell the whole story, and it is probably important to compare like with like.
NB Interestingly, as the recent Hantavirus outbreak did not impact 3% of passengers, I don’t know believe it would be reported via this system, and I suspect that they only manage US related outbreak numbers.
Outbreak Organisms (CDC list 2023 – 2026)
When you are training in microbiology, virology and infection prevention and control, you study A LOT of outbreak scenarios. Some of theses are almost always linked to outbreaks on cruise ships and/or navel carriers. Studies of re-supply and bringing in vegetables used for salads that took down 2/3 of the ship cohort with multiple organisms. I thought it might, thereofore, be interesting to look at the CDC data related to some recent outbreaks and see what the causative organisms actually are.
From 2023 – 2026 (to date) there were 54 reported outbreaks on the CDC website reaching the 3% of total passengers threshold. The causative organisms, where known, included:
Norovirus
Salmonella
E. coli
Combined Salmonella and E. coli
Now, I’ve previously posted about Norovirus, and how difficult it can be to control, especially the challenges of getting it out of environmental reservoirs (carpets, curtains, bedding) and so I’m not surprised that it is on the list.
I was interested to see how dominant norovirus was compared to other causes. When you look at the numbers it shows that norovirus really does seem to be as dominant as I was taught, with nearly 90% of outbreaks due to noro:
Norovirus: 48 outbreaks
E. coli: 4 outbreaks
Salmonella: 1 outbreak
Combined Salmonella and E. coli: 1 outbreak
Whilst noting that this feels like a lot of cases, it is also worth considering that the CDC states that cruise ship outbreaks account for just 1% of all reported norovirus cases globally. The other interesting thing is that the numbers seem to be pretty stable year on year, whereas out in the community I would expect there to be a significant rise in norovirus cases every 2 – 3 years, as strains change due to mutation, this doesn’t seem to be the case within the cruise data available.
Disney cruise line specific outbreaks
Having noted that Disney had only 1 outbreak listed recently on the CDC site, I thought I would investigate a little further. Disney Cruise Line has had two major officially documented gastrointestinal illness outbreaks that reached the CDC mandatory reporting threshold of 3% or more of passengers or crew, one in 2016 and one in 2002, each on a different ship:
Disney Wonder:
April–May 2016 (Official CDC Outbreak): During a 4-night Bahamian itinerary heading into a Panama Canal cruise, 131 of 2,680 passengers (4.89%) and 14 of 991 crew members (1.41%) fell ill with laboratory-confirmed norovirus.
Disney Magic:
November 2002 (Official CDC Outbreak): A total of 175 passengers and crew members out of 2713 passengers and ~950 crew, contracted norovirus during a Bahamian voyage. Disney temporarily pulled the ship from service for a week to break the infection cycle through a deep chemical sanitation.
Not all ships are equal
Something that struck me, is the outbreaks listed for Disney are to do with the two older ships in the Disney Cruise Line fleet, as they are both part of the Classic Class. This is interesting for 2 reasons:
Is there an accumulation of outbreak risk due to age? Especially for organisms like norovirus which can be linked to environmental reservoirs
The oldest 2 Disney Cruise Line ships were early custom Disney build and so lack some of the specific design features that may support risk reduction on the newer ships
To aid with understanding this, it is noteworthy Disney has built a number of custom ships since the production of the Classic Class, and therefore have had the opportunity to include many more custom features in the later classes of ships.
The Classic Class – purchased by Disney but built in a different ship yard and to a different design than the other ship classes
Disney Magic (1998) ~2700 passengers
Disney Wonder (1999) ~ 2700 passengers
The Dream Class – commissioned by Disney for Disney
Disney Dream (2011) ~4000 passengers
Disney Fantasy (2012) ~4000 passengers
The Wish Class – commissioned by Disney for Disney
Disney Wish (2022) ~4000 passengers
Disney Treasure (2024) ~4000 passengers
Disney Destiny (2025) ~4000 passengers
The Global Class – purchased by Disney but part built before acquisition
Disney Adventure (2026) ~6700 passengers
One thing I didn’t realise, until I started to investigate this area more, is that cruise ships need to go into dry dock at least twice in every 5 year period by maritime law. Obviously mostly this is to do with safety, linked to the hull etc, but most cruise lines will use this opportunity to re-fit and manage any fittings and soft furnishings, which can aid with managing ongoing outbreak risk.
Why does Disney Cruise Line have to do things differently?
Full disclaimer here, I haven’t been on cruise lines with anyone else, but I have done a lot of talking to people and watching videos to enable some comparison, but my only first hand knowledge is from what I have experienced. I have only been on the Fantasy, and there are other classes of ships, obviously if Disney Cruise Line would like me to travel on them all to do an infection control audit, I’d be happy to, they wouldn’t even have to pay me.
I think, from my experience, one of the reasons that Disney Cruise Line is different, and has to be different, is because of the passenger demographic they serve. Their passenger number contain a huge amount of children under the age of ten. Children who may be shedding high viral loads, and carrying asymptomatic infection. Children who may also be too small to be able to communicate how they are feeling when symptoms come into play, and who may also not be compliant with hand and other hygiene practices, and are likely to be in close contact with others when playing etc. The ships are therefore at higher risk, potentially, than other cruise lines of having significant spread once a virus is onboard. It is also much harder to be able to isolate small children, and they are much more likely to need clinical support if they become unwell, which is a risk to the child and logistically complicated to manage. It is therefore much better to invest in steps to prevent infection spread.
What does Disney Cruise Line say they do to prevent the transmission of infectious disease?
Disney consistently ranks in the top five cleanest cruise lines globally. Their fleet frequently achieves perfect 100 scores during unannounced CDC sanitation inspections. They also have an advantage as they are an independent fleet, they don’t rent their ships out to others for events or specialist cruises, where they would have periods of time where they couldn’t control their risk. This allows them to maintain control of their fleet, what activities are undertaken, and ongoing control methods. The ships are also on the smaller size in terms of passenger numbers compared to some of the very large cruise ships managed by other companies (~2,700 to ~6,700 guests compared to ~5500 to ~7600 on some other lines).
Below is what Disney Cruise Line states about how they control their infection risks:
Key Quarantine and Isolation Protocols
Mandatory Isolation: If you test positive for COVID-19 or another contagious illness during your cruise, you and your stateroom occupants will likely be required to isolate in your stateroom or a specially designated, safer area of the ship.
Medical Evaluation: Shipboard medical centers are staffed with experienced doctors and nurses to provide care, and you may be required to quarantine at the sole discretion of the shipboard physician.
Disembarkation/Evacuation: If necessary, you may be required to disembark early for medical reasons, which could occur in a foreign port.
Pre-Boarding Screening: While pre-boarding testing is not always required, all guests must complete a mandatory health questionnaire before boarding, which includes screening for symptoms like fever, cough, vomiting, or diarrhea.
Compliance: You are required to abide by all health safety protocols, which can change without notice, and failure to comply may result in denied boarding or forced disembarkation.
Stateroom Support: If you are required to isolate, Disney provides necessary support, including food delivery and medical check-ins.
Illness Prevention: The crew conducts extensive cleaning and sanitization of common areas and staterooms
Now, luckily for me, I didn’t experience any sickness onboard and so I can’t testify to the accuracy from all of these portrayals. I can, however, attest to many of other aspects, such as pre-screening, cleaning, and hand hygiene support.
Operational approaches
There were some brilliant operational choices that made me both happy and also surprised me. There were also some really simple design decisions, which now I’ve seen I don’t understand why they aren’t present everywhere. The best example of this was the way that plates on the buffet were stored upside down. This means that no one is in contact when taking a plate with the surface that someone else will then eat off. This is such a simple change but makes so much sense in terms of infection control I can’t believe I have neither thought about it myself or seen it elsewhere.
Other simple things included the fact that all cutlery was left fully wrapped, and so no one was touching the implements that anyone else was going to eat with. This fully enclosing, rather than just wrapping, is another easy way of prevention cross transmission routes, as asymptomatic, or even symptomatic excreters, are not in a position to pass on their organism to others. It also prevents deposition on cutlery from other routes, such as when people sneeze, effectively providing a protective barrier.
Self serve vs cast member led
Another key thing, on some ships, is that the buffet is served by cast members rather than self serve. This means that the food is kept behind screens and significantly lowers contamination risk. All main meals are served plated by cast members, which also reduces reduces the risk. Even self serve items, have guidance linked to risk reduction. For instance the fizzy drink dispensers advice people not to use reusable cups, so that the dispenser outlet does not risk re-contamination after someone has drunk from the cup.
Keeping hand hygiene easy
Something else, that is very prominent, is the emphasis placed on hand hygiene wherever you go onboard. Hand hygiene stations are conspicuously present with both adult and child height basins. Special sinks are also present in all the child specific areas that can help children with hand hygiene, as all they have to do is submerge their hands and the sink itself undertakes the agitation. This helps hygiene efficacy for children who younger or less engaged.
Multiple hand hygiene stations are available at the entrances to the buffet, and there are enough of them that no one should skip unintentionally because they haven’t seen them, or because people are off-put because of queues. Making hand hygiene easy and visible has been found to be key from healthcare studies, and I imagine cruise ships are no different.
Gatekeeping
At main dining room meals, in the evening, hand hygiene is actively enforced. As there are too many people entering the dining rooms at each sitting (as everyone eats at either early or late dining) Disney enforce hand hygiene by having crew members physically hand out hand sanitising wipes directly to each passenger as they enter the dining room. The same happens at the buffet at busy times. This is very different (from what I can tell) to other cruise lines and definitely contributes to risk reduction. Having these multiple points, every day, where hand hygiene is enforced really helps to impact the collective risk level onboard.
Bathrooms
Even the bathrooms pleased me, and not just because of the Mickey shaped mirrors. Having a feature that attracts people towards the sink does help with hand hygiene compliance, however. They also have signage on how to wash your hands by every sink, to encourage that it is done appropriately. Additionally, many have access to hand hygiene in areas after you have exited the bathroom door, to manage any exit contamination risk, as an additional option.
Domestic cleaning
Cleaning is obvious everywhere you go. I may have been the only person on that cruise who spent time photographing the cleaners trolley rather than the ‘big five’. All rooms got cleaned at least once a day, but in my experience many rooms got cleaned twice a day, as they get a morning clean and an evening turn down. Eating areas are also rotated and open at different times which allowed cleaning to be supported. Spending so much time auditing, I am often super aware of environmental grime, and no once was I brought out of the magic of being onboard by seeing anything that triggers my IPC brain.
Cleaning trolleys have freshly made up cleaning solution, alongside cleaning wipes. Fresh cloths and easy access to gloves. The level of cleaning we experienced was immaculate, and this does seem to align with the CDC audit scores.
Pre boarding
There are steps taken to reduce risk, however, before you even get on board. Disney Cruise Line requires all guests to complete a mandatory, online health questionnaire on the morning of embarkation, typically arriving via email between 5:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. The is pretty brief and asks a series of “Yes/No” questions regarding recent fever/respiratory symptoms, gastrointestinal issues, and pregnancy status (specifically for those 24 weeks or more). Although not infection related the pregnancy question is an interesting one and often catches people out. Disney, like many cruise lines, won’t let women sail if they are over 24 weeks pregnant. This appears to be standard across the industry because , if a medical emergency or preterm labour occurs, ships do not carry the specialized equipment or staff required to safely manage delivery or provide neonatal care for a premature infant.
If you reply in the positive to any question, other than the pregnancy question which is an immediate no board, then you will usually be reviewed prior to boarding and a risk assessment performed.
During cruising
If you develop symptoms of any kind, once you are onboard, there is support available from the medical team. It may be hard to distinguish between gastrointestinal symptoms and sea sickness, and everyone is encouraged to flag anything in order to ensure the right risk review is undertaken. If it is felt to be an infectious cause, passengers will be asked to isolate, and enhanced cleaning is undertaken.
Not only is hand hygiene reinforced during signage, by telling you not only how but when to wash your hands, it also clearly flags that you should contact medical support staff if you experience symptoms, and helpfully even flags what they are. All of this means that they are multiple contact points every day where passengers can access information that may be helpful in reducing infection risk (also, how clean are those tiles).
During excursions
Hand hygiene is also enforced after excursions before you get back onboard the ship. Alcohol gel dispensers are brought out by the crew, and cool towels, as well as water, are available to aid passengers stay cool and hydrated. I’m sure if you were in colder climes these would be aimed at warming you up.
Signage is also placed outside of disembarkation points that can help guide whether special measures may be needed or advised before you start on excursions. I think most people are more concerned with COVID still than norovirus, whereas I am very much concerned about diarrhoea and vomiting as part of my ship board experience.
Visible prioritisation
In general the communication of the need for hand hygiene is ubiquitous onboard. The signage below was part of the display in the lifts on the Fantasy. Embedding this guidance, and having it reinforced by cast members, means that for the most part everyone just complies without the need for prompting. I suppose it should be no shock that Disney do communication well, so much so I think there are some things we could learn in hospitals about how it is approached.
Design led solutions
The other area that healthcare could learn from is some of the design based solutions. We obviously have a lot of hands free options in healthcare but it was great to see these design points across the ship to minimise areas where hand contact is concentrated by needing to touch single points. A lot of thought has been given to pinch points in the system, and actions like manually supporting hand hygiene using wipes really also helps to address these.
Things I still can’t get over
Having talked about everything I loved, there is one thing that I don’t think I’ll ever get over, the people soup that are shared spa pools. The idea of sharing warm bubbling water with strangers and imagining our shared bacteria growing is something I can’t get passed. Also, I need to see the Pseudomonas testing certificates. This isn’t a Disney specific aversion, I just don’t think I can get my head around them anywhere. Nothing is perfect.
Where can I learn more?
I was taking on my cruise as a surprise, but Mummy and Mr Girlymicro has done a LOT of research before we want, so much so they even had to delete their YouTube histories so I wouldn’t notice. All lines have different risks, so I would advise doing some research to see which ones have risks that you are prepared to engage with. For me, I’m a Disney girl and I’m yet to see information from any other cruise line to temp me into doing something different. What can I say, I’m a convert to cruising, but only under a very specific set of parameters, and if Disney ever need infection control support, all they have to do is call me.
If you want to learn more, or check out your own cruise line of choice, the CDC website that contains a lot of info:
Content warning – this one is long, and is heavier on the detail than usual. It kind of needed to be as people have died. However, if you want the Cliff Notes version, no, there is no need to panic as Hantavirus is not going to be the cause of the next pandemic.
Everyone seems to be talking about Hantavirus right now, well they were, now people are also talking about Ebola and meningitis. It does rather feel like the infectious disease of the week right now. Despite a lot of effort by scientists and healthcare professionals there seems to be an appetite for panic linked to this. It is worth knowing that although Hantavirus is considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID), that is mainly because it is linked to a potentially severe outcome for an individual if infection is confirmed, rather than potential for wide scale spread.
As I’m being asked about this by everyone from cab drivers to healthcare professionals, and faced with panicked social media commentary about whether this is going to be another pandemic, I thought I should share some of the information that is out there in order to support the ‘don’t panic’ key messaging. I think it is important to note, however, that I am not a Hantavirus expert, just your standard infection prevention and control professional, but having studied zoology in a previous life I couldn’t miss the opportunity to talk about a zoonotic (linked to spread from animals) infection.
What is the current scenario?
The cruise ship (MV Hondius) that is making headlines departed from Ushuaia, Argentina, on April 1, 2026, and traveled across the South Atlantic Ocean, stopping at several remote locations that including excursions and the opportunity for passengers to get off the ship, standard cruise fare but with more unusual destinations. These included Antarctica, South Georgia Island, Tristan da Cunha, Saint Helena, and Ascension Island.
The ship itself carried 147 people (86 passengers and 61 crew) from 23 different countries, so small for a cruise but still a sizable mix of people to have in one space.
The extent of their contact with wildlife before or during the expedition is either unknown or disputed, although there are plenty of rumours linked to bird watching etc. The importance of all of which will become apparent when we talk more about the virus and it’s standard transmission routes.
It is also worth noting, that unlike many cruises which have a curcular route with all passengers embarking and disembarking at the same point, with this cruise a number of passengers departed at various points as part of planned departures, therefore dissemination of some people involved had already occurred before any clinical symptoms were understood.
Headlines began to appear linked to a possible outbreak onboard in early May, with the outbreak developing, and more information gradually becoming available, as so often happens during any outbreak situation.
What are Hantaviruses?
First let’s start with the fact that Hantaviruses are very different from the viruses that we have seen causing pandemics over the last century. Although all three are RNA viruses, Hantaviruses are different in structure, transmission and disease presentation to both coronaviruses and influenza viruses. They demonstrates low comparative rates of mutation and very limited person to person spread, so the same epidemiological principles do not apply.
Hantaviruses are RNA viruses that are part of the genus Orthohantavirus. They were named after the Hanta river in South Korea in 1978 (originally called the Hantaan virus) and consist of a family of viruses rather than one single disease, with over 20 species known. As a viral group they have since been split into Old World Hantaviruses and New World Hantaviruses, with viruses found to circulate not just within rodents but also within moles, shrews and other animals. They circulate asymptomatically within their natural zoonotic reservoirs without causing symptomatic infection. When humans are exposed, and infection caused, it is typically due to spread from their normal reservoir with exposure due to interaction with bodily fluids, such as dried urine and droppings.
Different Hantavirus species are associated with different animal reservoirs and their associated geographical territories, as well as leading to different clinical presentations in human infection. Old World Hantaviruses are linked with hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS) and are geographically associated with Africa, Asia, and Europe. New World Hantaviruses are associated with hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome (HCPS) have a geographical and have a distribution across the Americas, sometimes also called hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (HPS). As the cruise exposure focus is mostly linked to South America, due to both cruise stops and clinical HCPS presentation, the main animal reservoirs of interest are:
Long-tailed Pygmy Rice Rat (Oligoryzomys longicaudatus)
Pygmy Rice Rats (Oligoryzomys species)
Vesper Mice (Calomys species)
Although there have been a number of cases in the current cluster confirmed as positive for the Andes virus, for context, in Europe (according to ECDC), just under 1,900 cases were recorded in 2023 across all different strains/species of Hantavirus. In the Americas, 8 countries reported 229 cases in 2025. There are, therefore, cases of Hantavirus infection detected annually across the globe, and although not huge numbers the impacts on individuals can be significant. The number of cases that are currently being observed linked to the cruise are therefore considered to be an outbreak, but the risk is mainly due to how individuals that will need to be repatriated to their native countries will be managed and how to ensure the best possible outcomes for those exposed.
What are Zoonotic infections?
A zoonosis (or zoonotic infection) is an infectious disease that can jump from a non-human animal to humans. Traditionally it will have no, or limited, ongoing human to human spread. Transmission can be:
Direct – touching, petting, biting, leading to direct contamination by saliva, blood, urine, or other bodily fluids
Indirect – exposure to saliva, blood, urine, or other bodily fluids via indirect routes such as contamination linked to food, contaminated environments where animal reservoirs live (soil, water etc), contaminated objects
Vector borne – not linked to Hantaviruses, but for other organisms can be spread linked to insect carriage and transmission via insect bites
I’ve talked about the fact that Hantaviruses have animal reservoirs. But which animal, depends on the Hantavirus species, which then impacts where there is a risk of acquisition, as you can’t be exposed if the animal doesn’t live there.
The cruise had been visiting remote wildlife areas, so a passenger could have come into contact with the virus then, or before boarding the ship, as the incubation period is prolongued. This can make contact tracing and understanding the epidemiology more challenging, at least initially, and it is possible that the initial transmission event will never be well understood. The animal reservoir associated with the identified Andes virus, the causative agent of the outbreak, long-tailed pygmy rice rat (Oligoryzomys longicaudatus) and Pygmy Rice Rats (Oligoryzomys species) which can help to pin down broad areas, but not precise transmission route.
Transmission
Transmission linked to zoonotic infection happens in two main ways, transmission within the animal reservoir where infection is usually without any symptoms (asymptomatic), and exposure to humans to the virus circulating within the animal reservoir.
Within the animal reservoir transmission can be linked to moments like aggressive acts, such as biting and scratching where saliva or bodily fluids may be transferred. This is probably one of the primary mechanisms. Animals may also share environments leading to close contact, such as sharing nests, and viral transmission can be linked to exposure in close quarters.
This transmission linked to close contact is also an unusual feature of the Andes Hantavirus and can occur in humans and not just within the animal reservoir. Even so, human to human transmission is relatively rare, but can occur when individuals have prolongued close contact with someone who is symptomatic, especially if exchange of bodily fluids can occur via kissing or other close contact. There is also believed to be an airborne transmission route for the Andes virus, although the route by which this occurs is not well understood. This is addition to the transmission routes from the animal reservoirs that can be due to a number of exposure routes:
The initial clinical presentation of the 70-year-old Dutch passenger, who developed a fever, headache, and diarrhea day 6 of the cruise, five full days after boarding, and who then died on day 11. This timeline means the passenger is unlikely to have acquired Hantavirus onboard as the minimum Hantavirus incubation is believed to be 7 days, meaning that the exposure was likely to have occurred before the passengers even boarded the ship. Ongoing transmission onboard is therefore unlikely to have been point source from an animal exposure, and is more likely to have been linked to close contact of human passengers.
Clinical presentation
Initial presentation of HCPS is pretty generic, and could easily be hard to recognise as Hantavirus infection without a string travel or exposure history. The prodrome phase, or early onset phase is usually 1 – 5 days long and can occur 4-42 days after exposure. Symptoms can be confused with many other viral illnesses and include:
High fever, chills, and profound fatigue
Severe myalgia (muscle aches), particularly in large muscle groups like the thighs and back
Prominent gastrointestinal symptoms: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, and abdominal pain
Headaches and dizziness
One to two days after the initial phase patients can enter a cardiopulmonary phase where patients can become critically unwell:
Rapidly progressive dyspnea (shortness of breath) and hypoxia
Noncardiogenic pulmonary edema (fluid in the lungs) and coughing
Hypotension, tachycardia, and cardiogenic shock
Potential myocardial depression and acute metabolic acidosis
Vial P, Ferrés M, Vial C et al. Hantavirus in humans: a review of clinical aspects and management The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2023; 23, e371-e382
This is different to the progression of HFRS, which typically has five phases:
Febrile Phase (3–7 Days)
Hypotensive Phase (Hours to 2 Days)
Oliguric Phase (3–7 Days)
Diuretic / Polyuric Phase (Days to Weeks)
Convalescent Phase (Weeks to 6 Months)
The initial febrile phase is still pretty non-specific in terms of presentation, but tends to include high fever, chills, intense headache, severe backache, and abdominal pain. Mortality rates vary by causative species, but range from 1 – 15%.
Vial P, Ferrés M, Vial C et al. Hantavirus in humans: a review of clinical aspects and management The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 2023; 23, e371-e382
Transmission control
Within the UK, Hantavirus infection caused by Andes virus is classified as a high consequence infectious disease (HCID). HCIDs are defined based on the following criteria:
Requires an enhanced individual, population and system response to ensure it is managed effectively, efficiently and safely
Acute infectious disease
Typically has a high case-fatality rate
May not have effective prophylaxis or treatment
Often difficult to recognise and detect rapidly
Ability to spread in the community and within healthcare settings
Interestingly, only the Andes Hantavirus is listed as a HCID, due to the risk of airborne human to human transmission. Once an HCID is confirmed or highly probable based on a combination of exposure history, symptoms, and diagnostic testing outcomes, the patient will be transferred by specialist transport teams to a designated HCID Treatment Center or High-Level Isolation Unit (HLIU). There are 7 adult and 5 paediatric Airborne HCID Treatment Centres in England, all of whom will hold specialist isolation facilities.
Early diagnosis of Hantavirus infection can be difficult, especially within the first 72 hours of symptoms, before the virus can be accurately detected in body secretions and excretions. Repeat diagnostic testing is often done 72 hours after symptom onset. As the initial presentation is fairly generic, it can take some time to realise what additional testing is required, and a good travel and activity history is key to informing diagnostic steps.
Within the UK, diagnostic testing options include:
Serology (Blood Tests): This is the primary diagnostic method. Laboratories use Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays (ELISA) or immunoblot assays to detect hantavirus-specific Immunoglobulin M (IgM) which looks for recent infection and IgG antibodies which looks for more established immune response, both by testing blood serum samples.
Molecular Testing (RT-PCR): Reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) is used to detect hantavirus viral RNA in acute blood or blood samples during the viraemic phase, when the virus is present within the blood stream.
WHO update 6th May 2026
Internationally, one of the challenges for control in this specific outbreak, was that this wasn’t a point source exposure where everyone is incubating according to the same time frame, as people left the ship at different times, and were also isolating onboard the ship over different time periods based on the level of contact with the initially cases. This made initial components of contact tracing challenging, which then led to further possible exposures as some of the initial passengers returned to their home countries before the extent of the outbreak was understood.
Clinical management
There is no specific antiviral treatment option for Hantavirus so management focuses on supportive therapy, respiratory support (often in intensive care), fluid management, and for HFRS dialysis. Among patients who have severe respiratory symptoms as part of HCPS, the case fatality rate has been estimated to be approximately 38%.
As part of the follow up for this current outbreak, UK nationals, once repatriated have been taken to an isolation facility where they will be kept for up to 72 hours and initial clinical review and testing will be undertaken. As part of this clinical teams will then assess whether contacts who are not displaying symptoms can isolate at home or at another suitable location based on their living arrangements. Exposed individuals are generally being advised to self-isolate for up to 45 days from their last known exposure, but this self-isolation is voluntary. During the isolation period clinical networks will maintain daily contact to check for potential symptoms and undertake regular testing.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended a 42-day quarantine period for the cruise passengers from their last exposure, although within the UK this has been extended to 45 days. Cases are managed, if symptoms develop using the following case definitions:
Confirmed Case: A patient with positive PCR testing for hantavirus in clinical samples, combined with travel on the MV Hondius from 1 April 2026 or contact with a passenger within 45 days of symptom onset.
Probable Case: A patient with compatible symptoms (e.g., fever, respiratory distress) and no other identified pathogen, linked by travel or close contact to the MV Hondius outbreak.
Possible/Suspected Case: A patient with compatible symptoms and no other identified pathogen, who had contact with a MV Hondius passenger within 45 days of symptom onset.
Previous outbreaks
Although all of this information seems rather intense and it is easy to see why the new media are trying to make a big story out of it, apart from those exposed we do need to put this outbreak into context. Outbreaks of Hantavirus happen with relative frequency, probably more than we know as diagnosis can be difficult identification may be underestimated, and some local outbreaks are probably under reported. To help demonstrate this I’ve put together a list of previous, easy to find, outbreaks along with their case numbers:
Argentina Regional Outbreak (Late 2025 – Early 2026)
Cases: A spike in localized regional cases with the NEJM reporting 34 cases from a single event.
Deaths: Up to 20 deaths.
Germany Voles-Linked Surge (2025)
Cases: 55 cases in the first half of the year (predominantly in Bavaria)
Driven by an ecological spike in the local bank vole population.
Brazil Farmland Outbreak (September 2022)
Cases: 22 cases.
Deaths: 10 deaths.
Traced to wood and rice mice exposure on agricultural properties.
Episodic Outbreaks in Los Santos, Panama (2022)
Cases: 29 cases recorded over nine months.
16 manifested as severe HCPS; no fatalities reported.
Argentina Andes Outbreak (2018)
Cases: 34 confirmed cases.
Deaths: 11 deaths.
Someone sick with ANDV attended a birthday party with 100 people; 5 people who were seated close to the individual later developed symptoms
Yosemite National Park, USA (2012)
Cases: 10 confirmed cases.
Deaths: 3 deaths.
Contracted by visitors staying in signature tent cabins infested with deer mice.
Chili (1997 – 1998)
Cases: 25 cases were officially recognized as part of the primary outbreak wave from July 1997 to January 1998.
When expanding the surveillance period from October 1995 through January 22, 1998, a total of 33 cases were confirmed nationwide
Epidemiologists verified human-to-human transmission across two out of three family clusters identified during the outbreak
The Korean War Epidemic (1950–1953)
Cases: 3,000+ UN soldiers infected.
The landmark historical event that first clinically defined Hantavirus Hemorrhagic Fever with Renal Syndrome (HFRS)
What is currently happening with this outbreak?
As this post has taken me a couple of weeks to pull together, I thought it was worth ending with the latest update I have available from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) on 24 May. At this point 12 cases have been reported in total, including 10 confirmed and 2 probable cases. One new case and no new deaths have been reported since the previous update (unclear when the last update was).
ECDC update on 24th May
The cruise ship M/V Hondius has had all passengers and crew disembarked and is currently docked in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, undergoing sanitation procedure.
The short answer is no, I don’t believe so and neither do many people who are far more expert than I that you will hear write and talk on this subject. This scenario has got me thinking though, if this outbreak hadn’t impacted European and US passengers whether we would have even heard about this outbreak at all. As you’ve seen in the outbreak section, Hantavirus outbreaks are not that uncommon. Was it because of passenger social media that it made headlines, because the cruise industry is big business, or because it impacted audiences because they saw passengers as being ‘like them’ and worrying that they too could be impacted on a holiday?
I think, whatever the reason, that this should be used as a wake up call for all of us to realise that infection diseases are global, and that we ignore infections that we don’t consider to impact ‘us’ at our risk. With global travel, with climate change, with changes in health surveillance due to certain US policies, the old way of looking at infectious diseases may not be fit for purpose. Too much of the world is in pandemic denial, and just doesn’t want to think about infection risk. We either experience coverage that induces panic, or ostriching where we don’t talk about it at all. Neither of these approaches are going to lead to the best outcomes or knowledge sharing in the face of a changing infection landscape. What needs to happen is for global networks to be built, for infrastructure to be invested in, and for communication to occur in a way that supports surveillance and knowledge acquisition. I don’t believe that Hantavirus is a risk for developing a new pandemic, but if we don’t take the time we have available to invest in planning, we won’t be as prepared for the next outbreak that could be.
You may have noticed that I’ve been a little poor at keeping up with the Girlymicrobiologist site admin, and missing the odd weekly blog post. This isn’t because I’ve been slacking, honest, it’s more because I may have become a little distracted by a new project. I promise to get back on top of things soon, but in the meantime I thought I owed you an update.
Many of you have been kind enough to support last years project, which was a book aimed at supporting people to engage with research and research degrees, and I couldn’t be more grateful for your cheer leading. This new project, however, in the words of Monty Python could be described as ‘and now for something completely different’. It couldn’t be further from a book about academic study. This one is all about something else I love passionately, movies and TV.
I finished and launched the last book last October, and to be honest it hadn’t occurred to me, prior to letting it go into the wild, that I would write anything else till my retirement – when I’m planning to write some pathology based murder mysteries. It was never the plan to do something again, at least so soon. Frankly though, my brain tends to disrupt all my best laid plans, and ideas come meaning I just can’t help myself but get swept up. I’m blaming Ian McKellen inspiring me to ‘practice any art’.
Despite having no plans to do more, I have to say that I really enjoyed writing the first book, and I found the process of being able to write in a different way very fulfilling. I love writing this blog, and the first book is based on a lot of the pieces I have written for here, but it was nice to see them come together and take on a new and different life of their own. I also enjoyed mixing up the writing of something on a single theme with writing blogs on different topics for here, although I did rely a lot on Dr Claire Walker bringing together many guest blogs to allow me some writing time. It was lovely to see what those guest blogs brought to the site, and I really enjoyed seeing how including those voices really makes this feel even more like a community space. Without realising it, I think I caught ‘the bug’. Now, I’ve always enjoyed writing, this is my happy space, but I had never seen myself as an author, having held a book I’d written in my hands though, I can see how it could become a little addictive.
As I was sitting watching horror movies as part of my post release recovery, and researching for my 2025 Halloween post, I suddenly realised what I’d like to do next. I really wanted to write about some duel loves of mine, movies and TV plus infection.
Without any expectation of writing another book, all of a sudden I had a structure in my mind, and Don’t Open That Door had began…
You all know how much I am a movie and TV buff, everything from guilty pleasure reality TV, like The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives, to documentaries, and all genre of film (with the exception of torture porn horror movies, I’m a Blumhouse girlie). Whilst enjoying some down time with Mr Girlymicro, I realised how widely infection is featured in all kinds of different genera settings, some of it was actually pretty good, whilst some of it was really poor. So the first step was to do a whole bunch of research about what kind of examples were out there, by hitting up a bunch of different lists that have been collated by others, internet searches, and sourcing opinions from my movie loving friends. All of which led to the creation of a list of 138 options that needed a review to see if if they were actually linked to infection, and if they were infection based….was the infection content any good.
If you follow me (Girlymicro) on Instagram, you will have probably seen a number of stories that I’ve posted recently linked to movies I’ve been watching with some Infection Prevention and Control/micro commentary:
These have come about whilst I’ve been watching the 138 films/series with Mr Girlymicro to decide which ones make the cut to be included. I’ve watched some awesome films, some like Sinners, weren’t based on infection so couldn’t be included. I have also watched some truly bad movies, I even gave Resident Evil another go, and have spared you all by making sure that it is not included on the list. One of the considerations was that, even if the science wasn’t dreadful, I haven’t included anything that I or Rotten Tomatoes include as being truly horrible. I’m not just saving you on this, but also myself, as I’m having to watch included examples many times as part of the writing. I also felt it was really important to cover infections linked to viral, fungal, parasitic, and bacterial causes, just because they behave so differently and the interventions needed are so different. So the final list for inclusion involves movies and TV series that sit across infectious agents, although viruses are more represented than any other cause.
There are plenty of horror movies on the list, purely because they represent A LOT of the infection genera, but I was surprised at how many options there were outside of horror movies. I also tried to mix up certifications where I could, so that there are some options that everyone might enjoy.
Not everything could be included however, and there were also some exclusion criteria that impacted what I could include. Exclusion criteria included factors such as availability – no point including things that people can’t access, language options – I sadly only speak English so it needed at least English subtitles, and most importantly not based on real life events – this is about fiction.
For inclusion examples also needed to have infection as a central theme. This meant that health dramas could not be included as they only feature infection in some episodes, but at some point I do really want to write something that compares different medical dramas (House, New Amsterdam, Holby City etc) and maybe do a ranking scale….let me know if you think that would be a fun blog post.
Image credit The Red Dress
The reason it felt timely to talk about this today, is that the Biomedical Scientist magazine has been kind enough to do a whole feature on what the new book will look like, with a bit more detail, and some examples of what chapters will look like. It dropped on the 27th March and you can check it out the link here: https://thebiomedicalscientist.net/2026/03/24/infections-films. Also, how awesome is the art work they’ve done, can’t say enough how awesome The Red Dress are.
Whilst writing the article for the Biomedical Scientist and watching the example movies, I couldn’t happen but note how many weird and wonderful things are included as part of the science representation. Things that in my scientific career I rarely if ever encounter, but seem to crop up time and time again in Hollywood depictions of scientific life. I’m collating these for one of the final chapters in the book called ‘Science House of Horrors’ as I find them a bit fascinating. I’ve included some of the ones in the Biomedical Scientist article that I noticed, as well as those sent through as responses from social media, but I’d love to know if you have any others that I should include.
There are other opportunities to get involved though, I have 23 films and series examples, but there is room in the book to cover 25. I’m really keen to get other examples that include fungi, but if there is just something brilliant I haven’t included please let me know. There will also be a chapter called ‘Hall of Fame’ that covers both amazing movies that just don’t have enough infection in them to be included, or ones that were great but not quite as good an example of an infection characteristic as the ones already included. There is also the ‘Hall of Shame’ for examples, such as the TV series The Rain and Resident Evil, where the science is so bad that it is note worthy in itself.
Anyone who drops me an email to elaine@girlymicrobiologist.com and inputs into the House of Horrors, volunteers film examples I’ve missed, or suggests contenders for the ‘Hall of Fame’ or ‘Hall of Shame’, will get their name included in the list of contributors at the back of the book. Science takes a village, so does pulling together a book, and I’m really keen that this feels like it comes from our community. I hope you enjoy the article and I can’t wait to hear from you about your suggestions.
I am so excited by todays’ guest blog post. I’ve been so eagerly awaiting sharing it with you all. I don’t have any tattoos myself but it is something that is common amongst my friendship group, and I get asked about tattoo related infections A LOT. Partly as I was involved in some of the investigations when there was an issue some time back. So, a post that could help address some of the risk assessment and best practices linked to this art form felt very necessary, even though I didn’t feel I was best placed to write one. Then I saw this great article from Julie Russell on LinkedIn and I just had to reach out and see if she fancies writing a guest blog for me, and thankfully she said yes!
I first met Julie as Head of Culture Collection at Public Health England, that has since changed it’s name to the UK Health Security Agency. She was an inspiring microbiologist, who just had so much knowledge, and she became a great phone a friend. Since then she has moved on to work in a really different area where she still gets to put her microbiology and infection prevention and control knowledge to good use, as the director of a tattoo/art studio in Muswell Hill. No one is better placed therefore to answer the questions that I always get asked and have not felt best placed to answer.
Blog post from Julie Russell
After years in NHS microbiology laboratories, I joined the Public Health Laboratory Service, where I provided external quality assessment schemes and reference materials to laboratories worldwide. After that, I decided to do something completely different. I now co-own and manage Old Marine Arts Group, a tattoo studio in Muswell Hill, London.
It hadn’t occurred to me that tattooing, one of the oldest art forms in the world, essentially creates controlled wounds on people to decorate their bodies. I’ve had tattoos since my 20s – my first done in a legalised squat by a friend who’d never tattooed anyone in his life before. There was no personal protective equipment (PPE) involved; it healed beautifully, and I didn’t think about it anymore.
Many thousands of people across the UK have similar stories with no ill effects. Yet infections linked to tattooing have been recognised since the 19th century, and the government quite reasonably seeks to minimise such risks.
Tattooing, Skin, and Infection Risk
Bear in mind that the skin has a rich, diverse microbiome consisting of millions of microorganisms, some of which can cause infections if the skin is broken. Tattooing involves puncturing the skin with needles thousands of times, to a depth of approximately 1.5-2 mm, to place pigment into the dermis, creating a permanent design. Invariably, the tattoo process causes some bleeding, and after it’s finished, short-term redness, swelling and scabbing are normal. Resisting the urge to scratch is essential to minimise the risk of infection.
A July 2024 YouGov1 poll suggests 28% of UK adults – around 15 million people – now have tattoos. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) notes that the true prevalence of tattoo-associated infections is unknown. There are no statutory notification procedures in place for infections specifically caused by tattooing, and no indication that such infections significantly burden the NHS. Various estimates suggest that approximately 1-3% of tattoos become infected in the UK. Most infections are mild local skin infections that can be treated with a single course of antibiotics; severe infections remain rare.
Interpreting the Evidence
Publications on tattoo-related infections must be read with caution. A December 2024 paper in The Lancet Microbe2, “Microbiology of tattoo-associated infections since 1820”, highlights rare severe cases such as necrotising fasciitis, leprosy and atypical mycobacteria outbreaks. The authors state that, “Despite advancements in public health policies and increased awareness of tattoo-related risks, a notable rise in both the number and diversity of microbial infections has been observed with an increase in the population opting for tattoos, particularly since 2000”. However, they provide no population-level denominators and conflate expected irritation, redness and swelling with true microbial infections. The authors fail to note that severe cases are overrepresented in the literature precisely because they are unusual. The paper may be a useful clinical catalogue, but it is not an incidence study.
A Brief History of Safety
Tattooists and clinicians have long recognised infection risks in tattooing. In the late 1800s, some artists infamously spat into powdered ink and sucked the needles during the tattooing process. Meanwhile, London-based artists in the early 1900s, such as Alfred South, promoted “the most perfect antiseptic treatment, painless and absolutely harmless”, whilst Tom Riley warned: “Caution to Ladies and Gentlemen thinking of being tattooed – First see the work of two or three tattooists then make choice {sic}. See that a complete set of new needles are {sic} used at each sitting as well as antiseptics”. Some early tattooists even wore white coats to convey a clinical level of cleanliness.
Legal regulation, however, arrived much later. It was still legal to tattoo children in the UK until the Tattooing of Minors Act 1969. Some aristocratic families reportedly tattooed babies for identification – in case, for example, their children were hospitalised or kidnapped.
Modern Regulation
Mandatory licensing changed the landscape. Under the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, tattoo studios need to be registered. More recently, there is the British Standard BS EN 17169:2020, which covers safe and hygienic practice, although not many councils use it as a benchmark. This standard covers workplace preparation, equipment sterilisation, PPE, client consultation and aftercare. It requires studio owners to implement a comprehensive hygiene protocol to protect clients and staff, and tattoo artists to provide evidence of continued professional development.
Wales now requires tattooists to complete and pass a regulated Level 2 Infection Prevention and Control Award. Requirements in England and Scotland are less specific. Barnet Council licenses my studio; their Code of Practice 13 details the specific requirements for tattooing activities, in addition to those laid down in the Regulations applicable to all special treatment licensed premises. It notes that tattoo artists who are unable to demonstrate hygiene competence may be asked to complete a Level 2 hygiene certificate.
Reducing the Risk
Infection risk can be reduced through:
Good personal hygiene (artist and client)
Effective cleaning
Separating clean and dirty materials
Correct sterilisation or disposable equipment
Artists must assess clients for skin issues (including rashes, moles and scarring), alcohol or drug use, and relevant health risks (e.g. allergies, immunosuppression, pregnancy). Artists must be vaccinated against Hepatitis B.
Tattoo stations should be treated as clinical areas. Equipment must be protected from contamination; inks must be decanted into disposable cups; distilled water used for dilution of ink and ‘green soap’ (a vegetable-oil-based surgical soap used in the tattoo industry) or for washing the needles between colours.
Dressings applied afterwards are usually transparent, self-adhesive, polyurethane film (known as second skin in the industry), similar to those used for burns and post-operative incisions, or cling film attached to the skin with surgical tape. Clear aftercare guidance should be provided verbally and in writing about how to care for the tattoo whilst it heals (no swimming, spa pools, sunbathing, perfumed soaps or scratching).
Unlicensed Tattooing
Although it is illegal to tattoo in unlicensed premises, this is rarely enforced. Anyone can buy machines and inks online and tattoo friends at home, often with limited knowledge of hygiene.
Inspections across the UK vary, with some councils inspecting only once when the studio opens, while others do so more regularly. Licensing rules differ widely outside the UK. Excellent tattoo studios can be found abroad, but so too can be deplorable hygiene. Getting a tattoo may be a more permanent souvenir of a fun holiday than a fridge magnet, but it can be risky, and alcohol and sunshine don’t help healing.
Final Thoughts
Tattooing in the UK, when performed by licensed professionals, carries a low risk of infection. I believe the demand for tattoos will grow, and I support nationally enforceable, pragmatic safety standards.
Takeaway messages:
Tattooing by licensed professionals in the UK is low risk
Nationally recognised training and regulation are likely to emerge
A tattoo is a controlled wound—so please, as I once observed, don’t let your dog lick it
Kondakala, Sandeep et al. Microbiology of tattoo-associated infections since 1820 The Lancet Microbe, Volume 6, Issue 4, 101005
Training For Aspiring Tattoo Artists:
After two years in the tattoo industry, I now work with licensed tattoo artist, TomCatTatt, to provide introductory training for aspiring tattoo artists, covering the basics in safety and hygiene, legislation and licensing, and an introduction to tattooing techniques. Contact me for more information: julieru13@hotmail.com.
It’s the most wonderful time of the year! It’s time for the annual Environment Network meeting, where we get together to talk all things environmental microbiology; sharing new research and experience to improve practice. And your guide for the conference this year, live blogging the morning session, is the token immunologist in the group, Dr Claire Walker.
What is the environment network?
Before we get onto todays’ content, a little introduction to what the Environment Network is.
The Environment Network works to support people in clinical, engineering and scientific roles who are interested in environmental infection prevention and control (IPC) and/or the built environment
Do you want to know more about what to do with your water screening and air sampling results? Are you keen to understand the evidence behind equipment cleaning and the role of the environment in healthcare associated infection?
Then welcome to the Environment Network!
This is a network for people in clinical/scientific/engineering roles within the NHS and other associated organisations who are interested in the role of environmental infection prevention and control in preventing infection.
The aim of the network is to support infection prevention and control professionals involved in commissioning, environmental audit, water, air and surface testing within their Trusts. By working together we can share best practice between Trusts; as well as circulating the latest evidence and discussing personal experiences.
What are the aims of the network?
To support the development of member networks
To provide events where shared learning can be supported
To permit sharing of experiences and best practice to improve clinical interventions
To support and share research in order to achieve improvements in evidence based practice
What is our remit?
Environmental testing and monitoring within healthcare environments
On to today. First up we have Gavin Wood, an authorising engineer for water who acts as an independent advisor to Trusts. He is covering the fascinating topic of water associate outbreaks and what we can ask of our water safety groups during an outbreak. There should always be a policy which covers how to organise the estates teams and the water safety groups – covering who is responsible for each area during the outbreak. Regular outbreaks are caused by organisms like Legionella and Pseudomonas, but might include non-tuberculosis causing mycobacteria. Detection of these organisms during routine screening is reported to the water safety group to assess potential risk. Most pathogens that we look at will grow within a certain temperature range, so maintaining cold water as cold, and hot water as hot is essential. What we really don’t want is warm water stagnating in the system as the pathogens can thrive in it. On top of this, we need chemical control of organisms – mostly silver and copper ion systems. Stagnant areas of warm water are pockets where the pathogens might thrive so flushing the system and chemical controls are key in maintaining a healthy water supply in hospitals. Controls that are effective for indicator organisms that we routinely test for, like legionella, tend to be effective for any other outbreak organisms. In an outbreak situation the first port of call is the Legionella risk assessment which considers the efficacy of temperature and chemical control. After this, in line with guidance, all trusts should refer to their Water Safety Plan which is contains the detail on actions to take when results are outside the expected limits. Most of the time the authorised engineer already has the answers because the system is repeatedly routinely tested.
Like any system in a hospital, it is vital that the risk assessment and training is up to date. As Gavin says if we haven’t covered everything in the risk assessment, and if the water policy hasn’t been recently reviewed then the whole system is vulnerable. External audit by authorise engineers ensures the system remains optimal. Investigation of an outbreak focuses on the patient pathway – where has the visitor or patient been on their journey through the hospital. This process finds the clues to identify the source of the environmental outbreak. Surprisingly one of the main pieces of evidence comes from review of training and competence records, is everyone appropriately trained and acting in accordance with policy. If in doubt, going an witnessing monitoring and maintenance tasks can provide essential information in a high pressure outbreak situation. Gavin drives home how important practice is in this – we need this information as much on a random rainy Tuesday as much as we need it during a Legionella outbreak!
Our next talk comes from Karren Staniforth from UKHSA. She is a clinical scientist and UKHSA IPC specialist adviser, and is talking to us about the pros and cons of different outbreak investigation techniques. Karren invites us to imagine painting a busy ward in different colour 10cm squares, every single surface with a cotton tip swab. Imagine how long that could take and just how many squares you would end up with! Even if you took 200 samples, how many squares have you failed to test? Usually we can only take 20-40 samples…. So even if they all come back negative, it doesn’t necessarily mean there isn’t an organism there – its just that the sampling didn’t find it. The chances of going in and finding nothing is quite high, but if you put a patient in that room for a week, they will almost certainly find that organism (not that we recommend that as a testing method!).
Karren reminds us that reading environmental plates is quite an art and different from clinical samples, it’s a different skill and guidance from experts is essential. Clinical diagnostic laboratories aren’t accredited to process environmental samples and the staff aren’t trained to process and analyse this work. Commercial companies can come and do testing for you, and they are extremely good at routine work. Bespoke work is harder to commission, and that’s where knowing the network can really help! So if you have an outbreak of something unusual, it’s hard to find the information on what level of environmental organisms – like aspergillus – are ok, and what constitutes a danger to patients.
The questions becomes, what type of samples do we want to take and why? We need to understand basal levels of indicator organisms to work out when to act. Building on what Gavin has shared this morning, you need to look – really look- at what is happening in your environment. Karren reflects on how useful an audit can be but we don’t go into an outbreak with the information already in front of you, so your audit probably won’t ask exactly the right questions. Epidemiology provides the answers – which organisms and then which patients are affected, where and when? Identifying common exposures can be easy when infections match case distribution e.g. sequential patients with the same infection in the same room. However some are less obvious like laundry delivered to multiple sites causing infection clusters which are miles apart or commercial products that might only impact high risk patients in very low numbers, but at multiple sites across countries. This can be exceptionally difficult to trace. Though remember not every exposure results in colonisation and infection, and even if exposure is universal some patient groups are more likely to develop infections than others.
Knowing what kind of sample to take is essential, especially when sample numbers are limited. Negative results can be just as useful as positive results – and identifying the source of the outbreak is as much detective work as it is learning to read plates! Karren reminds us – ‘You don’t always need sampling, somethings are just WRONG!’.
To close the first session, we have Louise Clarke who knows everything there is to know about proper ventilation. Ventilation is essential the movement of air within a system. The law tells us we must provide ventilation under the Healthy and Safety at Work Act, and building regulations set a minimum standard for ventilation. The main reason for good ventilation is to have a safe and comfortable environment; to remove odours, to control temperature and importantly to protect from harmful organisms and toxic substances. We have natural ventilation (like opening a window!), mechanical ventilation which pushes air around the building and a mixed mode – a combination of the two. The preferred method for ventilating a hospital remains natural ventilation, something which really shocked the group. It might work well on a windy day but it certainly doesn’t cover all areas and some times of year, like winter, it’s really no good at all.
Like Lou says, simple is best. When we talk about ventilation, we need to ask what is the issue we are looking at? Human elements are usually a key element to understanding problems in ventilation – you need to think about when the issue arose and who was involved? Often there is a significant time lag between the problem starting and it’s detection in real time. You can be left scrabbling around for details long after the issue began. Lou walked us through the potential information sources to considering during an outbreak, including design records. Which tend to be a little less useful than you would imagine, considering they often tell you the purpose the room was designed for 30 years ago – perhaps not so relevant now! Echoing the sentiments of Karren earlier, one of the most important things you can do is go physically and take a look – not an audit, just turn up and use all your senses!
To kick off the session after a much needed cup of tea (Earl Grey, hot!) we have Dr Mariyam Mirfenderesky who is talking about the challenges of managing fungal outbreaks. Candidozyma auris (note the new name!) is probably one of the most difficult outbreak causing organism to manage. To help with this a Clinical Expert Reference Group was established in March 2025. Candida species are the dominating fungal pathogens of invasive fungal disease and account for >85% of fungaemia in Europe and the United States. Candidozyma auris was first identified in 2009 from a Japanese patient with ear discharge, and is a critical WHO priority fungal pathogen. It is fluconazole resistant and has a propensity to cause healthcare associated infection outbreaks. There are 6 independent clades, with clade 1 dominating in England. Mariyam walked us through the identification of the first neonatal case of C.auris from an eye swab – it was found in two infants, five weeks apart with no direct contact between the children. Fortunately both were colonisation with the fungus only. She then discussed the safety measures that should be in place to manage this difficult pathogen – particularly focusing on why the current cleaning protocols are insufficient to manage this threat. Her final points considered how to act when you detect C.auris – you must be decisive and act!
If you’d like to know more about C. auris, check out this blog post from earlier this year:
Next we have Dr John Hartley who is talking to us about investigating environmental surface mediated outbreaks – what you can’t see may still hurt you. Using the classic movie ‘the fiend without a face’ as a metaphor for IPC, John introduced the idea of modes of transmission between individuals. It feels like a simple problem, its just cleaning and handwashing after all! But we see there is a complex person-organism-environment dynamic system, and as John says, there is always a well known solution to every human problem – neat, plausible and wrong! John highlights the importance of continual surveillance and knowing ‘where the fiend is’. The controls are based on a four pronged approach – clean, replace, destroy or rebuild.
By way of a case study, John told us about his experience of managing adenovirus outbreaks in a paediatric BMT ward. This is a very common virus causing 5-10% of febrile illness in early childhood. Almost everyone has had it, and it can establish latency which can reactivate during BMT. More often it causes severe morbidity and mortality in these patients who can develop hepatitis. What you can’t tell is if the child caught adenovirus from the environment or if it has reactivated post latency. However, whole genome sequencing (WGS) can resolve 1-3 SNPs across genomes – its not like looking for a needle in a haystack, its rather like looking for a needle in the whole of Texas. But WGS can be used to confirm or refute cross infection events.
Of course the next question is, what can be done? Visual assessment is not a reliable indicator of surface cleanliness, John described the varied methods which can be used to detect adenovirus. Then we need to develop the right tools to manage it – including development of environmental PCR as a measure of cleaning efficacy by GirlyMicro herself! Finishing on a Dr Who reference to delight a crowd of scientists is always a win – even if it is comparing adenovirus to the scariest episode, the weeping angels! Of course, when monitoring adenovirus, the most important advice is ‘Don’t Blink’.
To close the morning session we have Dr Sam Watkin discussing research tools to help predict the future of outbreaks. Sam began acknowledging the current challenges facing preventing transmission of environmental organisms. In his PhD he aimed to identify how microbes disseminate through the clinical space, if the starting contamination site determined how is was disseminated and if the usage of space influenced microbial transmission risk. IPC is often retrospective to the aim was to develop research tools to allow the development of prospective knowledge. Sam used cauliflower mosaic virus DNA markers as a surrogate for pathogens, and followed its movement around two different units. It was shocking to see how far this benign organism could spread in such a short time.
I think if we take away anything this morning it’s that nobody likes the new name for C.auris, and death, death to recirculating air conditioning units!
The morning was followed in the afternoon by a series of case discussions in order to help implement the learning from the morning, help everyone get to know each other, and support the sharing of peer to peer learning. The case discussions this year included:
Case discussion one (Facilitated by Dr John Hartley):
Seek and remove: approaches to source control for environmental surface mediated outbreaks
Case discussion two (Facilitated by Professor Elaine Cloutman-Green):
How to implement a multi-disciplinary approach to investigation of water borne outbreaks
Case discussion three (Facilitated by Louise Clarke):
Interpretation of ventilation data and applying it to ventilation risk assessments
Case discussion four (Facilitated by Dr Sam Watkin):
Determining the role of equipment in outbreaks: how do you investigate?
Case discussion five (Facilitated by Karren Staniforth):
Introducing new cleaning process: what should you consider?
Case discussion six (Facilitated by Dr Claire Walker):
Choosing new equipment and furnishings: what questions should you ask?
It was truly inspiring to hear the buzz in the room that all of the discussion created. Thank you to Mr Girlymicro (Jon Cloutman-Green) for being in charge of photography, and to all of our speakers and facilitators for making the day happen. Also, massive shout out to Ant De Souza for pulling the day together, Angela McGee for making sure we all turned up to the right place at the right time, Mummy Girlymicro for running the reception desk, and to Richard Axell for supporting all of the tech on the day.
Now it is all over, the only thing to do is to tap our feet until we all get to meet again in 2026, although the presentations and discussion sheets should go up some time during 2025. Until then however, if you want to know more either head to the Environment Network website to look at info from previous years, or read some of the other blog posts linked to environmental IPC down below.
For my birthday in 2014, I celebrated by submitted by PhD thesis for printing. I ripped off the band aid and committed.
For this birthday, 11 years later, I’m taking another leap of faith, and once more rolling the dice on myself. This time it’s still PhD related, but rather different. This time it’s to let you all know that I have written a book, which will hopefully go live on Amazon on Friday the 17th October.
It feels like birthday launches could become a tradition.
I’ve been talking about a super secret project for a while now, and the wonderful Dr Claire Walker has been taking on some heavy lifting in terms of arranging some guest blogs, so that I could write a book on my weekends rather than writing a blog. But what is the book, and why did it come about?
The Book
The book is entitled ‘It Shouldn’t Happen to a PhD Student: How to thrive, not just survive, during your PhD’. It has 40 chapters that take you all the way through from deciding you want to do to PhD, and thinking about where and what type, to submitting your thesis, and what kind of skills you may need to develop during your PhD to maximise your career success after it is done.
Professor Elaine Cloutman-Green, otherwise known as “The Girlymicrobiologist”, is a clinical academic with over 2 decades of experience leading research projects and supporting students at all levels, including PhDs. She also runs the popular Girlymicrobiologist blog, which aims to de-mystify science and support those wanting to engage with academic careers from A-level all the way through to career enrichment.
In this book, Girlymicro talks about the reality of what it is like to study for a PhD, what gateways you may need to pass through, and how to manage key relationships in order to achieve success.
This book starts at the very beginning, with why you might want to do a PhD, how you might decide what route to PhD is right for you, and what a successful application might look like.
It then takes you through your PhD journey, year by year, with tips about how to approach and succeed during significant moments, such as attending your first conference, or writing your first academic paper.
Finally, you will discover what other skills you need to develop during your PhD to give you the best route to success after your viva. All of this supported by links to activities on the Girlymicrobiologist blog, to help you with practical exercises in order to apply what you have learned.
Whether you’re planning your PhD, a healthcare professional looking to develop, or simply curious to know about how the world of academia works, The Girlymicrobiologist offers a refreshing blend of knowledge and relatable experiences. Get ready to laugh, learn, and be inspired to find a way into, what she describes as the best job on the planet.
This is the book I wish that someone had given me when I started on my PhD. I was pretty clueless and spent a lot of time finding my way, and making heaps of mistakes. It seemed only fair to write all of my learning down so that I can share it, not just with my own students but more widely, so that everyone is free to make their own new mistakes, not just repeat ones I’ve already made.
The Why
I’ve been talking about writing a book for ages, and I still have the original Girlymicro book I’d planned going on in the background. I was prompted to do this book now though, after spending an afternoon at an awards event and realising that I could tell you every person who was going to win in every category before the dinner even started. It made me think a lot about access and privilege. That night I came home and I was really glum, and I couldn’t quite process why I was feeling that way.
I slept on it and spent some time speaking to Mr Girlymicro the next day to process my thoughts. I talked about how much access to healthcare professions and even academic training schemes are now based on who you know, to describe the best way to get through gateways like applications and interviews. How, even once you are in them, to feel like you understand how things work and the undisclosed boxes that need ticking, you need to have someone who will let you in and tell you the unwritten rules, and frankly not all supervisors see that as their role. This means that I really feel like we are missing out on some amazing talent. People who would make wonderful PhD students, or academics, because they can’t get across the threshold or see themselves in the role.
Not everyone has strong connections with a university. Still fewer people know someone who has a PhD. The way the system currently feels is that if you can access information you really have such an advantage over those that don’t. I therefore see a lot of my medical colleagues getting access to PhD funding, and yet fewer and fewer of my nursing and scientific colleagues. I increasingly encounter more and more undergraduates who are reaching out because they need help to know why they aren’t being successful, because they don’t know what is expected of them. It has always been hard to get onto PhD programmes, and it should be. What it shouldn’t be is hard because you don’t have access to the right people to give you the knowledge you need to level the playing field.
I realised that was why I was feeling upset and unsettled. I don’t like unfairness. I don’t like inequity. I don’t like realising that I’m part of the problem. Mr Girlymicro commented, as I was off loading, that I had plenty of blog posts that talk about how to apply for and do a PhD, and so why didn’t I take the way I was feeling and turn it into something positive. A book. So, this book concept was born. A book where I set out to play my role in fixing the disparities as I see them.
The Vision
That conversation happened right at the end of May. I gave myself 3 months to take some content form this blog, as well as creating new content, to come up with a book of ~80,000 words that captures the advice I give to my PhD students, and those approaching me floating the concept of applying for a PhD.
Why 3 months? Well, if I allowed myself a year, I would take a year, and remember that other book? I still want that to happen at some point. The other thing was that I wanted it finished as close to the start of the academic year as possible, so that it could start benefiting people right away. We all also know that I have no patience, and so using my birthday as a cut off always felt right.
The book was finished at the end of August, and I’m in final edits before upload at the end of the month. I want it to be the kind of resource that people can dip in and out of, whether they are doing a PhD or not. Chapters, such as developing goals, or on public speaking, should stand alone to benefit even those who are not in academic study. The activities that can be accessed alongside the book, to help things like developing your elevator pitch, should only grow in number over time, and hopefully will be a good general resource for anyone that finds them, not just for those who are studying for a PhD.
My main hope however, is that people who are on a PhD will find it not only helpful, but something that will help them feel a little less alone in the process. There were times, as I was doing my PhD outside of a standard academic department, that I felt really lonely, and sometimes even very lost. Not everyone has a super supportive supervisor, not everyone finds those peers that keep you going. I was lucky that I had great colleagues who picked me, not everyone has that. I hope that this book can act a little like the friend you need, who you can turn to for advice, and to know that others have been there before and found a way to succeed.
What to Expect
I don’t know what to expect to be honest. I’ve never written a book entirely alone before, with thanks to Dr Helen Rickard and Dr Sam Watkin who have contributed text. I know why I needed to write this book, and as I say in the first chapter, knowing your why is the most important thing. I don’t expect it to be perfect, nothing is, but as I say to my students, the main thing is that it is done.
The book should go live on Amazon (depending on their turn around time) on Friday 17th October. It should be purchasable in 3 forms:
Ebook for £2.99 or included in your ebook subscription if you have one and free to download
Paperback for £9.99
Hardback for £15.99
None of this is about making money for me, but Amazon have minimum costs, especially if you want it to be available widely, so there we go.
To mark the occasion, although it is terrifying me at the moment, I’m holding a small book launch event at UCL on the same night. If you fancy, come and join me. After all, we should all do a little something that scares us, and I’m hoping if I feed you wine you will forgive any deficiencies knowing the reasons why this book came into being in the first place.
If you like, I’m kinda hoping you might also tell your friends…
Following on from the wonderful fungal post on fungal toxins (mycotoxins) last week from Dr Sam Watkin, I wanted to follow up with a post on the latest fungi of interest from a clinical perspective, Candidozyma auris. This fungi is getting more and more coverage, as well as becoming more important in healthcare, so I thought I would take a moment to talk about what it is, what it does, how to find it, and what to do when you do.
In a pre-pandemic world, which feels like a long time ago, Professor Lena Ciric was working at a media fellowship, and as part of that work wrote an article for the BBC on Candida auris, which has subsequently been renamed to Candidozyma auris.
This article came out in 2019, so maybe C. auris is not so new but in terms of the numbers of cases we are seeing within the NHS, and the changing prevalence out in healthcare systems more widely, it is definitely more of a feature and a concern than it was back then. Reflecting this change the UKHSA guidance Candidozyma auris (formerly Candida auris): guidance for acute healthcare settings which was originally published in 2016, has been updated recently (19th March 2025). It feels timely therefore to put something out in order to raise awareness of this organism and the unique challenges it presents.
NB I can neither spell nor pronounce Candidozyma auris and so we’re sticking to C. auris from this point out.
Yeast are a type of fungus, and Candida species are often associated with colonisation (present without causing infection or symptoms) on skin, in the mouth or within the vagina. If they grow up to high levels they can cause an infection called candidiasis, which often causes symptoms like itching or discharge. Common infections include Thrush and nappy rash. Candida albicans is one of the most common yeast infections seen within the healthcare setting, and in this kind of environment more serious infections can be seen, especially those linked to the blood stream, and occasionally serious organ infections.
C. auris was originally believed to be a relatively new species of genus Candida, as it often behaves in a similar way to the other Candida species. The reason for the name change to Candidozyma auris, was because, although in many ways it behaves similarly to its Candida cousins, it does have some differences in the way it behaves. These include features such as intrinsic antifungal resistance and growth conditions, that make it useful to characterise in a way that acknowledges it as a novel genus in its own right.
What is the difference between C. auris and the other Candida species that you know?
Many Candida species can cause severe infections within specific settings, however C. auris has been known to not only cause a wide variety of infections (bloodstream, intra-abdominal, bone and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) infections), but ones which lead to significant mortality rates, with an estimated rate of 30 – 72% in severe infection reported in the literature.
Infections can occur in any patient group, although UK outbreaks have been most frequent associated with adult settings. Augmented care settings (such as intensive care and transplant settings) are at highest risk due to the vulnerable, long stay nature of many of their patients. Management of any infection occurring is complicated by the fact that C. auris has developed resistance to many available classes of antifungals, with emergence of pan-resistant strains, which add to the mortality risk.
C. auris also appears able to both easily transmit and colonise the skin of patients, with most patients being colonised before they go on to develop any subsequent infection. These colonised patients can then contaminate their healthcare environments, and unlike other yeast species, C. auris is able to survive and represent a continued risk within the environment for prolonged periods, all of which contributes to outbreak risk.
It was first identified in the ear canal of a patient in Japan in 2009, but has since been found globally, and is now separated into six genetically distinct clades:
Clade I = the South Asian clade, first detected in India and Pakistan
Clade II = the East Asian clade, first detected in Japan
Clade III = the South African clade, first detected in South Africa
Clade IV = the South American clade, first detected in Venezuela
Within the UK from January 2013 – December 2024, 637 C. auris isolates were reported through laboratory surveillance in England, with 59 (9.3%) isolated from blood culture specimens. It should be noted that not all labs report, and for some time many labs could not accurately identify C. auris, or actively screened for it, and so this may represent under reporting. A routine whole genome sequencing service is not currently available for typing, although it can be undertaken linked to specific outbreaks. Hopefully this will be up and running soon to better understand how the different clades discussed above are represented in the UK, and whether any of them are linked to more challenging outcomes than others.
Due to its global distribution, overseas patients may also be at increased risk of introducing C. auris into UK healthcare settings, with one centre reported 1.6% of their overseas admission detected as colonised, with patients coming from the Middle East, India and Pakistan, showing higher levels of recovery.
UKHSA guidance suggests we should screen any patient who has had an overnight stay in a healthcare facility outside of the UK in the previous year, as well as patients patients coming from affected units in the UK. This sounds relatively straight forward, but it can be challenging to identify patients who have had an overnight stay overseas on admission if they are not being admitted from overseas. It also relies on clear communication from other centres that they have an issue, if we are to screen patients from impacted units. Many centres have therefore decided to screen all patients on high-risk wards, such as intensive care, to address some of this unknown risk.
Risk factors for developing C. auris colonisation or infection should be considered when deciding on screening strategies and the list within the UKHSA guidance includes patients who have experience:
healthcare abroad, including repatriations or international patient transfers to UK hospitals for medical care, especially from countries with ongoing transmissions
recent surgery, including vascular surgery within 30 days
prolonged stay in critical care
severe underlying disease with immunosuppression, such as HIV and bone marrow transplantation
corticosteroid therapy
neutropenia
malignancy
chronic kidney disease or diabetes mellitus
mechanical ventilation
presence of a central-venous catheter or urinary catheter
extra-ventricular CSF drainage device
prolonged exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotic or antifungal use
Screening is undertaken by taking swabs from the axilla (armpit), groin and nose, although different patient groups may require additional screening. Patient surveillance is important for two reasons:
1) to understand which patients are colonised in order to introduce additional precautions to limit risk of transmission to other patients or the environment
2) to support improved patient management but allowing patients to be put on the most effective antifungal if they go on to develop any signs of yeast infection, in order to improve outcomes
If a patient is detected as positive, other screening sites can help manage individual patients and so UKHSA say additional site screening should be considered:
urine (especially if there is a urinary catheter in-situ, including intermittent self-catheterisation)
throat swab
perineal swab
rectal swab (in paediatrics we would consider a stool sample instead)
low vaginal swab
sputum or endotracheal secretions
drain fluid (abdominal, pelvic or mediastinal)
vascular access sites
wounds or broken skin
ear
umbilical area (neonates)
Swabs should ideally be processed on chromogenic media (colour changing agar plates) and fungal colonies confirmed using MALDI ToF or a validated PCR (my previous post on PCR may help with this). It can also be helpful to incubate plates at 40oC, as C. auris can grow as much higher temperatures than its Candida cousins, which can help with identification. If grown then the yeast should be stored in case you need them for future typing to help in understanding transmissions or outbreaks.
Why should we care about it?
Due to the high mortality rates for patients who develop infections, and the issues with choosing antifungals that work, it is really important that we know when we have patients who are colonised with C. auris. Controlling spread, even if patients don’t become infected, is incredibly important for the individual. This is because if a patient is detected as positive they won’t be de-alerted (have IPC precautions stopped) at any point and so it will impact them for months, if not years. These IPC precautions include isolation (keeping separate from other patients), and sometimes only being nursed by specific members of staff. These patient and staff impacts are so significant they’ve even been acknowledged in popular media, with a three episode arch covering C. auris in The Resident on Netflix (season three, episodes 18, 19 and 20).
Are there differences in how you might treat?
As I’ve already said, C. auris is pretty resistant to treatment compared to its Candida cousins. UK data indicates that isolates are resistant (don’t respond to) to the normal first line treatment of fluconazole, and often to other antifungals within the azole class. Some isolates have been resistant to other commonly used antifungals, such as amphotericin B (20%) and echinocandins (10%). Resistance to other antifungals can also occur whilst infections are being treated, and so it is important to monitor sensitivities (whether the drug works) and send to reference labs in order to understand the most appropriate therapy. Its resistance profile is one of the reasons the WHO have highlighted C. auris as a priority fungal pathogen for further research and to highlight clinical risk.
Its not just antifungals that are important however, antimicrobial stewardship is important in general, as prolonged exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotics and antifungal agents are risk factors for both C. auris colonisation and infection (again this links back to the high risk patient groups impacted). Therefore, doing a better job of monitoring and controlling antimicrobials in general is likely to have a beneficial impact on C. auris risk.
Challenges with environmental control
One of the many things I love about the new C. auris guidance is its focus on multidisciplinary input ‘Healthcare workers are encouraged to work in multi-disciplinary teams, including Clinical Infection Specialists and IPC teams, to risk assess and support the management of patients infected or colonised with C. auris‘. I think this is so important, especially with an organism that is so challenging and can present such a high risk.
Environmental control is a particular issue for C. auris as we know it’s ability to survive and can grow at higher temperatures than many other fungi, means that it is likely to survive well in the environment. It also has the ability to form environmental biofilms, which can mean it is difficult to impact effectively using standard cleaning techniques, and once within the environment has been been detected for 4 weeks.
Within the UKHSA documentation, environmental contamination for C. auris has been found on the following surfaces during outbreaks:
beds, bedside equipment, bedding materials including mattresses, bed sheets and pillows
ventilation grilles and air conditioning units
radiators
windowsills and other horizontal surfaces
hand wash basins, sink drains and taps
floors
bathrooms doors and walls
disposable and reusable equipment such as ventilators, skin-surface temperature probes, blood pressure cuffs, electrocardiogram leads, stethoscopes, pulse oximeters and cloth lanyards
Basically most of your healthcare environment, whether fixed or movable features. In order to help stop the transfer from patients to the environment, via staff, the use of personal protective equipment is really important. Therefore the use of gowns and gloves is suggested. Single use and disposable equipment should also be used whenever possible, and patients should be kept in single, ensuite rooms, to minimise the risk of C. auris escaping from within the bed space to adjacent clinical environments. Any items within the space should either be cleanable with a disinfectant, or disposed of after a patient leaves. One thousand ppm of available chlorine should be used for cleaning, but needs to be used in concert with an appropriate contact time if it is to be effective.
WHO fungal priority pathogens list to guide research, development and public health action 2022
Outbreaks
Most detections of C. auris cases detected are colonisation rather than infection (though colonisations can lead to subsequent infections). Within the UK there have been 5 significant outbreak of C. auris, each with over 50 cases, in addition to many sporadic introductions of single cases, frequently from overseas. Many of these have been in London or the South of England, and have resulted in considerable disruption to services over a prolonged period of time. This disruption can, in itself, be a risk to patients as it can result in delayed access to care. Outbreaks are also financially significant, with outbreaks reported as costing over £1 million for a service impacted for 7 months.
Although outbreak numbers are currently small, they are becoming more frequent, and even if infrequent have significant impacts. The need to control this risk before it becomes endemic within the UK health system is therefore significant. It is crucial therefore to collect more data and understand transmission routes of C. auris better.
Despite probable under reporting, it is clear that C. auris is becoming more common within UK healthcare settings, and has the ability to both cause significant issues for both individual patients and for services, due to outbreak impacts. Although fairly new on the scene there is increasing recognition of how C. auris could change fungal risks within healthcare, and even long stay residential settings. If we are going to adjust approaches in order to react to the new risks C. auris represents we need to both update our current practices, and invest in research, in order to learn how to do things even better. This is the reason that it feels important to share a post that is a little more technical than normal, both to help myself by learning more, but also to ensure that we are having conversations about an organism that has the ability to impact us all.
Friday just gone, 25th April, was World DNA Day. I’ve had a series of blogs that I’ve been playing around with linked to what DNA is, how we look for and investigate it and how we are exploring DNA in our everyday lives. Linked to this I’ve also got two book reviews coming where the world changes because of genetic testing and genetic manipulation. So this is the first of four part DNA bonanza.
I thought I would write these posts, because as much as artificial intelligence could change the way we live and is frequently discussed, we are all accessing DNA based testing more and more, with many of us not really thinking about how this too is changing the world in which we live.
I remember really clearly the first time I actively came across the concept of DNA, DNA testing and DNA manipulation. It was in Jurassic Park, when Mr DNA pops up at the start of the film to talk you through how they used DNA and cloning in order to make the dinosaurs. This film came out in 1993, I was 13 and I just remember how all of my class were queuing up to get tickets. It was the first film I really remember there being hype about, well that and Aladdin which was a different kind of seminal moment. It was the first film I remember watching and thinking just how cool science and scientists were.
In fact I talk about Mr DNA so much that the wonderful Mr Girlymicro brought me a Mr DNA Funko pop which lives on my desk at work and reminds me that the impression we make on people stays with them.
What does all this have to do with how we use DNA now? Well, in 1990 when Jurassic Park came out, the routine use of DNA, even in research, was still pretty much science fiction. The structure of DNA had only been described in 1953. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), which is the main way we investigate DNA, had only been developed in 1983, and was only starting to become more widely available in the 1990’s. When I started working within healthcare in 2004, we were only really just starting to move from PCR being something that was used in research to something that was common place in clinical diagnostics. The leap from there, to a world where thousands of us can swab ourselves at home and post samples off to be diagnosed with SARS CoV2 during the pandemic, or to get information on our genetic heritage, would have sounded like something that would only occur in a science fiction novel if you’d mentioned to me back theb.
Just a flag, this part one post has a lot of the technical stuff linked to what DNA is and how we investigate it. You may want to skip this post and head directly for part two if you don’t want to be reminded of secondary school science, but if you can bear with me I think it will help some of the context.
What is DNA?
DNA, or to give it its full name Deoxyribonucleic acid, is commonly referred to as the building block of life. The structure of DNA consists of a double-stranded helix held together by complementary base pairs. The nucleotides that form the base pairs are adenine, thymine, guanine or cytosine. These nucleotides act to link the two strands together via hydrogen bonds, with thymine always pairing with adenine (T-A) and guanine always pairing with cytosine (G-C).
Sections of DNA then combine together together to code for genes, which are sections of DNA that work together in order to code for proteins, that then permits the expression of our DNA in physical form.
Genes are organised into chromosomes or packages of DNA. Each chromosome is formed from a single, enormously long DNA molecule that contains a strand of many genes, with the human genome containing 3.2 × 109 DNA (3,200,000,000) nucleotide pairs, divided into 46 chromosomes formed from 23 pairs (22 pairs of different autosomes and a pair sex chromosomes).
So how do we get from DNA to proteins? The specific sequences of nucleotides that form our DNA are arranged in triplets (groups of three). To turn DNA into protein, it gets transcribed into RNA (ribonucleic acid) within cells, with each of these triplets coding (translating) into an amino acid, which then get combined together to form proteins. The amino acids combined dictate what form and function the resulting proteins takes. Proteins then serve as structural support, biochemical catalysts, hormones, enzymes, and building blocks for all the processes we need to survive as humans.
Long and short, everything comes from your DNA, it’s super important, and is unique to you, but it’s structure is complex and there’s a lot of it in each of us.
How do we investigate DNA?
Now that we know about what DNA is, and how important it is for life, not just for humans but for all living things, it makes sense why so much time and energy has been deployed into understanding more about what it means for us as a species, as well as for us as individuals.
I’ve mentioned that PCR was first developed in the 80’s but didn’t really come into routine clinical testing until the 2000’s. What is PCR though and how does it work?
I often describe PCR as a way to look for DNA that is similar to looking for a needle in a 25 story block of flats sized haystack. The human genome is 3.2 billion base pairs, and we are often looking for a fragment of DNA about 150 base pairs in length, 1/21 millionth of the genome. It’s quite the technical challenge and you can see why it took quite a while to be able to move from theoretically possible to every day use. What makes it even more complicated is that you need to know what that 150 nucleotide fragment is likely to contain or where it is likely to be positioned within those 3.2 billion base pairs to really do it well. The human genome was not fully sequenced, and therefore available to us to design against, until the year before I started my training at GOSH, 2003. The progress therefore in the last 20 years has been extraordinary, and I can only imagine what will happen in the next 20 years. Hence the book reviews that will be coming as parts 3 and 4 of this blog.
So, how does PCR work? Well the first thing to say is that there are actually a number of different types of PCR, although the basic principles are the same. For example, there are some types of PCR that target RNA. There are also types of PCR that are used more frequently within clinical settings for things like SARS CoV2 testing, that are called Real Time PCR, called that as results become available in real time rather than waiting for the end of the process. It is for Real Time PCR that the small ~150 nucleotide fragment length is an issue. So all of these processes have their own pros and cons. Like many things in science, you have to use the right process to answer the right question.
The basic principles shared between types of PCR are as follows:
Designing your primers:
Primers are the pieces of DNA that you design and make that will stick to your target piece of DNA you are interested in. The reason this works is because of the fact that the nucleotides that make up DNA are complimentary and so A binds to T, C binds to G. As DNA is double stranded you can design your primers (your equivalent to the magnets to find you needle in your haystack) so that they will bind to your specific target (the piece of DNA you are interest in). If you want to have your primer stick to a piece of DNA sequence that reads AAG CTC TTG, you would design a primer that ran TTC GAG AAC using the complementary bases, make sense?
You design one set of primers for one strand, this is called your forward primer (moving from 5′ to 3′), and then you design your reverse primer at the other end of your target for the opposite DNA strand (moving from 3′ to 5′). Doing it this way means that when you start your PCR process you end up with complete copies of your target. You will then successfully have pulled the needle from your haystack using you targeted magnets.
Undertaking the PCR:
Once you’ve got your primers (which you can just order in once designed) you can then get onto the process of the PCR itself. You combine your sample that you think might contain the DNA target you are looking for (be that human, bacterial, environmental etc) with the reagents (chemicals) that you need to make the process work all in a single small tube. This tends to be a delicate process that needs to be undertaken at controlled temperatures as the protein that runs the process (Taq polymerase) is delicate and expensive. To do this we combine:
DNA Template: This is the sample that contains the DNA target you want to amplify
DNA Polymerase: Almost always this is Taq polymerase which is used due to its heat-stability as it originates from a bacteria that lives it deep sea vents. This allows it to function at the high temperatures required for PCR and is used to make the new DNA copies
Primers: These are the short, synthetic DNA sequences that you design to attach to either end of your target DNA region. These then allow the DNA polymerase to add nucleotides to create the new DNA strands
Nucleotides (dNTPs): These are single nucleotides (bases) that are then used to build the new DNA strands (adenine, thymine, guanine, and cytosine)
Buffer Solution: This solution provides the optimal conditions (pH, salt concentration) for the enzyme to function properly
Once you have your reagents you then put them on a platform that heats and cools for different steps to allow the enzymes to work and for the new DNA strands to be created:
Denaturation: The double-stranded DNA template is heated (typically to 95°C) to separate it into two single strands. This step ensures that the primers can access the DNA sequence of interest
Annealing: The temperature is lowered (typically to 50-60°C) to allow primers to bind to their complementary sequences on the single-stranded DNA. This is the step where your magnets find their needle
Extension: The temperature is raised again (usually to somewhere around 72°C, the optimal temperature for Taq polymerase activity). Taq polymerase extends the primers by adding complementary nucleotides based on the DNA sequence to create new copies of the original DNA target
These three stages are repeated in cycles, typically 20-40 times, which results in thousands and thousands of copies of the original target to be created, so that eventually your 25 storey haystack is made up of more needles than it is hay, and therefore it is easy to find what you are looking for.
Interpreting your results:
At the end of your PCR step, if you are using traditional PCR, you run what is now called your PCR product or amplicon (the things you’ve made) through something called a gel. This is just a flat jelly made of agarose (or seaweed) which also contains a dye that binds to DNA and allows to separate your DNA based on size. This allows you pick out where you have samples that have the massive amplification you are looking for, as you can see it as a band within the gel. If a band is there and the right size (as you know how big your target was supposed to be) this is a PCR positive.
If you need to know more detail than whether something is present or absent, for instance if you need to know not just that a gene is there but which variant of a gene is present, you need to be able to tell what the nucleotides that were added between your two primers actually were. To do this, you will follow up PCR with a process called sequencing.
You take your target PCR’d section and then put it through a process to work out what the nucleotides added were. This involves doing the PCR process again, to make even more copies, but the nucleotides added into the reagent mix have fluorescence attached so you can tell which ones have been added during the PCR process. G’s often produce a black colour when hit by light, A’s green, T’s red and C’s blue.
For our original sequence we talked about, AAG CTC TTG, the sequence would read Green, Green, Black then Blue, Red, Blue followed by Red Red Black. Colours are then back interpreted into a DNA sequence (a series of letters) and there you have it, you know what the DNA is between your primers and you can then interpret your sequencing result. If you have large fragments of DNA you are interested in, you may have to do this in overlapping segments and put it back together, something like a jigsaw, before you can get your answer, but the basic process is the same.
What can DNA tell us?
As I’ve said, the search for DNA and specific genes has become an increasingly normal part of providing diagnostics in healthcare. Most of us will have sent off a swab for a PCR at least once during the COVID-19 pandemic. PCRs are frequently used in my world of infectious diseases to see if a bacteria is present or absent. They are also used so that I am able to see if a bacteria will respond to an antibiotic, by seeing if they carry antibiotic resistance genes, which can be crucial to getting patients on the right treatment at the right time.
Looking for specific variants of genes is also key to making sure that the treatments we give also don’t cause any unexpected consequences. A good example of this is when we use PCR and sequencing to look at genetic variants of a gene called MT-RNR1. A specific variant in this gene, m.1555A>G, is known to increase the risk of aminoglycoside-induced hearing loss. Aminoglycosides are a crucial antibiotic class that are used pretty widely, but especially in management of some conditions such as cystic fibrosis and certain types of cancers. A small number of people have a gene that makes them prone to something called ototoxicity as a result of taking these antibiotics, resulting in hearing loss. If we know a patient has this gene variant we can then choose to use different antibiotics, improving patient outcomes and avoiding a life long hearing impact.
Outside of screening linked to patients presenting with specific conditions, the use of DNA sequencing is being utilised more widely to look for genes or conditions before they even present with symptoms, in order to reduce time to diagnosis, and hopefully to be able to find patients and start management before they’re impacted or even present as unwell. A great example of this is the newborn screening programme that started last year. This screens newborns using the heel pricks of blood taken at birth so that rare diseases that could take months or years to diagnose by traditional means are picked up early in life, therefore allowing appropriate treatment to start earlier and hopefully saving lives.
DNA is fascinating and I love knowing about it. It’s not just me though. In recent years there has been an increasing trend for people to send off their DNA for other purposes than to hospitals for clinical testing. I’m not going to say too much about this in part one, but it was this that really inspired me to write these posts in the first place and is the main focus of part two of this blog series.
Just a quick google however provides a wide number of different companies offering a variety of DNA testing services outside of the NHS (NB I don’t advocate for any of them):
Crystal Health Group: Operates a network of DNA testing clinics, offering relationship testing and other services.
23andMe: Provides DNA testing for health, ancestry, and other personal insights.
Living DNA: Focuses on both ancestry and wellbeing-related DNA testing.
MyHeritage: Provides DNA testing, particularly for ancestry research.
AncestryDNA: Company specialising in DNA testing for ancestry discovery.
The complication with all of this type of provision of testing is that outside of the clinical world in the UK, where testing should be undertaken in accredited laboratories and reporting of the results must meet certain standards, sending off DNA to private companies is much less monitored.
I hope you can see by some of the technical descriptions just how complicated these DNA processes can be. How time consuming, and how expensive to get right. There is also a lot of nuance about the different types of PCR, sequencing, gene targets, and results analysis that can be offered under the umbrella of ‘DNA testing’. Without the right people involved to make sure that there is embedded quality assurance challenges could arise, depending on what kind of testing is undertaken.
As stated in a recent Independent article:
As they’re based on estimates, I suggest treating home DNA tests as a fun investigation to get to know your family history a little better rather than a to-the-letter representation of everything that’s ever happened in your gene pool – Ella Duggan Friday 28 March 2025
The devil for all of these things really is in the detail, and we’ll get into that detail much more in part two! For those of you interested in learning more about the history of DNA testing, I’ve included a talk below. Happy World DNA Day
I got an alert of my phone last week that I set up this blog on WordPress 10 years ago! That was a bit of a shock I can tell you. That said, as I posted about in 2020, although I set up the blog and made my first post as I finished my PhD in 2015, I didn’t start posting regularly of another 5 years. I started it as I was looking for my next passion project but I didn’t really know what I wanted to say for quite a while. Despite the gap between starting and regular posting however, 10 years still feels like a gateway and something worth marking. I thought therefore that I would write something that reflects how I, my practice, and in someways the world, feels like it has changed in the last 10 years to mark the event. On the back of that, it also seemed fun to embed a few of the blog posts that have been put together since Girlymicrobiologist began in order to show how this blog too has changed and grown.
Apologies, this turned into a bit of a long one.
Microbes have changed
In 2015 I had finished my PhD in January, as well as a PGCert in Teaching and Learning in Higher and Professional Education. I had just taken my final clinical exams (Fellowship of the Royal College of Pathologists) in September and found out I’d passed them in November. After a decade of focus linked to completing what felt like an unachievable list of academic steps I was done. The question therefore was………what’s next? So, in December 2015 I started my first ever blog post, although I had been sitting on the web page for 6 months not knowing how to begin. This is how that Girlymicro blog began:
So, this is my first ever blog post. Bear with me as I don’t really know what I’m doing.
I’m what is know as a Clinical Scientist and I work in Infection Control.
Most people don’t know what a Clinical Scientist is so I thought I should briefly explain.
Most scientists that work within hospitals are involved with imaging (X-rays, CTs etc) or processing patient samples. We all work to support diagnosing patients. Did you know that scientists are involved with >80% of all diagnoses within the NHS? Their work is crucial to improving patient care, but the scientists are often unsung heroes as they often never meet the patients they help.
I do not work in the lab all the time like many scientists. I’m a clinical scientist, so half my time is spent working in a patient facing role within infection control and the other half involves bringing science to infection control to make it more efficient/evidence based. I work within a hospital with a team comprised of nurses, doctors and scientists. I have a PhD in infection control. I am also working towards my final clinical qualification (Fellowship of the Royal College of Pathologists) which is the same as my medical colleagues. My job is to help the translation of the science into a form that healthcare professionals can work with. Sometimes this means working with language so we are all on the same page. Other times this means working with the latest science and technology and developing new tests that will help.
I’m passionate about my job, but I’m also aware that many people don’t know that it exists and I’m hoping that this blog will help to change that. I plan to share a bit about what my day to day life is like as well as the science which I hope will inspire others to become healthcare scientists. After all, I have the greatest job in the world. And that is worth shouting about.
During the 10 years between setting up the website, with a world of good intentions, and writing today, many things have changed. Not least of all are the organisms people care about and the way transmission is understood. My PhD thesis was on the role of the environment in transmission of healthcare acquired infection. In many ways, getting papers published out of it was a struggle as very few journals were interested in the built environment and Infection Prevention and Control (IPC). Now organisations such as the Healthcare Infection Society run entire events linked to it, and I run something called the Environmental IPC Network, as the topics impacts so many of us. On a national level I’m now involved in writing guidelines to help support environmental IPC, all of which was a pipe dream when my thesis was being written. It felt like a very lonely area to be working in, but over the last 10 years it feels like the built environment is finally being recognised as an important component to how we keep patients safe in the world of IPC. I’ve now even had my own PhD students continue the work.
The other thing that has changed are the organisms that are perceived as being important. Even more though, there are organisms that were not even thought about in 2015, or didn’t exist, that can or are impacting so many lives, for instance Candida auris is a new kid on the block, and Mpox was called something completely different. Few people cared about Gram negative bacteria when I started my PhD, let alone Adeno. This was true even to a certain extent when I finished. I’ve worked on Adenovirus for over 2 decades, so it feels especially vindicating to see it make it onto the UKHSA priority pathogen list for research. All of this is to say, you don’t need to follow the crowd, if you find a problem that you believe is important enough, stick at it. Gather the evidence and put it out there. Eventually you’ll find others that join you in seeing the significance of your direction of travel.
Speaking of organisms, in 2015 we testing for the odd Coronavirus, and of course the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak had happened, and the Middle Eastern Coronavirus (MERS) outbreak was ongoing. Many of us had been concerned with the potential of Coronaviruses to cause a pandemic, but most of the planning was still linked to Influenza based risks, as that was what had been seen historically. Awareness sadly does not necessarily link to preparedness, and as lived experience shows, the SARS CoV2 pandemic was both fast and devastating. We were unprepared, but I don’t know that we ever could have been.
Outbreaks with a worldwide distribution are not unusual and the table below shows just how many have happened or have been ongoing from 2015 onward. It also shows that not all outbreaks with world wide spread are considered to be pandemics, and not all pandemics have death tolls in the millions. In fact a pandemic is defined as “an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people”. With this classical definition including nothing about population immunity, virology or disease severity. So, preparing for a pandemic is not as simple as it can initial appear.
NB for ease I grabbed this list from Wikipedia, please don’t judge me for it
The table also shows quite how hard life can be in the world of IPC as the organisms don’t stop because we are tired and need a break. In fact the world re-opening post pandemic, combined with some of the scientific distrust that the political handling of the pandemic created, and the fear people experienced, means that managing outbreaks since has been an ongoing struggle. Vaccine hesitancy is having a real impact on transmission and making a key line of defense less effective. Many experienced experts in this field and others related to infection and public health have now retired or moved away due to the ongoing personal impacts. This means it’s more important than ever to turn up, be seen and to have engaged conversations across boundaries and silo’s in order to develop trust and support patient safety. No matter how hard it feels, it is still worth it.
My clinical world has changed a lot, partly because of the changing organisms and the pandemic, but also because the patients and healthcare are changing. It can take quite a lot to keep up with all of these changes, and you have to be fully engaged with an approach that aligns with continuous learning to stay up to date. On top of this, when you start out as a trainee with over a decade of training ahead of you, you have also got a list of key education targets to prioritise. It can therefore feel very much like you are just working your way through a list of items that need to be ticked off so you can eventually get to the finish line. There is a lot of ‘onto the next thing’ as soon as you manage each key milestone because otherwise it can feel overwhelming. One of the key things I’ve realised since 2015 is the importance of cherishing the moment and recognising the importance of progress, rather than rushing from one thing to the next with my entire focus about keeping an eye on the prize.
Passing FRCPath first time is still one of the most challenging things I’ve done in over 2 decades in healthcare. To be honest, I’d rather do another PhD than take FRCPath again, any day of the week. I wish that I could have found a way forward where I didn’t let my ability to pass, or risk of failure of an exam define me, but for many years it did. I’m pretty sure that telling my younger self this would have achieved nothing, as it takes time and distance to be able to understand that the tick list isn’t everything, but just in case it helps anyone reading this……you are more than the sum of the exams you sit, the letters after your name or the achievements on your CV. You have value no matter where you are on the pathway, no matter how many diversions you have taken, and to be honest, it’s OK to also decide the end destination is no longer for you. Who you are matters more than any tick list.
Part of the way I’ve gained perspective on my own training is by supporting others now through theirs. Seeing PhD students go through their own trials and tribulations, and sharing in their eventual successes., has given me insight I couldn’t have gained any other way. Supporting Healthcare Science training, everywhere from writing curricula to mentoring individuals at all stages of their careers, has allowed me to see things from all kinds of different perspectives. It’s given me so much insight, as well as time to reflect on how I felt and what might have helped me along the way, in order to try to help others better.
I feel more seen as a Healthcare Scientist than I ever have. I feel that Healthcare Science as a discipline and a profession is more seen than it ever has been. There are so many more routes into Healthcare Science these days, with so many more options. This is a truly brilliant step forward from when I joined, when there really was only one route as a Clinical Scientist and having to really fight to show that you could do things differently if you wanted to go another way. As the same time however, all that choice can feel a bit overwhelming, and in some cases paralysing, as people just don’t know where to start. In order to reach more people and support them in navigating this changing landscape though does require a willingness to be visible, to bring ourselves and our stories, in order to show others what an amazing profession this is. To show the openness and diversity of the workforce, in order to make sure everyone knows this can be a profession that is welcoming and open to everyone. You can’t be what you can’t see, so let’s make sure we are seen!
I have been fortunate enough to have experienced opportunities that I never believed would be open to someone as normal as me. I don’t come from a privileged background. I didn’t go to private school or attend Oxbridge. I don’t have connections, or a rich family to bail me out and pay for my exams/conference fees/fancy memberships. So when I get invited or asked to do amazing things, I of course say yes, but I’d think to think I’m saying yes for more than just me. I’m going into spaces and having conversations with people so that I can represent. Represent my workforce. Represent my gender. Represent my background and represent my family. To do so is an immense honour and a privilege that I don’t ever lose sight of.
No one I knew, outside of work, had ever had a New Years Honour, so it never even occurred to me I would get one. Being able to undertake work in Africa which aims to reduce infant mortality by 20% in high mortality settings, is not work that I thought I would ever get involved with, it felt too big for someone like me. That’s just it though, ‘someone like me’. We put so many labels and restrictions on ourselves. We limit our own vision. If the last 10 years have taught me anything it’s that you probably can’t see where you will end up, there’s too much joyful chaos in life for that, but you can control saying yes. Saying yes to things that scare you. Saying yes to rooms that may intimidate. Saying yes to being open to opportunities and changes in direction, even when you have no idea where they might lead you. Half the joy is in the discovery, so put on that adventure outfit and head out the door.
I’ve talked about the tick list and why visibility matters, and not just for you as an individual. Now I want to talk a bit about glass ceilings and choosing to do things differently. I have, over the years, lost count of how many times I have been told that something wasn’t for me. Not for me because of my background, profession or gender, or maybe just because I didn’t fit in. I used to hear a lot of ‘no’ and I used to feel like others could define me. The thing I’ve learnt is, that the only person who can define you is you. You can give away your power to others and let them made those choices for you, or you can own your path, your career and your choices, in order to define yourself. I’m not saying any of this is easy. I’m not saying it is fast or straight forward. I am saying it is a choice.
I became the first non-medical Infection Control Doctor (that I know of), because I worked to create the path to get there, which hopefully others will now follow. I didn’t know that was possible when I started, and it came with a goodly number of fights along the way. There were days when I definitely believed the ‘no’s’ and didn’t think it would happen, but I kept trying, I kept showing up. It became clear that I would never make Professor at my original home within UCL, due to long standing bias for medical over scientific backgrounds. So I pivoted and found a new academic UCL home that welcomed me and supported me in my journey instead. Things that are worth fighting for take time and commitment, and nothing is guaranteed. Paths are often not well trodden, and so finding the right people to support you along the way is key. Don’t drift. Make your choices consciously. Know what you are willing to fight for. Know also what you are prepared to let go of. When things come together share the knowledge, share the path, and make it easier for others to follow. Drop that ladder down or prop the doorway open.
I had thought it was post pandemic blues but I think it’s just transitioning to another phase of life and career that got me thinking about this one. I’ve been working at GOSH for 21 years this year, pretty much my entire working life. During this time there have been two mentors that have pretty much introduced me to and gotten me through everything. In my clinical life it has been Dr John Hartley, and in my academic world it has been Professor Nigel Klein. Now, John retired part way through the pandemic, and he really is the reason I have my Consultant post, as I took his Infection Control Doctor role. Nigel sadly passed away last year, before he had the chance to retire. In my head, I’m still the new girl on the block, the new person in the department, the young upstart. It is a shock to look around and realise I am now one of the people who have been there longest and I have very large shoes to fill, knowing how unprepared I feel to fill them. The giants that have gone before have left, but I wasn’tt prepared for them to leave. I think the biggest shocker has been that there are some who now look at me in the same way that I looked at John and Nigel, when I don’t feel like I am even in the same league. I think they will always loom large in my mind, and I honour what they taught me by embedding it in my practice.
Your career can feel like such an open pathway ahead of you. Then you wake up one day and realise you, probably, have less than a decade left. It’s at moments like that you really need to think about what it is that you want to achieve, what you want to prioritise, in order to maximise the impact of the time you have left. Ten years feels like a long time, but its really just 2 cycles of PhD students, 2 large project grants and only 3 trainee Clinical Scientists. It’s no where near as long as it feels and so planning ahead takes on an all new perspective. If your a planner like me, now is the time to plan for this new phase of your career.
Learning that you can’t fix everyone or everything
Part of that planning for the future is also knowing what not take on. I am a simple soul, I like being liked. It’s taken me a long time to grow in my leadership to the point where I acknowledge that I not a god, and I don’t have a magic wand, therefore I can’t fix everything or everyone. Nor can I be liked by everyone. Part of being a leader is making tough decisions, part of being a leader is also about honesty and not saying the easy things, just to be liked. Sometimes, I have learned, putting off the difficult conversations and the difficult decisions does no one any favours and so it’s best to have them early. As a mentor, you are there to advise, but the decision are owned by the person making them. You are not people’s parents and they are not children, we should therefore be aiming for adult adult conversations. Acting like a White Knight can actually do more harm than good, as you are removing learning opportunities for those you swoop in and save. It is a difficult balance to know when to step in and when to maintain a pure supporting role. It is one that I will continue to get wrong. All I can do is learn, do my best, own the consequences, and aspire to be better.
The flip side of learning you can’t fix everything is being aware of your duty to try to make things that are in your remit of control or influence as good as they can be. As I’ve said, I have a decade left in all likelihood, and therefore my job is to ensure that I maximise the opportunities for others until the day I don’t have the ability to influence any more. My career is very much no longer about me, it’s about those who I will be leaving behind to carry on once I’m writing murder mysteries and drinking martinis at three in the afternoon. My job is to support as many people as possible to be in the best position possible when I walk out the door for the last time. I realise it’s now my job to keep the doors open and assist people through them. Whether it’s mentorship, nominations, or speaking peoples names in rooms they haven’t been invited into, I plan to do all I can to make sure that I pay it forward every opportunity I get.
I have the job I planned for and dreamt about for 2 decades. It is my dream job and I love it I wouldn’t change it or my decision to go for it for the world. There is no doubt however that post pandemic it has been hard. I don’t know if it’s because I’m getting older, because the job and the world right now feels pretty intense and hard core, or because my body still kind of hates me for what I put it through during the pandemic, but I definitely feel burnt out and recognise that even a dream job can be a lonely place to be.
The thing is, not every day is going to be a great day. Even in a dream job there will be bits that are harder or speak to you less. It’s also OK to not be OK. The world, and especially those of us in infection control, have been through a prolonged period of pretty significant stress and trauma. We are not going to be the same people we were going in. You don’t have to change the world every moment of every day, sometimes showing up and doing your best is enough, and what your best looks like will be different at different times. I have learnt the importance of asking myself, what would I say to a friend in this situation, and to show myself the kindness that I would show to others rather than acting as my own harshest critic. Try to take a step back and give yourself the prospective you need to find a route forward.
Just the act of writing this post has made me realise how far I’ve come. If you’d asked me in 2015, I would have said being a leader is about setting an example, about getting things right, about showing competence and keeping a cool head. I’m sure leadership is about some of those things, but what I have learnt, for me, is that leadership is about authenticity.
It’s about prioritising bringing my whole self to every encounter. It’s about saying sorry when I make mistakes, rather than pretending to always be right. It’s about sharing that I too am finding it hard, rather than pretending to be OK, but that success is about showing up anyway. It’s about the fact that some people will find this bringing of self about sharing of weakness and use it as a route to criticise, not everyone will like or even ‘get’ what you bring to the table. It is also about knowing that you don’t have to like or be liked to work with others, but that it is instead about developing shared goals, and that diversity of thought makes us stronger and not weaker. Finally, it’s about knowing that it can be scary to share who you truly are as the comments and the insults hit harder without having an armoured shell in the way. However, if you don’t show that you can bring your whole self to a space others will feel less able to do so. Creating safe spaces where people can truly be themselves is one of the greatest things we can do, and so we need to model the way forward so that others don’t have to take that risk instead of us.
Of all the posts I was most scared to share when I wrote it in April 2021 was the one where I talked about losing my sister and how it felt to know that I wouldn’t be able to have children on top of losing her. It was one of the first really personal and vulnerable posts that I put out and I was really scared of what the response might be, both from family and from strangers. Instead, it was shared more times than any other post, and people still come up and talk to me about it, my sister, and Morgan my niece, who we also lost. Something that terrified me, led me to being able to talk about something that impacts so many and is talked about so little. Sharing, was a bravery I don’t think I would have managed in any other way than on this blog, and having conversations with people who read it are so meaningful to me, even now.
More recently I shared a post about what it feels like now, over 10 years since losing my sister. I really wanted to post how something that feels so insurmountable, in terms of not having children when you wanted them, can actually turn into something where your life still has so much meaning and joy. A position I could not have even imagined in 2010 when I lost them. I truly, honestly, love my life. My life has meaning and I have achieved things that I’ve been forced to admit would not have been possible if my life had taken a different course. I hope that sharing this can help others who are not there yet to know that there is a future where they will smile, laugh and feel valued again, no matter how dark the moment feels.
I’ve always been a family girl, but I’ve not always prioritised them in the way that I should. I’ve missed funerals and weddings for work. I’ve cancelled dinners and missed trains home. The pandemic, and life in general, has made me decide that I need to put my family first, and thus myself. There needs to be balance to make it through the marathon of a healthcare career, and some of that balance requires that the job cannot always be the thing that defines who we are. Mummy and Mr Girlymicro are my world, and every moment spent with them makes me a better person and thus better at my job. Bringing my whole self to my job and my leadership requires me to nurture precisely that, my whole self. So credit where credit is due. My family support me in being able to do what I do. They make me martinis when I’ve had a bad day, give me water when I’ve forgotten to drink, and feed me when I’ve inevitably forgotten to eat. They love me for my flaws as well as my strengths, and put me back together when I break. They are my everything, and so they need to feel like my priority in life. I guess my learning is this, don’t become so focused that you forget to acknowledge the people that got you there, and don’t be so ‘eyes on the prize’ that you forget to enjoy the journey with those who care.
Last, but by no means least. I have learnt to embrace the unexpected. I’m a planner but when I started posting on this blog I didn’t really have a plan. I had no idea where I was going or what I was doing. I just knew that it felt like it was something that was needed and had been asked for as part of a challenging time when people were looking for information. It was something that was supposed to be a little hobby that unexpectedly became a central rhythm of my life. Something that is a focus of a little time every day. Something that feels mine when less and less of my working life feels that way. It’s a space where I really feel I can connect, in a way that is probably a little insane for something I throw onto a page and don’t see people read. None of this was planned, and yet it has changed my world. It has changed my plans for the future. It has given me a creative outlet, and some hope in pretty dark times. So, if I have a thought at all for you to take from this overly long blog post, it is this. Embrace the random moments that come your way. Embrace the actions that you roll a dice on and don’t think will lead you anywhere, because every once in a while, without you even being aware of the whys or the how, they may change your life for the better.
This weekend I’m off to Torquay for the Agatha Christie Spring Literary Festival. It will involve talks, a statue unveiling and even a ball! Some of you will know that I’m a massive Agatha Christie fan and love a good murder mystery. It’s part of the reason my ambition for when I retire is to finally have time to write some of the pathology murder mysteries that I have drafted out. I’m planning a three book series called The Murder Manuals. Anyway, that’s some way off but I still love to indulge in a bit of Agatha joy.
Whilst thinking about it this weekend, when I should have really been packing instead, it occurred to me that maybe one of the reasons that I love my job so much is because, in many ways, working in Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) is like working to solve real life mysteries and challenges on a daily basis. You come into work every day not really knowing what the future will hold and spend your days trying to uncover who the criminals (microorganisms) are and how to prevent future ‘crimes’, in the form of infections. This feels even more true having recently posted about how a forensic science lecture I went to looked at solving crimes. So, whilst my head is all linked to the detective process (I suspect I’m more Miss Marple than Hercule Poirot, although really I’d love Mr Girlymicro and I to be Tommy and Tuppence) I thought I would write about why I believe IPC professionals make the best healthcare detectives.
Beginning at the end
Like most good crime dramas, we in IPC, often make our entrance towards the end of a story when we things have already happened. We then have to work backwards to understand what’s happened as well as working forward to prevent any future risk (‘crimes’). Now, the point we get involved can range a bit. Just like in detective dramas, if the crime is obvious the police get involved early. Sometimes however, Miss Marple suspects a crime has occurred (think Sleeping Murder) but everyone else can be slow to get onboard.
In the world of IPC sometimes there are very clear events that need to be looked into. An outbreak for instance is traditionally described as 2 cases linked in person, place and time, or a single case of a significant infection, such as Ebola. This works pretty well most of the time but there are circumstances where using this definition can mean it takes you longer to identify an outbreak, or ‘crime’, has occurred. An example of this is when outbreaks are linked to an intermediate environmental source. This means that you may have low level numbers of cases which don’t appear to be linked in time, or even person, but are just linked to location. I’ve written about the importance of environmental IPC before, but this is one of the reasons it can be particularly tricky.
Need to understand the rules
In every detective story there are rules. If you’re in a Christie novel there will be a denouement, if you’re watching Columbo you will always see the murder at the start, and if the murderer is a female she will always be the person Morse tries to flirt with badly at least once. Infection Prevention and Control is no different. There are unwritten rules that you need to learn and which will help guide you on your way. Vancomycin Resistant Enterococci outbreaks will often have an environmental component. Norovirus outbreaks within staff often have a secret staff member who vomited in the toilet and told nobody. Pseudomonas aeruginosa outbreaks make people ask ‘have you checked your water?’ All of these things give you a way to start investigating and a set of questions to begin with.
Now, here comes the word of warning. Just like The Murder of Roger Ackroyd broke the rules, so do bacteria and other outbreak causes not always behave the way they are supposed to. Just like any good police drama with a rebellious detective, you need to know the rules but also know when to ignore them. Know when to switch tack and think that your MRSA outbreak may actually be linked to your ventilation system, not direct hand to patient transmission. Be neutral enough when looking at your data to not ignore the clues that are there. Red herrings will be present and distract you, so know when to call a fish a fish.
Start broad and narrow down
One of the best ways, with any investigation, is to start broad and narrow down. This enables you to avoid diving down rabbit holes and missing other pathways that should be investigated. Very rarely can you turn up to a country house murder and exclude most of those present, and as Hercule Poirot famously states “it is always wise to suspect everybody”, and the same is true with IPC investigations.
Ask yourself, why do I think that there’s something happening? How do I know that cases occurring at the same time are actually linked? How are my surveillance systems set up to support identification of low levels of cases over prolonged periods? How sure am I then that a ‘crime’ has actually been committed? Once the body as been found, in terms of looking for sources, where do I get my information from? Do I consider just other patients, or patients and families, or patients, families and the environment, or even patients, families, environment and staff. This, all before you even start to consider how different organisms behave in different types of patients. In a country house murder you need to consider those above stairs as well as those below, and in stories like the A.B.C. Murders, you even need to consider those who came and rang your doorbell.
There are so many moving parts within healthcare and we need to ensure that we are capturing as much of that landscape as possible when we start our investigations. Starting broad supports this, but you also then need to know the key moments to start excluding options so that you can eventually get to the depth needed to support interventions and change. Eventually you have to have the scene where you commit and name the murderer. Within IPC, events such as outbreak meetings can really help with this, as unlike our favourite detectives, we can’t keep all the information to ourselves right to the very end. These meetings bring people together to both help gathering information but also to decide on how to focus next steps.
A plethora of unreliable witnesses
In A Murder is AnnouncedMiss Marple states, ‘Please don’t be too prejudiced against the poor thing because she’s a liar. I do really believe that, like so many liars, there is a real substratum of truth behind her lies’. One of the things that is often quite difficult to pin down during IPC investigations is….what is the truth? Truth is often seen as definitive but in reality truth relates back to the lens through which the individual sees the world. For instance, if you asked me what I was doing at 7am last Wednesday I wouldn’t lie, but I would have to offer some form supposition as I can’t actually remember precisely. The other complication is that those directly involved may be even less able to recall their own roles. If I’m sick in hospital days can merge into one and I’m focussed on my physical reality rather than taking in my environment. This is all before we take into consideration the fact that we may be providing sedatives and other medications that could impact recall. Would I remember that one of my visitors mentioned my niece had diarrhoea……..probably not.
Within IPC investigations no one is likely to remember every physical action, which is why audit can be a helpful addition, in order to have an external person capture trends. In other scenarios the actual witnesses to the event can’t speak, for instance ventilation gauges that may have fluctuated or alarmed (is that a voice?) to an event that no one wrote down or reported. This is especially challenging when you are trying to get to the bottom of grumbling outbreaks that have been going for some time, but also is a particular challenge linked to infections with organisms that may not become apparent for months, such as some surgical site infections or infections with pathogens like Aspergillus. Memory can make individuals particularly poor witnesses in these scenarios and good record keeping and notes are essential to support look back investigations (investigations where you are looking back to capture risks and event detail).
Need to know which tools to use
If you only interview half of the witnesses in your case, you’ll be lucky to get even half of the story, as it will all depend on which people hold the information. On some occasions you will luck onto all the answers with the first witness, but is this a risk you want to take? The same can be true in IPC investigations if you don’t think about the tools or sampling methods you want to access from your toolkit. Is your main focus on using bacterial culture? Do you have a method that will work even if the patient is on antibiotics? If you are looking for a viral cause, what method is best? PCR is not PCR is not PCR. You can look for RNA, or DNA, you can extract from different volumes and different types of samples. The pros and cons of all of which need to be considered. Putting together a sampling strategy in response to an investigation is like choosing the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle whilst knowing that you are not going to have all of the bits. You want to choose pieces that give you the best chance of accurately guessing what the picture is.
In IPC there are various pieces of documentation that will help with thinking in this area. Documents like the UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (UK SMIs) can help guide thinking linked to which samples might be useful to take. UKHSA also has various documentation linked to outbreak investigation with specific organisms and interpretation criteria, such as measles, C auris, and TB. At the end of the day however, just like your detective walking into a murder scene, you will need to work out how to apply that guidance to what you see in front of you.
It’s all about the clues
Once you have investigated and questioned your witnesses then you need to be able to work out from your clues which pieces are useful and which are your red herrings and may lead you astray. Like all investigations the most important thing is to be methodical but you then need to make time to be able to think and reflect. Poirot famously once solved a case without leaving his front room, just by being able to sit and question those involved. I’m not saying that this is something we should try in terms of IPC, but I do think it holds some lessons for us about the power of thinking time. Especially when you are in the midst of an outbreak there is often a real drive to be seen to be doing something, responding to everything, and constantly doing more. After 20 odd years in micro/IPC I think I’m beginning to think that Poirot may have been onto something.
If you are constantly changing or adding in responses it can be really difficult, even if you reach resolution, to know which thing you did made the difference. Early on in an outbreak it can be easy to rush into making recommendations prior to having gathered all the information you need. It sometimes feels good to call an exposure meeting the minute you get the information that an event has happened. For instance, you may have days to respond in the case of something like a chickenpox (incubation period 8 – 21 days), before those patients become a risk to anyone else. Therefore waiting to call a meeting until you have gathered all the clues, until you know everyone’s immune status, levels of exposure etc, can mean that your meeting is so much more effective in managing any risk. Waiting until you have a decent action plan for where you might search for clues, i.e. sample, may mean you find the answer so much more quickly then having to go in for multiple attempts. Taking a breath and putting thought before action may mean you get to the final result so much faster. So utilise those Little Grey Cells!
Not everyone takes kindly to be investigated
IPC should not be about blame, but just like the house guests in a country house murder may not take kindly to a visit from Inspector Japp, some occupants of your ward may be less than happy to see IPC walking up to the nurses station. Although I talk about the similarities between IPC and detectives, we should not be feared and act like police, or worse than that judiciary. Often the reason why Jessica Fletcher gets further faster in finding the murder than the police at the scene is because she is seen as just another friendly visitor rather than someone looking to find fault. Her focus is on building and utilising relationships in order to gather information. She is often seen by the other witnesses involved as being part of their team, and the outputs of her investigations are often linked to co-production of outcomes by sharing information, rather than going it alone.
In general, as in many areas of working life, relationship building is key. You see Jessica all the time in Cabot Cove, not just when there’s been a murder. That means that by the time she finds the body she already knows most of the players and has built up relationship capital with those involved. This enables her to sometimes ask the challenging questions. I believe the same needs to be true for IPC. If clinical teams only see us when things go wrong, they are automatically going to be somewhat defensive. If they see and work with us when times are going well, as well as less well, they are more likely to feel we’re in it together with shared ownership. All of which means we may also get to the source that much faster when we need to.
Sometimes there’s a twist in the tail
There are a number of famous Agatha Christie stories where the murder victim turns out to not actually be dead, I won’t spoil them here. The same can be true for IPC cases. There are certain organisms, of which Adenovirus is my personal favourite, that can both cause primary infection and then go latent and reactivate later. Often this reactivation is linked to immune status, and of course many patients in hospital have immune systems that are doing less well. These present challenges as you can look like you have a cluster of cases but, due to the type of patient, they can all be independent findings that happen to cluster together. So, without the right investigations you can call ‘murder’ when actually there is no corpse. Being happy to hold your hands up and step down when you have new information is an important trait, but knowing to get the testing done to enable you to do so is even more so.
The other scenario that can happen is, as Sherlock Holmes famously said, “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth“. There will be things that have been done, behaviour that has occured, that you would never imagine or predict. Over the years I’ve found a lizard in a bathtub, olive oil used as skin care by parents, and all kinds of things in fridges and freezers, just as the tip of this iceberg. Things that out in the real world would probably not be a risk, but in the healthcare world can lead to all kinds of issues, none of which would be on my primary list of questions when trying to identify a source. The world continues to surprise me, and therefore in the world of IPC keeping enough of an open mind to to respond to the unexpected is essential.
It’s a team sport
Poirot has Hastings. Morse has Lewis. Sherlock has Watson. Tuppence has Tommy, and Jessica has most of the population of Cabot Cove. Solving crimes benefits from teamwork and IPC is no different. I’ve spoken about the importance of relationship building but doing IPC investigations well benefits from more than even that. One of the key ways these partnerships work is by creating the space where the discussion and reflection we’ve already talked about can happen. In healthcare, which is far from a contained setting with only a handful of key players, being part of a team can also provide vastly more eyes and insight into what happens in reality.
The Hawthorne effect is a type of human behaviour reactivity in which individuals modify an aspect of their behaviour in response to their awareness of being observed
One of the reasons that it’s important to undertake a team response within IPC is that if I turn up, a stranger or less frequent visitor on the ward, then those on the unit may behave differently because I’m there. If you see IPC hanging around a sink, for instance, then you may suddenly focus way more on your hand hygiene efficacy then you would otherwise. If I go to speak to a family, they may say different things to me than they would to the bed space nurse they see everyday. In order to get the full picture I may not always be the right person to ask the questions. Being fully integrated, being seen as part of the team, or having relationships with people that are, can make all the difference in terms of the success of your activity. Everyone benefits from having a Hastings to send in to ask questions from time to time.
No greater satisfaction than being part of the denouement
I don’t know about you but I just love the moment that everyone gathers at the end of a Christie novel and detective starts the process of walking everyone through all of the different clues, red herrings, and witness statements. The moment when you discover if you’ve picked up on everything that was on offer to you, and even more than that, the anticipating of waiting to hear if you’ve put it all together in a way that a) works and was b) actually correct.
I feel the same way when I finally have that moment when I crack the case, when I find the source, or even just get to the point where I understand a tricky result. The hallelujah moment when you look down at the jigsaw pieces you have and you can finally see the full picture. It’s the reason that some of our favourite investigative successes live on for years in teaching and case studies. I will talk about the case of the Norovirus and Biscuit Tin to anyone who will listen even now. The settings may be different but every detective, whether in a novel or in healthcare, loves to regale others with their exploits. We just can’t help ourselves. My excuse is that sharing the learning helps is all. That said I’m off to attend a talk called ‘How to kill people for profit’. I’m assuming it will give me all the tips I need to be the next cozy murder success and maybe even weave in the odd IPC detective drama moment into the mix.
This post was supposed to be something quite different. It was supposed to be about One Heath and a great podcast created by Beckman Coulter I was involved with in 2024, alongside some really inspiring people. In some ways it still is that, but because of the cruel reality of life it is actually also something quite different.
”Going Macro on Micro” is a podcast that Dr Simon Doherty and I were involved with that explores emerging themes and pressing issues in the world of microbiology. As the host, Dr Lough, says the podcast covers everything from investigating the global challenges of infection control to unveiling the future of diagnostic technologies.
The week the final episode of the podcast dropped, before Christmas, I got some pretty devastating news. Sadly Simon has passed away. Now, I didn’t know Simon well. We’d emailed since doing the podcase together and I kept an eye on the awards he received and his really interesting posts. In this limited contact though, he still managed to inspire. Recording the series with him was such a privilege. He was kind, open and funny. More than that he was so knowledgeable and I came away feeling like I’d learnt so much. I am so sad that I won’t be able to build on the foundation we laid to continue to learn from him and talk about the challenges/opportunities that face us in the fascinating world we both inhabited. I thought about not sharing these episodes when I heard the news, but then decided that I don’t want you to lose out on the honour I had of learning from him direct. I hope that you will hear both his wisdom and his challenge, and also aspire to do better, as I do, as a result. Thank you Simon.
I’ve decided to keep the focus on Simon and just put some graphics and links here that might supporting learning more about antimicrobial resistance and One Health. At some point when the loss of Simon has had a little more time to be processed I will think about writing something in a little more depth reflecting on his comments and the overlap between human health and veterinary medicine. Until then, the links to the episodes are below:
Ahmad Nayeem , Joji Ronni Mol , Shahid Mohammad. (2023). Evolution and implementation of One Health to control the dissemination of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and resistance genes: A review. Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
Episode One
Rhouma, M., Soufi, L., Cenatus, S., Archambault, M., & Butaye, P. (2022). Current Insights Regarding the Role of Farm Animals in the Spread of Antimicrobial Resistance from a One Health Perspective. Veterinary Sciences, 9(9), 480. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9090480
Episode Two
Sanseverino, Isabella & Navarro, Anna & Loos, Robert & Marinov, Dimitar & Lettieri, Teresa. (2018). State of the Art on the Contribution of Water to Antimicrobial Resistance. 10.2760/771124
Episode Three
Sanseverino, Isabella & Navarro, Anna & Loos, Robert & Marinov, Dimitar & Lettieri, Teresa. (2018). State of the Art on the Contribution of Water to Antimicrobial Resistance. 10.2760/771124
Episode Four
Sanseverino, Isabella & Navarro, Anna & Loos, Robert & Marinov, Dimitar & Lettieri, Teresa. (2018). State of the Art on the Contribution of Water to Antimicrobial Resistance. 10.2760/771124
Episode Five
Sanseverino, Isabella & Navarro, Anna & Loos, Robert & Marinov, Dimitar & Lettieri, Teresa. (2018). State of the Art on the Contribution of Water to Antimicrobial Resistance. 10.2760/771124
Episode Six
Sanseverino, Isabella & Navarro, Anna & Loos, Robert & Marinov, Dimitar & Lettieri, Teresa. (2018). State of the Art on the Contribution of Water to Antimicrobial Resistance. 10.2760/771124
The World Health Organisation (WHO) talks about it like this:
Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) occurs when bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites no longer respond to antimicrobial medicines. As a result of drug resistance, antibiotics and other antimicrobial medicines become ineffective and infections become difficult or impossible to treat, increasing the risk of disease spread, severe illness, disability and death.
I think it’s easy to forget that although AMR is a big part of the professional life of most Infection Control and microbiology professionals, even for other healthcare professionals it features less often, let alone for members of the public. It can be surprising therefore when you do go out and about, or even just talk to friends and family, to hear some of the ways that non infection professionals think about how AMR works and who it impacts.
Common misconceptions I hear when talking to people about AMR:
It’s the body that becomes resistant to antibiotics
I have never taken antibiotics so I cannot get a resistant infection
Antibiotics treat all types of infection
Antibiotics can be stopped when the symptoms stop
Only infected patients can transmit antimicrobial resistance
If you reflect on some of these myths, it’s actually pretty easy to understand how they come about. Most people are focused on themselves and act from a human centric point of view. Many people give little, if any, thought to the multitudes of living bacteria that co-exist in their bodies. Once you accept this as the starting point, most of these myths are actually based on pretty small mental leaps. If, however, you don’t switch your point of view before you start having conversations about AMR, you can unwittingly end up reinforcing the very misconceptions you were aiming to address.
One of the reasons that I think this post is timely right now, is that I am already seeing more posts linked to how we should not be putting artificial medications into our bodies, alongside the back lash against vaccines, and so it seems to me a good time to remember what a difference these, now common, medical interventions have made to the lives of individuals and public health in general.
Let’s start with a little bit of context
Hardly any of us will have living memory of life without access to antibiotics and what life was like in a world without vaccination. One way to really get a feel for the impact these common interventions have made is to look at the impact in the last 30 years on reducing child mortality (death). Even in this recent time period, massive progress has been made due to advances such as the rota virus vaccine, but also in getting more global access to antimicrobial therapy where it is most needed.
Public health is multi factorial, with impacts being cumulative and made by more than just one thing, so not all of these impacts are made by antibiotic and vaccine availability. Other steps to reduce death linked to infectious disease include everything from clean water and sewer systems to pasteurisation and other means of food safety controls. The impact of these combined approaches is massive, but as the UN sustainable development goals show us, those of us who are access to clean water are not actually in the majority and more is yet to be done to ensure equality of access.
To aim to undo some if not all of this century plus of progress is something I find pretty hard to process. If you’ll forgive the momentary indulgence, I have to state that I think the current anti-vaccine and general anti medical stance that is being seen within some groups and communities is ultimately an act of extreme privilege It’s a privilege to be able to choose not to access something that is readily available to you and not available to others. It is a privilege not to have to live first hand the consequences of what the alternative might hold. It’s also a privilege to be able to change your mind and choose to access something later. Thinking of things in this light doesn’t necessarily help with having conversations in a supportive and open way when some of the underlying thinking may be so different, but it may mean we can flip the dialogue from one of imposition to one about the power of choice, and supporting evidenced based decision making for all.
Where does AMR come into this?
There’s a big stat that everyone quotes about more people dying from AMR than cancer by 2050, with an estimated 10 million deaths. As a scientist, I get the need to quantify and use numbers, as a human being however, I find that numbers that are so big can just be off-putting. They are so large it can make us, as individuals, feel powerless to impact them.
For me, the reason this conversation is so important to have in the right way, and pitched to the right communities, is because if we are going through a period of global push back against the common interventions, such as vaccination, that have successfully reduced mortality and provided first line protection, then our final line of defence in terms of treatment is now even more vital. 2050 isn’t that far away, and we are already seeing consequences linked to more resistant organisms being identified in severe infections. Therefore, the time to be having conversations and really raising awareness to impact decision-making is now. Sadly, this is coinciding with a period of time when trust in healthcare professionals and science in general feels very low. Instead of being defeated by this, however, we need to use it a driver to really focus on how we can do it better.
One of the other reasons that AMR is both important and challenging to communicate is that it is always in constant flux. You can’t just learn about it and move on. The mechanisms change, the diagnostics change, and the interplay of all of these factors within the bacterial host interactions can make it even more complex and hard to engage with. To exemplify this, the figure below was something I saw posted on Bluesky and fell in love with, as I adore the fact that it lists all kinds of routes to AMR in a single image, thus capturing the complexity of what we’re dealing with.
That said, you don’t have to understand all or any of this image to understand the core of why AMR is going to be a problem moving forward. The main thing to take away from it is that AMR is complicated, and as a result you will hear many different messages linked to it, and those messages will continue to change as we learn more and the impacts are felt differently. As a result, it can then sound like we don’t know what we’re doing, or just end up really off putting, as there isn’t one clear message we are getting out there for people to cling onto. We, therefore, need to build this flexibility into messages and link around core themes rather than trying to talk in absolutes. Otherwise, we risk losing more of the public confidence than has already occurred.
What is being done nationally?
This year, a new version of the UKs National Action Plan for confronting AMR has been released and within it there is a strong focus on the acknowledged need to educate both members of the public and healthcare professionals on AMR.
There is also plenty in there about increasing equitable access to antimicrobials, the need to improve diagnostics to help support both diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship, and something that pleased me greatly, a special mention of the role of the built environment in managing AMR.
The thing is, top-down approaches will only ever get us so far. At some point, those of us involved in all things infection also need to be consciously including some of these drivers in our own every day practice.
No one can do everything, but whether you are collaborating with industry, undertaking research, or working in clinical practice, we have to embed AMR based action into our encounters. Do you include an AMR slide into all of your teaching? No matter the audience? Do you take the moment when it comes up with friends and family to just talk about the fact that this issue exists? Can you free up some capacity and undertake some public engagement?
Recognising there is a need is not the same thing as addressing that need, and we also have to be there to hold strategic partners and organisations to account in order to make sure action happens. So, let’s consciously match that top-down approach with a bottom-up drive for change.
What resources are there to help talk about AMR to other professionals
Having talked a lot about the need to talk to other healthcare professionals and seeing so much about #WAAW this year, it does really feel progress is being made to support us all to do this better.
Those of you who are UK based have probably heard of and support the Antibiotic Guardian programme (https://antibioticguardian.com/). This programme has lots of resources and supports personal action by asking you make a specific pledge about what you will undertake linked to addressing AMR.
Every year, new infographics come out that talk about different aspects of AMR. Some of these, like the one above, link AMR into commonly known components of healthcare practice, such as hand hygiene, in order to support individuals to feel empowered to act. Others focus more on messaging about antibiotic courses, or as we heard a lot about at the FIS/HIS conference last week, things like IV to oral switches, and sending the right samples to enable a switch from broad to narrow spectrum antibiotics. There’s plenty of ones out there now that can be really useful to embed in talks or laminate and put up on walls. The UKHSA especially have recently released a lot for WAAW, and because there are so many, you can keep them on rotation so that they don’t just become invisible as people see them too frequently.
I’ve also been involved in creating various content this year, as have many others, including webinars and podcasts to explore some of the issues linked to AMR and provide different routes via which healthcare professionals can engage with information and CPD on this topic. I’ve included a link to just one of these below in case it’s of interest, but a quick internet search will provide you with all kinds of others.
The main thing to remember is that we all like to receive our learning in different ways, and so ensuring that we remember that when we’re designing our education strategies is one of the best ways to be impactful.
What resources are there to help talk about AMR to members of the public
The resources you might want to use linked to AMR will vary greatly based on your target audience. It’s important to remember that even if someone is a healthcare worker they are also a member of the public, and depending on their personal background or setting they work in, utilising content created for the general public may serve both purposes.
There is some really great video, podcast, infographic, blog, and other content aimed at public outreach on AMR. There’s even a musical called The Mold that Changed the World, about Fleming and Penicillin, as the first antibiotic.
There are lots of different entry points when you are thinking about content that might be appropriate, and you’re likely to go to different depths depending on whether you are doing a one off encounter or a more prolonged piece of relationship building.
The post that is linked to at the start of this article on AMR as a Super Wicked Problem may help with choosing your content. You may also want to consciously address some of the myths mentioned at the start or even start your conversation with the fact that many antibiotics actually started as products identified in nature, and so are not as far from natural compounds as may be frequently thought.
Some of you who have been reading this blog for a while will know how proud and passionate I am about The Nosocomial Project, which aims to use a science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics (STEAM) approach to talk about infection and infection risks.
As part of this work, we organised a two part festival linked to AMR entitled Rise of the Resistance Festival. All of the content is split across YouTube and the website. I’ve included linked here in case any of it is useful in your own settings when you are looking for inspiration or planning content. The content covered in the festival included everything from a play aimed at pre-school aged children entitled Sock the Puppet, who is a hand puppet who is scared of germs, expert panels, comedy sets, and Klebsiella as a drag queen. I still have so much fun rediscovering this content, and I hope you’ll feel the same way.
I would make a plea that we all work together on this one to do some myth busting and get messages about AMR out there, but also find a way to get messages across that are entertaining/joyous and filled with hope for what we can achieve, rather than focusing on the horrors of what happens if we don’t get our act sorted. I think all of us, including healthcare professionals, have had our fill of trauma in the last few years. So, let’s focus on empowerment and positivity to make this change happen, rather than following in the footsteps of those who want a world of decisions driven by fear.
I’m off to the Federation of Infection Societies (FIS) conference this week. I’m involved in 3 sessions over 2 days, and in many ways, these types of events are a complete highlight for me. I get to be inspired by hearing new science, I get to catch up with wonderful colleagues who I don’t get time to see very often, and I get to immerse myself in all things microbiology without the distraction.
There is another side to this coin, however, and that is both the anxiety that builds before I go, and that can last throughout the whole event. The ever-present spirals of ‘do I know anything?’, ‘will I say something stupid?’, ‘will I know anyone?’, and the classic ‘do any of these people actually like me?’.
The combination of this social anxiety with the, sometimes long, very peopley days, can mean that I hit spirals pretty easily and the lack of solo recovery time means that I can find it pretty exhausting by the end.
Now, I’m obviously not talking about extreme cases of social anxiety that may require informed medical or long-term support. I’m talking about situational anxiety that most of us may find ourselves in from time to time.
Just in case there is anyone out there in a similar boat, I thought I might put together some things I’ve learnt along the way that help manage some of my anxiety traits and enable me to actually enjoy the experience rather than dreading it.
Do your prep work ahead of time
The first thing I’ve had to learn is that I can’t just pretend that doesn’t happen. I can’t wish it away. What I can do is be prepared and make sure that I have made the process as trigger free as possible.
For me, this is about simple things, like getting a hotel as close to the venue as possible. It means that if I just need a 30-minute alone break, I can take one. It removes anxiety about getting lost or forgetting something crucial and not having time to go back for it, which, although minor, can be the final straw. It’s also about making sure that I have pre-found all the rooms I need to locate ahead of time, so I know where I’m going, and that ahead of multi-day meetings I have a plan for which sessions I’m going to before I even travel to the event.
Know your triggers
I know that I have a few things that really lead to anxiety, but perhaps more unique to me, is the fear that I was have an auto immune attack and won’t be with people who understand what is needed. I learnt early that the best way to cover this one off is that I very rarely travel alone, especially over seas. I often travel with my mum or one of a very small list of truly trusted people, who I know would understand how to get me help if required.
Something that is more likely to strike a cord with others, is that I am also the girl who has walked into conference rooms, spent 15 minutes and walked out, as I knew no one and was just overwhelmed. I’m not proud of these moments, but I think it’s important to acknowledge that they have occurred. Although, to be honest, when they’ve happened, I mostly felt invisible, so I doubt anyone noticed.
I have discovered that I need to know that the space is one where I feel welcome for me to perform at my best. This sense of welcome can be either intellectual, because of the topics covered, or because of feeling a sense of community, as the room contains people within my field or in strong alignment with my values. I’ve found the overwhelming feeling hits most strongly when I’ve been in very large political or strategic sessions, where I felt out of my comfort zone on both intellectual and community counts.
That said, I’m not too bad in the sessions themselves, I’m there to learn something new, and learning excites me even now. It’s the breaks that are my nemesis, especially when large groups all surge into a space at the same time, and the weight of expectation that you must now network lands. The seconds that feel like hours of desperately searching for faces you recognise and being forced to face the fact that yes, you really should go up and speak to that absolute stranger, as it’s the right thing to do. It’s these moments that can cause me to bolt for the nearest bathroom.
Carve out time for yourself
One of the key mechanisms I’ve identified to help with my triggers is that I make sure I have enough time to myself, be that eating food away from the venue so I feel more certain what it contains and less at risk, to making sure I have evenings to myself to process and unwind.
I usually come over as really social, and really into spending time with people, and I am both of those things. I also only have a limited amount of social battery, and so in order to maintain that extrovert part of myself I have to have recharge time. I love talking to people about this blog, I love hearing about and responding to other peoples work, but at a certain point I need to sit down with an audio book and a cup of tea in order to do it well. This means that when I go through the brochure ahead of time, and plan my sessions, I make sure that I have enough blocks of time to enable me to be my best self when I’m in the space with others. Sometimes all you need is a walk to a local coffee shop and back to give you the perspective you need.
The wonderful thing about having hit my 20th year as a Healthcare Scientist, is that I now also know quite a few people, some of whom I’ve known for well over a decade. This means that at most events, there are also people who I count not only as colleagues but as friends. People that I can just go and spend time with that doesn’t include social commitment. Those friends you have that you can just be in the same space without any demands being made. If I’m at an event where these people are also attending, then I know that I have someone I can just excuse myself to catch up with if I’m having a moment. It’s also the great thing about ensuring that you have a hotel room nearby. Your safe bolt hole is only minutes away.
Make an agreement with yourself about how much is enough
The fact that you have social anxiety does not provide a free pass to escape one of the fundamental purposes of attending conferences, networking. It’s key to your career, it’s key to your development, it needs to happen. The thing is that there are varying degrees of what networking can be, and before you’re in the space, you need to decide what level you are aiming for and will therefore achieve. For me, my deal is that I will, on each day, speak to one person I don’t know. I am not allowed to finish my day without this happening, but once I have had that one daily interaction, then any further moments are a bonus. Once that one challenging moment is over with the pressure is off, and then I almost always over achieve on my goal.
Be realistic about how much you can expect of yourself
The key thing I’ve learnt is that I have to realistic when I’m making that deal with myself and deciding on achievable targets. For me, there is not point is saying I will speak to five people I haven’t met before, as I’ll just be setting myself up for failure. You will also find that I rarely sign up for conference dinners, as I have over the years found that if I’m in a space with other people from 08:00 – 18:00 I will really struggle to then spend yet more time with other people, no matter how lovely or interesting those people are. All I will want at that point is room service, tea, and a movie in my room.
Everyone will have their own tolerances and lines. The important thing is to have enough self reflection to know what yours are. Otherwise, you just add guilt into the anxiety mix, which is not much fun for anyone.
Learn how to work a room using tools you are comfortable with
One of the other things that I’ve learnt about myself, is that although I get super anxious standing in a room trying to approach someone at the coffee table, I am much much more comfortable moving around the exhibitor stands. The guys at the exhibitor stands are motivated to speak to those who approach, and there are usually science based discussions that I am eager to have. This, for me, is a match made in heaven, as it breaks me into the speaking to people I don’t know in a very gentle way. If I’m lucky, I will also meet others when I’m wandering around, which will allow me to tick my ‘speak to one stranger box’ as exhibitors do not count on that front. The added bonus is that I also often manage to find cool new stuff I’m interested in or develop collaborations whilst this is happening, so it’s a no lose scenario for me.
The other thing that having worked for 20 years has given me is the opportunity to be asked to be involved with sessions. For this girl with social anxiety, this is actually a great thing, despite the fact that it sounds like it should be stressful. I’ve never minded public speaking in the same way as I worry about 1:1 interactions. When I speak, all I can do is put my best foot forward and hope that others will be interested in what I have to say. For the most part, if people don’t engage they will just leave and not give it another thought. On the positive side though, if people find what you say interesting enough to want to speak to you afterwards, this a great way to tick the ‘speak to one person you don’t know box’ and as they are approaching you all you have to do is respond. I find this so rewarding, but I also appreciate how fortunate I am to have this type of opportunity and how much it helps me manage to get the most out of events.
Prepare your exit strategy
One of the important things to bear in mind, and which I often forget, is that others do not necessarily feel the same way about social requirements. I struggle when people arrange evening meals at meetings when you’re already booked to spend a full day together. I understand the purpose, it’s lovely to build bonds and memories, and logistically it’s easier. I rarely, if ever, hit the end of the meeting day and wish to spend the few hours downtime I have with others, over reading in the bath however. There are frequently times I can’t opt out of these moments, but where I can, I will often have a pre planned reason to excuse myself. Often, this is work related, as I will always genuinely need to do some email catch up, and doing this after dinner means working till midnight. I don’t lie but I may pre-plan my rationale for not being available to support both my work load and my mental well being. I will never not pre-inform, as that is rude. People will have budgeted and made arrangements, so I will never last minute drop, but if the option arises I may flag unavailability at the planning stage.
Don’t succumb to expectations and pressure
People are amazing and much more welcoming than you expect. I’m always counting myself as so fortunate is be asked to unexpected drinks, meals and catch ups at conferences. I have learnt that I need to not get caught up in the moment and end up crossing the carefully curated boundaries I have put together, in order to ensure that I can last the social distance of the conference. I’m a planner for a reason and I don’t riff off the plan well. I also struggle with saying no. This means that there have been multiple times when I’ve said yes to that dinner, or those drinks, and have then suffered the consequences afterwards. Now, I work hard to keep to my boundaries so that I don’t make life harder for myself. This can be surprisingly difficult as all these invites are inclusive and well intended, I just have to remind myself to make the sensible choice to enjoy the entire event, rather than burning out after a single evening.
Know that this is an essential part of the job, so invest in coping strategies early in your career
The truth is that networking and attending these kinds of events is essential. They are a fundamental way of hearing the latest science and expanding your knowledge. They are also key for collaboration and building your networks, as well as dissemination of your work. No matter what anyone says, I have found that science fields tend not to be meritocracies, there’s plenty of ‘who you know’ involved, and the only way to address that is to get yourself out there. So you will need to learn how to navigate these settings, and the earlier in your career you manage that, the more rewards you will reap.
I’ve talked about some of my own pitfalls and things that I’ve implemented to help me, but you will have your own triggers, and each response will need to be customised to yoi and your needs. What is true for all of us is that you are not alone, and if you are in need of someone to speak to during the horror of a break, then I am always happy to be your person. This is what I look like and I will never turn you away.
Know that it gets easier
The longer you hang on in there, the easier it gets, honestly. I haven’t walked out on an event in a decade, although the toilet hiding is still a little more frequent 🤣
Pre manage your expectations of yourself and make sure they are reasonable
Book with a group or a friend if you can to take the edge of socialising with strangers
Join a social network, as you can use it to find like-minded people, and it can give you a virtual introduction rather than the cold approach
Similarly, join a society. Societies often have small meet-ups either before events or at meetings, and so you can make connections in a smaller, less intimidating space
Submit work. It’s much less intimidating if people come and speak to you rather than the other way around
Know it’s absolutely OK to need to tap out and have your own space, but make sure this is pre-planned so you don’t miss the reason you came to the event
Right, well, having talked about the need to be prepared. I haven’t even packed yet, so I’d better get on that. If any of you are Liverpool bound, make sure you come and say hi. I’m there Wednesday and Thursday.
All opinions in this blog are my own
If you would like more tips and advice linked to your PhD journey then the first every Girlymicrobiologist book is here to help!
This book goes beyond the typical academic handbook, acknowledging the unique challenges and triumphs faced by PhD students and offering relatable, real-world advice to help you:
Master the art of effective research and time management to stay organized and on track.
Build a supportive network of peers, mentors, and supervisors to overcome challenges and foster collaboration.
Maintain a healthy work-life balance by prioritizing self-care and avoiding burnout.
Embrace the unexpected and view setbacks as opportunities for growth and innovation.
Navigate the complexities of academia with confidence and build a strong professional network
This book starts at the very beginning, with why you might want to do a PhD, how you might decide what route to PhD is right for you, and what a successful application might look like.
It then takes you through your PhD journey, year by year, with tips about how to approach and succeed during significant moments, such as attending your first conference, or writing your first academic paper.
Finally, you will discover what other skills you need to develop during your PhD to give you the best route to success after your viva. All of this supported by links to activities on The Girlymicrobiologist blog, to help you with practical exercises in order to apply what you have learned.
It has not been a great week for science, with many of us being concerned about how the presence of a vaccine denier on the successful ticket to the white house will impact public health initiatives and the quality of science communication in general. I’ve been thinking a lot about how we got here and how, even more than previously, embedding good science into mediums that are routinely accessed by the majority, will be crucial in ensuring the reach of accurate science communication when some of the more standard public health routes are bound to suffer in the coming years.
I think it will be a surprise to none of you that I am a bit of a lover of TV and movies, we’ve also covered a number of book reviews linked to this blog, and I like nothing better than snuggling down with a good book and a cup of Darjeeling. What does any of this have to do with anything? Infection, infection control, and science in general is a huge chunk of my every day, but this isn’t the case for everyone, or even most people. Many people are passive absorbers, meaning that they may not search out information but take on board when they encounter it when going about their lives. This means that the quality of what they encounter may be hugely variable, depending on how and where this happens. I’ve previously talked about the quality of the science in some of the books I enjoy, including the News Flesh series, as well as posting last week about how infection control is represented the Alien movies for Halloween. These are fun posts to do, but it made me think of the most popular movies that are linked to infection out there. How good is the science they represent? and by doing this better, could we support science literacy in general?
IMDB list of Top 25 Virus/Pandemic/Epidemic/Infection Movies
In order to think about this more detail I hit the Internet Movie Database (IMDB) which contains all kinds of lists, including a top 25 of Virus/Pandemic/Epidemic/Infection Movies (https://www.imdb.com/list/ls094715071/)
A Quiet Place (2018) (Girlymicro comment – I don’t know that this should count as it’s an alien invasion film)
Bird Box (2018) (Girlymicro comment – I don’t know that this should count as it’s an unknown enemy film that does not appear to be linked to infection)
Now, I have only seen 16/25 of these, Mr Girlymicro has seen 22/25, so between us we have most of these, so hopefully I’ll be to comment from a position of knowledge on a fair few of these. Before we even start however, as you can see from my commentary on this list, the poor science starts early during the classification of some of these as infection movies, even before we start to talk about the science content of the movie/show itself. Firstly, let’s look at the name of the list = Top 25 Virus/Pandemic/Epidemic/Infection Movies and how it related to the actual definition.
An increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in a specific population and area.
An outbreak, which carries the same definition as an epidemic, but is often used for a more limited geographic area.
The CDC suggests epidemics occur when an agent and susceptible hosts are present in adequate numbers, and the agent can be effectively conveyed from a source to the susceptible hosts. Whereas a pandemic refers to an epidemic that has spread over several countries or continents, usually affecting a large number of people. The starting epidemic is usually due to a combination of factors including:
A recent increase in amount or virulence of the agent,
The recent introduction of the agent into a setting where it has not been before,
An enhanced mode of transmission so that more susceptible persons are exposed,
A change in the susceptibility of the host response to the agent, and/or
Factors that increase host exposure or involve introduction through new portals of entry
So you can see from the above that a number of movies on this list don’t actually count under the terms linked with to the title. Some of them are alien invasion, some of them are climate change related, and one is even on the topic of bioremediation. Yet there they are on the list.
For some of the others, I’ve already covered their concept during my Zombie post, so I’m not going to go through these in this blog, but focus instead on the ones that fulfill the epidemic based criteria. That said, give me a shout if you’d like a more in-depth zombie comparison post as Train to Busan is an awesome movie, and I’ll accept any excuse to re-watch it.
Let’s start at the very beginning
The first film on the list is Outbreak, a film that came out in 1995, with a description of ‘A team of Army doctors struggle to find a cure for the deadly Motaba virus that was transported from Africa to North America by a white-headed Capuchin monkey and is now spreading quickly throughout a small California town.’
This movie has an amazing cast, but I have to say I don’t want any of them in my team if it came to trying to lock down a high risk infection from an unknown source (vector). In terms of the escape monkey component. You’d think that it is far fetched, and if you’d asked me yesterday I would have said just that, but just today on BBC News there was a story on 43 escaped monkeys from a research lab in the US. So far fetched it may be, but not unheard of, in the case of vector escape.
Even if the vector component may not be quite as unlikely as I’d previously thought, I’d like to say that the rest of the practice in this is highly suspect at times. That said, I do have to admit, that I once went to a talk by a scientist who was looking for viral transmission sources of haemorrhagic fevers in Africa. They showed pictures of the table where they performed autopsies on found deceased animals in the jungle, under the same canopy as the table where they then sat down for dinner. So, as much as the way that high consequence infectious diseases (Ebola etc) are not portrayed as accurately as I’d like, maybe this is a movie of its time, as was that lecture. I really want to enjoy this movie, as it so defined how many of us had our first introduction to outbreaks and what they could mean, but almost 30 years on I don’t think I could recommend the scientific accuracy it portrays. The fact that this is still the top rated movie does not bode well for our scientific literacy hopes.
What a difference a decade makes
Almost 15 years after Outbreak, Contagion was released in 2011. This was the first of the infection movies on this list that I saw after I’d started working within Infection Prevention and Control. Contagion is described as ‘Healthcare professionals, government officials and everyday people find themselves in the midst of a pandemic as the CDC works to find a cure.’ I remember going to see this with a scientist friend and whooping out loud at the explanation of an R0, it gave me so much joy I was shushed by someone else in the cinema, to my ongoing shame.
The CDC defines an R0 as ‘The basic reproduction number (R 0), also called the basic reproduction ratio or rate or the basic reproductive rate, is an epidemiological metric used to describe the contagiousness or transmissibility of infectious agents.’ So, see if you share my joy at how the movie explains what this is, in a way that is so much more approachable than the CDC definition:
This film is not perfect, I clearly remember losing my mind about the glove use at one point, and SPOILER ALERT, it was that poor glove use that meant I was OK with one of the characters dying, but the underlying science is well explained and some of the approaches to containment and vaccination are definitely well routed in evidence. The differences in the quality of embedded science between Outbreak and Contagion are highly noticeable. Part of me wonders if some of the drivers for this heightened quality is linked to awareness of the topic due to the 2009 Swine Flu pandemic, or whether this was part of a wider shift towards improved factual grounding in these kinds of movies.
When talking to Mr Girlymicro about this movie, whilst writing this post, he has pointed out that despite my enjoyment he found it an act of ultimate depression which he will not be watching again, and that was when he watched it before the pandemic. It may therefore be, something that triggered my science joy may, in fact, be too depressing or triggering for other reasons to equate to true enjoyment for the general public. This may be an example of something that could risk being dis-engaging by being too close to the truth, despite being second on the IMDB list. Especially in a post pandemic world, this is a line that may prove difficult to walk and prove to be a barrier to movies and TV on this topic being commissioned in the short to medium term.
A completely different movie about primates
Still on viruses and re-visiting our primate theme from Outbreak comes Rise of the Planet of the Apes , which was also a 2011 release. It came out the same year as Contagion, and in the same discussion as Mr Girlymicro stated he would not re-watch that movie, for all the accuracy of it’s science, he would watch Rise repeatedly, and I can testify that in fact he has. Rise has the following description ‘A substance designed to help the brain repair itself gives advanced intelligence to a chimpanzee who leads an ape uprising.’ This is a really interesting addition to the category, as the pandemic aspects of it are mainly actually addressed in the closing credits which demonstrate how a pandemic can spread across the globe, with the film very much focused on the human (and primate) story behind the build up.
This film utilises a viral vector to try to address and revert brain abnormalities linked to Alzheimer’s, with a scientist desperately trying to find a cure for his father, whilst undertaking clinical trials on primates. Now, the clinical trial aspects of this film could not be further from the reality, and any scientist caught undertaking clinical trials and then sneaking the medication to treat their father would at best be fired and at worst been imprisoned. Somehow, because of the focus on the relationships rather than the science, the bad science in this movie bothers me significantly less than that represented in Outbreak, possibly because it feels deliberately portrayed as more like science fiction than science fact. There are some aspects of science to this one that I find interesting and like. The idea of a vaccine or medication behaving differently across species barriers is something that is interesting and could be deeply seated in evidence based plot-lines. I am aware, in this age of post truth and vaccine denial, having a film that focuses on how a vaccine or treatment could end life as we know it may not play into the goals I’m wishing to achieve using popular culture.
Let’s not forget about fungi
In recent years there’s been a rise in the quality of TV and the amount of choice has exploded, especially on streaming and other services. The switch to being able to film big budget TV over shorter film equivalents has provided storytellers with the capacity to really explore bigger and more complex tales that may not have been possible in under 3 hours.
This is last and most recent entry onto the IMDB list and is also the only TV entrant. It is our first step away from the world of viruses, into the world of mycology and all things fungal. The Last of Us came out in 2023, although it’s based on a computer game that was released in 2013. The series is set ‘after a global pandemic destroys civilization, a hardened survivor takes charge of a 14-year-old girl who may be humanity’s last hope.’ This is therefore a great combination of the way different mediums impact popular culture. The plot asks big questions about how far you would go to get a cure for the world, how much is one persons life versus the possible saving of mankind. It’s a real homage to the power that vaccination could hold to impact the world, and how when one isn’t available how desperately people might act in the search for a cure. This is the only entry on the list that came about post pandemic, and I think it is because of that (despite being a parallel to the game) that really resonates on where that desperation comes from, and despite the current vaccine back lash, shows how different outcomes could be.
The very first scenes of the series are a flashback interview from before the pandemic where a scientist talks about what they think the next bit pandemic will be, and I have to say the whole scene brings me unacceptable levels of science joy.
Anyway, this one played so much into my particular ball park that I worked with Liv Gaskill at ID Transmission on a series of articles that talked about the science behind both the Last of Us computer game and the resulting TV series, which pretty closely followed the same plot. This four part series was a real joy to be involved with and so I’m hoping that you might enjoy them too:
I wonder if fungi will be increasingly represented in this genre a) due to the success of The Last of Us and b) as viruses feel a little too close to home these days and so the fungal world might feel like a safer sand box to play around in. This could provide a safe way to have accurate science portrayal, alongside entertainment, as the real prospect of a fungal pandemic is thankfully pretty small.
A shocking oversight
We’ve reached the end of the list, but not the end of the blog post as I want to address an appalling over sight on the IMDB list, and that is the omission of The Strain on the list. This is also a TV series, where season 1 was released in 2014, covered a series of 3 books, and ran for 4 seasons. The series is described as ‘A mysterious viral outbreak with hallmarks of an ancient and evil strain of vampirism ravages the city of New York.’
The strain – episode one, season one
There are many reasons why I love this series (and at some point I should do a vampirism and infection blog to include things like Ultraviolet) is that some of the main characters are epidemiologists linked to the CDC and so some of the science exposition as part of the job based discussions is very pleasing. The other reason I like this series is there is a definite bait and switch, in terms of the causative agent, with all the initial dialogue being linked to your standard viral outbreak, with a gradual reveal that the culprit is actually a parasite. This adds a layer of interest as the approaches to dealing with transmission really start to reflect this, and provide an interesting change as the characters are also forced to pivot and discuss the differences. So, the use of a non-viral infection is not as unique as some of the coverage of The Last of Us may imply. That said, the general science outside of the epidemiology in this definitely becomes more to serve the horror plot than feasibility as time progresses.
Where are the bacteria?
You’ve survived ~3000 words of outbreak talk, covering viruses, fungi and even parasites. You may however be struck by the lack of bacterial cause in any of these listings. I’ve been thinking about this whilst I’ve been writing this blog and I’ve come up with a few thoughts as to why this might be the case:
Too close to home – many people have experienced bacterial infections themselves in their loved ones, sometimes with tragic consequences. It may be hard to therefore suspend belief enough to enjoy the offering. I wonder if this will be true to an extent for viruses now, or whether popular culture will be a safe way to explore collective trauma linked to the pandemic
Too slow – one of the features of many of the scenarios in these movies and shows is that the impact to fast and significant. This an important aspect of making events have real risk and in raising tensions. If accurately portrayed bacterial infections may be too slow in their impact OR the deterioration is so quick there is insufficient time for viewer engagement
Not dramatic enough – bacterial transmission (as described by R0) are not going to be as dramatic as their viral counterparts, so if you subscribe to ‘go big or go home’ this transmission route is probably not the one to drive a sprawling plot-line forward
Too commonly encountered – there are 101 medical shows which have bacterial infections and their consequences featured and so they may be too close to a different genre
The science is pretty hard to get right – as people are more familiar with the topic the less story flexibility there is and the greater the need to not be too jarring for those you are trying to engage. At least in the UK, many people will have been taught about Typhoid Mary and the John Snow Cholera outbreak, and so may have some familiarity. It may also be that these also make people think of the past, and this is not the feel many of these properties are trying to evoke.
So maybe bacteria are a harder sell, although I’d be intrigued to throw a little antibiotic resistance into the mix, or some bacterial toxin related drama and then see what cool things could be done as a result. Maybe that might be my future project 🙂 Let me know if you think that there is a bacterial based film/series that I’ve missed.
It’s Halloween weekend, and in previous years I’ve talked about all things Zombie and infection transmission. This year, though, I thought we talked about something a little different, infection control precautions through the lens of the Alien movie series. Most importantly, I’m going to talk about those initial interactions with the unknown that we frequently see in both these movies and in infection prevention and control (IPC), and whether we too would open the door when someone presents at the air lock?
Spoiler warning! This post is going to mention things that happen in various Alien movies. If you haven’t seen them it may, therefore, contain spoilers – the best way to deal with this oversight in your viewing (if you are concerned) is to just get out there and watch them as Alien is the same age as me 😁
This post was inspired by watching Alien Romulus again this weekend, which, if you haven’t seen it is the best Alien movie in forever.
In preparation for the cinema release I also did a re-watch of a number of the movies in the franchise. Just in case you are less familiar, and inspired to do the same, the list includes a variety of films in different sub-genres as listed below:
Whilst watching these I was struck by a number of moments that made me think about behaviours during the pandemic, but also tales of heard of some activities that occurred during the response to the Ebola pandemic and other high risk clinical settings. Not all of these moments would have been massively out of place, in terms of parallels with these films, and demonstrate that both risk assessment and clarity of thinking can be impacted and lead to responses outside of what would be normally expected.
The thing to remember is that there are usually protocols for just about everything, so most of the decision-making should occur and have been thought out long before the situation ever arises. The problems are almost always linked to human factors in the way we respond to stress and unexpected situations, and when the protocols appear to go out the window. So, just like every character and every space ship in the Alien franchise has a protocol for how to behave when they encounter new life, strange situations or sick crew members, every healthcare facility also has protocols to help deal with illnesses we see less often or that get issued when new diseases are encountered. Healthcare facilities may not have air locks, but they do have labs and isolation facilities, so the parallels may be more present than you’d imagine.
Infection is not always obvious
One of the first themes that recurs throughout all the movies is that infection is not always obvious, either to those on the other side of the air lock, or to the individuals outside waiting to come in. Infection with the parasite sometimes occurs when the stars of our show are unconscious, be that due to trauma or medical interventions, and so they are unaware of the Facehugger on character action that has occurred.
In terms of IPC the same if frequently true, both for viruses and bacteria. Some viruses have what is known as a pre-symptomatic phase, where you are infectious to others before you even know you are sick. This was a big problem in the early stages of the SARS CoV2 pandemic. Even for bacteria, when we talk about antibiotic resistant bacteria, most people are colonised and have the potential to act as silent sources without even knowing it, with only small numbers going on to develop infections.
The truth is not always apparent
Even when an individual knows that something has happened, and are aware of their close encounter with Alien kind, the truth of their scenario may still not be apparent to either them or to others. If you look at the Facehugger situation, surely once the terrifying creature has dropped off without apparent poor consequences, then everyone breaths a sign of relief and is grateful for the near miss, not knowing that this is only the beginning. When you combine this with the fact that some people will determine this to be a low risk event and therefore not want to disclose, as they are aware of the inconvenience that will result, you end up in situations where not all the information is available.
This can also be true in real life clinical situations. Patients may not know they have been exposed. Patients may also present with symptoms that they haven’t recognised as significant, or that they have risk assessed themselves and decided they aren’t concerned about and so don’t disclose. This can happen more easily they you think, especially at the start of something, where patients don’t feel particularly unwell, or they just have a couple of vesicles/small rash. In the latter stages, when patients are presenting because they feel unwell, they may be confused or not always able to accurately disclose what’s happened. Occasionally, this may be a deliberate attempt to withhold personal details, but most often it’s because they are rightly focussed on how they are feeling in the moment. Plus, if you asked me to accurately recall everyone I met and everything I ate a week ago, I’m not sure I could, even when well.
By the time you realise the condition is a threat it may already be a risk/out of control
One of the consistent themes across all of the movies is that situations get out of control before anyone truly understands the situation and the risks. It’s only when the person that you breached protocol for suddenly starts to writhe and the horror stands before you in all its glory do you truly understand the implications of the decisions you’ve made. At that point you are trapped in your glass med bay with a growing Alien and your self recriminations are not going to save your life.
This one is a rather more dramatic version of some of the conversations that happen amongst healthcare workers when you phone to give results and have conversations about whether patients had been in the right precautions and the staff member was wearing the right personal protective equipment (PPE). There have definitely been times when staff have made a risk assessment and not followed the protocols about what PPE to wear and have then responded to these phone calls with ‘what can you do?’ in relation to the exposure. Sadly, in some cases there is nothing that can be done once the guidance has been bypassed but to wait and see, which is the reason for the guidance in the first place. Fortunately, for most scenario’s in the real world, the consequence isn’t bloody horror, death and an alien threat to mankind.
Risk assessment is linked to risk management
One of the reasons that protocols are in place in the Alien movies is that someone, somewhere, has obviously recognised the risk of infection in a small contained community where everyone interacts and lives on top of each other. Even in Aliens, when you’re talking about somewhere the size of a colony, this principle stands. This is because you are unlikely to be able to access a clinical trial on a mining ship, or develop a novel antiviral on terraforming mission, even if what you’re importing is a more traditional style of infection, versus an Alien parasite. The extent of the risk mitigations needed will always align to the risk itself. If you are concerned about an introducing something that is untreatable, then your measures are going to be much more extreme than if your infection is likely to just mean someone goes to bed and takes paracetamol for a weekend. If you can’t treat, then prevention is your only option. After 9 movies there doesn’t appear to be a Xenomorph (Alien) cure and so measures taken to prevent allowing one into your space need to match the risk they present.
This approach is definitely seen in response to infection in IPC. If you have a condition that spreads easily, rapidly and can be incapacitating for a period (i.e. norovirus) then you will use a different set of precautions to those that you use to manage something which may not be as transmittable but is untreatable or has life threatening consequences such as a haemorrhagic fever. Having conversations and being open with people about the risks of getting things wrong and ensuring that individuals understand why responses are different in different circumstances are a key requirement for people working in IPC, and something I think we should all endeavour to do better at. I think the days of asking people to blindly follow protocols should probably be behind us, as I think the Alien movies demonstrate that if people don’t get the why, they often ignore some of the core components based on external drivers
So, what lessons can we learn?
Beware of acting on incomplete information
Decisions are consistently made in these movies based on incomplete information, which leads them to underestimate both risk and consequences. A great example of this is the way people use information related to the black goo, especially in Alien Romulus, maybe don’t inject yourself with a substance that doesn’t have a proper name let alone a full data set for you to understand what it does. The other thing is that information is often treated as static, and so there is very little rapid inclusion of new info, rather than being mindful of an iterative response to new data, so help constantly inform and improve your risk assessment. It’s always worth being conscious of when is enough is enough when it comes to information and decision making.
Emotions get in the way of logic
During the movie Covenant, the entire crew is made up of couples. I get this in terms of colonisation, but in terms of good decision making, and in relation to risk this is just a one way route to bad outcomes. There’s a reason that in a certain Zombie series husbands have kept their zombie wives locked in basements rather than removing the risk to them and others. There’s a reason medical professionals should not manage their loved ones. Emotions interfere with logic, and there is no way under this setting you are managing to make decisions without your emotions getting in the way. It’s a reminder that if we become aware that we are in an emotive place, it may be the time to step away and take a deep breath, before making that judgement call or even tap out entirely and allow someone more removed to take our place.
The contrast between human emotional decision making and evidence based decision making, usually undertaken by the android cast, is beautifully explored during Romulus via Andys story arch and is one of the highlights for me in terms of enjoyment.
Science doesn’t change based on how much you wish the outcome to be different
One of the reasons that emotional involvement in decision making can be so challenging is that it can interfere with perspective and accurate interpretation of risk, thus impacting risk perception. Sadly the truth that wishing does not impact outcomes is hard to argue with, but it is human to try to persuade ourselves we have more control and ability to influence the outcome than we do. Under stress, our natural tendencies towards pessimism or optimism are definitely amplified. All of this means that when there is someone at the door banging and begging to be admitted, it is easy to persuade ourselves there is a) enough time to manage to open the door safely and b) the consequences of opening said door will not be as bad as we fear. Emotions don’t change outcomes but we are almost programmed to hope that they can.
An individual will always want to be the 1 in a million
The reason someone opens the door is the same reason that when one character looks at another and utters the fateful and true words ‘it’s too late’, and it almost definitely is, neither one acts before everything gets out of control. Humans are not good at dealing with numbers and risk when they are actively involved in the situation. One of the reasons we aren’t in that we throw sentences around saying it is a 1/million chance. We, as humans, have a tendency to focus the fact that, although it is a long shot, there is a chance that things can go your way. Sadly, as someone who has experienced the opposite, where my sister died in a 1/10,000 pregnancy, someone always need to be the one. The stats work both ways, whereas most of us survive in the world by only focussing on one side of the equation. This therefore impacts our capacity to evaluate any risk in situations we are involved with. Somebody always bears the cost and few of us can bear the vulnerability of acknowledging that that somebody could be us.
The people with the most experience are not always the ones making the decisions
One of the other main themes in these movies is that decisions, when not being made by friend and loved ones, are often being made by people in positions of power, not necessarily based on knowledge or even accepting of prior experience. This works well or not so well based on how well they listen to those who do have the information to help improve their decision making. Chains of command, especially in high stakes scenarios, are not necessarily bad, as we’ve already talked about the risks linked to emotional decision making, but so much depends on how well they work and how they place value on evidence based choices rather than hierarchy.
The other theme here is the trusting of unknown sources, especially ones with no evidence of expertise, over those who have either lived experience or expertise. I think this one resonates a lot right now, when there are so many sources of misinformation out there, and so many conspiracy theories that rely on speculation and rumour. Fact checking is key, be that on a space ship or deciding on your vaccination options.
Not everyone has the same thought processes
One of the other reasons decision making goes astray in these movies is because those involved in that decision making often have undisclosed values, beliefs or drivers that are impacting their choices, and this process is not always obvious to those others involved. This is true from androids that may or may not be obviously androids and who will have programmed ‘primary directive’, as well those working for the corporation. This is interesting as they often have more complete information than the others involved, as well as seeing the situation through a different lens because of how they view the world. This means that they can see others as disposable or views risks different, as they have a set of criteria that they wish to achieve which is more than just survival. Although in clinical life the juxtaposition is rarely so extreme, the challenge of reaching alignment when people come with different world views can definitely impact shared decision making.
Smart people can do stupid things
Having said all of that, smart people can in general do stupid things, even without all of these complications. Even when the experts are the ones making the decisions they can still make the wrong ones, especially when tired, stressed, or lacking all the information. This is the reason why protocols are key, drawn up and decided upon when all of the confounders to good decision making are not present.
You need to follow the standard operation procedures
In the end this entire post has been a very very long way of saying ‘JUST FOLLOW THE SOP!’
Many of these movies but have been much shorter with a much reduced body count, if those involved had just followed the pre-established procedures laid down for their safety. Obviously, we don’t have so many Xenomorphs as a daily risk factor in healthcare, but the same is true for us. SOPs are rarely there for the sake of it, they are there to support decision making so that in times of stress or information overload, you are not having to seek extra information to support good decision making, you have it freely pre-digested and available to you. So the next time you think twice about donning that PPE or the closing that isolation room door, ask yourself ‘would you open the airlock door?’, think twice and do the right thing.
And now for something completely different
Finally, because this is something that has amused me whilst watching these films and is probably not something that I can talk about in general down the pub. The computer in the Alien movies is usually referred to as Muthur, pronounced Mother. I just want to share my joy that the analysis software that is used to help analyse 16S rDNA runs, to give you microbiome analysis i.e. tell you what bacteria are present in your sample, is called Mothur, and also pronounced Mother. I’m sure the two things have nothing to do with each other, but allow me my scientific joy that something which was so ‘other world’ when it came out to me as a scientist has the same name as something imagined from ‘another world’.
Also, if anyone needs a science advisor on their next project, give me a shout as this post has brought me much joy and I think I may have missed my calling 🙂
Firstly, lets start with an apology. I’ve haven’t posted for a month as I’ve been struggling health wise and not really been able to get to a laptop to be able to write. Although annoying, it has given me plenty of time to think about what I might want to write next, so hopefully you’ll forgive me.
Now, onto the present. I’ve been in post for 20 years this month, and have also just spent some time recording a couple of webinars that covered bits about the journey to consultant. It felt timely, therefore, to put something out there talking about my experience of the consultant journey. Word of warning, though, this is only my experience, and everyone’s journey is different. I hope my sharing this it will help others, both in validating the aspiration but also in supporting expectation setting by talking about what it was really like to go through. Frankly, I want to be clear that it is never as linear as it appears from the outside and that that is perfectly OK.
So, let’s start at the very beginning. On my first day in post (all the way back in 2004) I was told that I was on an 11 year programme from trainee to consultant, and boy did I drink that cool aid and believe that would be the truth, after all these people were my bosses, supervisors and mentors. Sadly, it transpired that although they were being inspiring they were also far from being completely honest in terms of disclosing how straight forward, or not, the programme and progression actually were. I am now a Consultant Healthcare Scientist, although it took me 16 years rather than 11. Now I’ve reached the promise land I want to be clear that it was no where near the linear journey that I was sold on recruitment and there was a lot of struggle at every single stage. That being said however, now I’ve crossed the line, I wouldn’t have had it any other way. It was dealing with those barriers and obstacles that made me really decide who I was and what I wanted. It was also where most of the learning was truly at. So I wanted to write a blog post that doesn’t sell the ideal but discusses the realities of what some of those barriers looked like and to make those facing them a) feel less isolated and b) know they can be overcome.
You have to be doing the job to get the job
This one took me a long time to fully comprehend, as it can feel counter intuitive, but you have to already be doing most of the role in order to be able to get the role permanently. It is easy, in moments of frustration, to turn around and say ‘that’s not what I’m paid to do’ or ‘if they want me to do that job they need to pay me for it’. There are definitely times when you need to dig your heels in about workload and boundaries, but this generally needs to be the nuclear option. For the most part, you need to be prepared to roll your sleeves up and jump in to get the experience so that you are well placed to advocate for a post to be created, if that’s your aspiration, or to enable you to apply elsewhere with confidence. For me, I learnt huge amounts when I provided maternity cover for a year as a trainee. It built trust and showed willing to my clinical lead as well as providing me with experiences I would not have had in any other circumstance, enabled me to springboard into my next post, and meant my clinical lead wanted me stay enough they found money at the end of my training. Maintaining an openness to opportunities and an awareness of the fact that stepping up, although not always recognised financially or otherwise, does come with benefits on all sides and is an important part of playing the long game.
There is no single way to get from A to B
When I started, I thought the journey would be straight forward. I’d finish training, I’d get my 4th year funded, I’d get a Clinical Scientist post. Then I would work towards FRCPath and a PhD, hopefully moving into a Principle Clinical Scientist post. Once I’d achieved my tick boxes, my loyalty and hard work would be rewarded and a Consultant post would be forth coming. That’s just not the way work places and budgets work however. On this one patience is THE virtue, and the sooner you can acknowledge that A doesn’t immediately lead to B, the better for your mental well being. That said, the training pathway now available for Healthcare Scientists does make, at least the early stages, more straight forward.
Counter intuitively I’m going to say that, looking back, not having access to the straight forward route has been the most beneficial thing that could have happened to me. I would never have ended up with a clinical academic career if I hadn’t needed to acquire further salary funding and a PhD. I would never have ended up in Infection Prevention and Control if my training programme had been funded for the full four years. So many of the things I value the most only came about because I had to find ways around barriers and due to glorious happenstance. Despite being challenging in the moment, I’m grateful for every detour taken.
When it comes down to it, the person responsible for your progression is you
This one may feel harsh to hear, but no one is as invested in your career as you are. I’ve had a fair few people over years who’ve come to me and said that they deserve to be given X or Y. No matter how true this may be, this isn’t how it works in reality. If you want something to happen, you have to be the driving force to make it so. You are the star of your own movie.
I think a good example, for me, of this was my training programme. I was really fortunate that no one would block anything I wanted to do. The flip side of that coin was that no one sorted anything out on my behalf. It was my responsibility. I could go to any clinic, shadow anyone I wanted to shadow, but I had to reach out to find the contacts and arrange it. I had to have a vision of where I wanted to be and put together the pieces to enable me to get there. This is, in turn, enormously freeing and terrifying. It taught me early to be the master of my own destiny, and this is an important lesson for anyone on this pathway, irrespective of how supportive your surroundings at some point you will have to make it on your own.
You will hear a lot of no
One of the reasons to learn early to be your own driving force is that you will hear a lot of no as you under take this journey, whether that be linked to funding, exams, or posts. If you haven’t set your own direction then it can be hard to keep driving, as you may not be sure what you keep pushing for. As the old adage says, if you don’t have faith in yourself, no one else is likely to.
A lot of the no you hear will not be personal, a lot of it will be nothing to do with you or your skills. That doesn’t stop it from being hard to hear or from it feeling personal when it is not. A key skill that isn’t much talked about is learning how to respond to these challenges. You need to move to a place where you are able to process and move on without carrying that rejection with you. To learn from the moment and then let it go, so you always emerge a stronger, better person for the experience.
You have to know what matters
Something that can really help when facing the barriers and challenges along the way is being really clear what matters and why you are pursuing the choices you’ve made. Why does this route align with your own personal values and beliefs? If you understand your ‘why’ then you can weather the delays. It makes it so much easier to get back up when you’ve taken a knock.
The other side of this, which we don’t talk about anywhere near as much, is the importance of knowing what doesn’t matter. You can’t fight a battle on all fronts, and there will be positions you get into when you discover that you are fighting for something out of habit or without thinking about it. This is a waste of energy that you could be focusing on something that actually matters to you. Developing the self reflection to know when this is the case and using it to remove yourself from the arena is one of the most freeing and valuable skills you can invest in. I learnt this late, and I really wish I’d realised it earlier.
It is not an even playing field
I started this journey as pretty naive. I think I genuinely thought everyone would have a similar set of challenges and barriers to overcome. This just isn’t true. I know people who’ve become Consultants over a weekend with no external advert or interview. I know of trainees who’ve gone from point A directly to point B because their faces fit and everything aligned for them, not many but some. The challenging reality is that sometimes the playing field just isn’t even. Some disciplines are more set up for straight forward progression than others. Some disciplines have a bigger medical leadership who may not understand the role of Healthcare Scientists. In all honesty, being a woman in science is also not always straightforward. The gender issues are not always as obvious, but they are definitely still there, and that’s before we even start talking about other diversity issues.
When confronted with moments where this imbalance becomes apparent, we always have 2 choices, you can quit, or you can continue to fight. One of my core values has always been about parity of access, and one of the reasons I became a Lead Healthcare Scientist was to be in a position where I had the capacity to influence in this area. So when you come across inequality on your journey, whether it’s something you face or become aware of as an ally, I would always encourage you to be the change you want to see and to remember these moments when you are in a position to make life different for those that follow you.
Know that it’s OK to change your mind
So far, I’ve talked a lot about making Consultant, but I think it’s important to talk about the fact that it’s OK to also not want to end up as one. Life is about far more than work, and even in work we all find different sources of joy. The job role as a Consultant is not the same as a qualified Clinical Scientist. You won’t get lab time. There’s an expectation that it’s not a 9 – 5 role, and you will sacrifice a lot to get there, both financially and in your home life. It’s not the right choice for everyone, irrespective of your capability to do the role if you chose. I just wanted to take a moment out to write something that is supportive of starting along this route and then deciding it isn’t for you, for all kinds of different reasons.
Sometimes, I think people feel pressured to continue as ‘I’ve started so I must finish’. I love where I’ve ended up, and it was always my passion. If that wasn’t the case, then I would always support ending up where your passion does lie. That could be in the lab, in education, in quality or leadership. We are so lucky to have so many different options. I’m also aware that I talk about ending up working where your passion lies, and that is also not right for everyone. For many people, that passion doesn’t lie at work at all but with other aspects of their lives, and work is just what enables those things to happen. In my clunky way, I suppose what I’m trying to say is you do you boo and don’t let the pressure of expectation or external influences lead you down a pathway that isn’t right for you.
Bring yourself to every interaction
This all brings me onto something that also took me a long time to embrace. You can’t spend a career spanning decades pretending to be somebody else. For about my first 5 years in post, I didn’t really talk about the things that interested me. I didn’t talk about being a gamer and a geek because I was just really concerned about any judgement and how that might impact my career progression. It took me a while to accept that putting on a front is both really tiring and limits the amount of genuine relationship building you can do.
That said, I acknowledge that it can also be really hard to turn up as your whole self. I know there are some leaders out there who say we don’t owe our full selves to work, but I don’t think I know how to do it any other way. If I want those I lead to share something of themselves so we can build true connections, then I don’t think I can do differently. I’m not saying that everyone has to share every aspect of their lives, but I think I have to lead by example. For me, this means embracing the fact that I am not perfect and that I will have bad days as well as good, and make it OK to talk about those things. For me, that opens up dialogue on coping strategies and deeper dialogue versus pretending that everything is perfect. Everyone brings something different and we should honour that difference by embracing it rather than hiding who we are.
Sometimes, it’s just a case of continuing to show up
I’ve talked a bunch about some of the reasons that making Consultant may involve surmounting or finding a way around barriers. I think one of the things we talk less about is the fact that the thing that often makes the most different is continuous effort. At its heart it’s about continuing to show up, on good days and on bad. It’s about demonstrating commitment and being in it for the long haul.
Now, when I say continuous, no one expects every day to be the same, but there is a consistency linked to intention. If you are clear where your ambition lies and stick to it, it is easier for those around you to also factor that into their thinking. If you are changing the goal and ambition regularly, then can be harder for those trying to support you. It’s not that you can’t change your mind, but you should try not to scatter gun your approach. Making Consultant, to me, like getting a PhD, mostly seems to be about a tenacity of purpose that means you keep showing up, combined with the patience to know it will happen eventually.
Always remember why you started the journey
I think many of you will know that patience is not my greatest asset and so I found the journey so frustrating at times, as I had such a clear vision that was not always shared by others. For this reason, you really need to know that the pursuit of this is right for you, right for you when start, but also stays right for you along the way. It’s that clarity of purpose that can re-centre you when things are tough or when you are facing those no’s. Without it you could easily falter and it may be that it really isn’t the right option for you.
The other reason to have that clarity of purpose is that it is not like reaching the destination transports you to a land of rainbows and bunnies. Consultant roles have their own challenges, and in many ways just having the title doesn’t really change anything. The job is still the job. Therefore, if you aren’t sure along the way, you may just be signing up for more of something that may not be what you want it to be. The flip side of that coin is that if you are sure, and know what you are working for, you are likely to end up in the job you’ve dreamed of and aspired towards for over a decade, and that feels pretty damned good.
The people make the journey worthwhile
I just wanted to finish with something that has struck me more and more as I moved along the stages to becoming a Consultant. Although all the professional stages feel significant, it’s the people I’ve met along the way that I am most grateful for. It’s these people who will stick with you long after the nerves and stresses of an exam are just a distant memory. They will be the ones that guide and pick you up when you hear the no and face the obstacles. They are the ones that, when they celebrate with you, make the celebrations really worthy of the name. So don’t be so focused on putting one foot in front of the other that you forget to look up and find time to develop the relationships that will last a life time.
As Girlymicro has a) got tonsillitis and b) attempting to run the day, todays blog is a guest blog brought to you by frequent Girlymicrobiologist contributors and Environment Network stakeholder members: Sam Watkin and Dr Claire Walker.
It’s the most wonderful time of the year! Today is the Environment Network meeting where we gather together to talk all things environmental risk assessment. This is a network for people in clinical, scientific and engineering roles within the NHS and other associated organisations who are interested in the role of environmental infection prevention and control in preventing infection. Despite being an immunologist (Claire Walker) for most of my career, this is one of my favourite meetings of the year. Everyone is deeply passionate about what they do and how we can work together to exchange ideas and improve practice.
Too kick us off, we have the wonderful Professor Elaine Cloutman-Green and Lena Ciric welcoming us to a day of interactive sessions on key issues in the field. Prof C-G sets the scene for our day introducing the concept of our different perceptions of risk assessment and the challenge of unexpected consequences. Of course we understand the triumvirate of identify, understand and mitigate problems but how an engineer approaches risk is quite different to how a clinician might. As Prof C-G says clinical risk assessment is not a zero harm game, it is about controlling real rather than theoretical harm. A balance needs to be stuck between what is most appropriate for the patient – we could keep patients in bubbles and not even have healthcare professionals approach them, but I doubt that patient would fare very well! There is a need to balance the approach of the clinical and the engineer to find an optimal position to minimise harm. To make these decisions we need to consider the interaction between organism, patient and the built environment in order to work out what the control measure should look like. Problems aren’t simple, we need to accept and embrace that risk assessment is a complex process. And perhaps most importantly we need to take the time to see the perspectives of others, or we might never see the elephant in the room.
Risk assessment has the potential to make use all uncomfortable, as scientists we do not enjoy the unknown. In good risk assessment A plus B does not always equal C, it might do 50% of the time so we have to rely on our best judgement. Moreover, risk is not static. All patient and clinical environments are quite different as we need to pick the point that works for that situation – National guidance can never cover all of these unique situations. A multi-disciplinary team approach is essential to ensure we are asking the right questions.
Next up we have Dr Susanne Surman-Lee giving a talk on combining clinical and engineering risk and why working in silos hinders risk assessments. Silo working at all levels, even within a team, can cause a raft of problems, with poor communication, different priorities, resource conflicts and inefficiencies. This can mean those in each silo work to their desired outcomes, not taking into account what other requirements may be. The danger of this is that it ultimately increases the risk to patients.
A poll found that the event was well attended by people from a range of disciplines, covering many relevant professions to environmental infection control. We often all want different things from a building, be that aesthetic, cost or usability. What is critical, and reflected in new guidance, is that the purpose of a building must be to put the patient first.
To escape working in silos, the audience recognised that communication is absolutely key. Working as a single team, sharing respect, data sharing and fostering a collaborative culture is all needed to break down individual working silos. This enables the project team to work as a single unit, supporting faster, safer decisions across strategic levels.
A set of examples on real-world decision-making processes highlighted not only the importance of accurate record keeping when it comes to decision-making, but also what can happen when an IPC challenge is only viewed through teams working in silos.
When considering waterborne infection risks, a multitude of challenges, both from an engineering and non-engineering standpoint must be considered. This can range from inadequate usage leading to stagnation, poor hygiene during installation and poor labelling, outlet misuse, poor cleaning techniques and inappropriate assessment if transmission risks as examples.
Ultimately, we must consider the problem as a whole. Different hazards and sources of pathogens overlap, meaning we must work across disciplines to mitigate risk. We also must gather information from multiple sources to identify risks to make sure a risk isn’t overlooked.
Updated guidance has recently been produced following an outbreak of non-tuberculous Mycobacteria for the safe design and management of new buildings calls for collaborative working throughout the project, with continual risk assessments and project ownership by the trust. Having a multidisciplinary approach can help effectively design and manage risk, improving IPC risk assessment and decision-making procedures.
In this final session before some essential caffeine, we have Andrew Poplett taking us on a whistle stop tour of derogation management. Derogations, like puppies, are for life – if you agree to one you must be sure as they are extremely difficult to reverse. We know that unless specifically stated much of the guidance in not mandatory. However departure or derogation from HTM should provide a degrees of safety NOT LESS THAN that achieved by following the guidance laid out in the HTM.
A derogation is an exemption from or relation of a standard or rule but it must be carefully managed, documented and justified. It must be risk assessed and cannot be to reduce costs. Of course, the bugs haven’t read the HTMs and they really don’t care about the budget! Minimum standards and patient safety guidelines cannot be derogated, but for those for those ‘nice to haves’ there is some wriggle room. So why do we want to derogate? Situations like conflicting guidance and refurbishment of existing buildings. Once again we are lead to the conclusion that these decisions must be the result of a multi-disciplinary team approach and risk assessments – these decisions can’t be made solely by a financial manager, an engineer, a microbiologist or infection prevention and control, but requires a meeting of minds to reach the right conclusion. The cornerstone of derogations is communication, ideally reaching a sensible and agreed consensus that balances risk, compliance and other important factors (like cost!). Ego needs to be left at the door or we might need to start hiring some referees!
If you break the rules, you really need to document why, what, who and when. It’s not to say that we shouldn’t, as we know every circumstance is difference. But transparency is essential to the process, and they do need to be reviewed regularly. As a final thought, Andrew invites us to consider that it is important to remember that it is always cheaper to invest the time upfront because short cuts tend to end in expensive disaster.
After a quick coffee break, we have Louise Clarke from GPT Consult discussing capturing water and ventilation risks as part of governance strategies. First off, we must understand what risks we actually need to assess and manage. We often have aging infrastructures, changes in usage, hidden infrastructure, access challenges and maintenance works. Not only that, how people use and view spaces factors into the risks we must assess.
When assessing risk, it must be suitable and sufficient. But what does that actually mean? It depends on what you are trying to deliver, what you are looking for and what is being managed. Five-by-five risk matrices do not necessarily capture the complexities of these risks. Not only this, a huge amount od information is required for effective assessment. Factors like patient factors, unique building features, data from building management systems must all be considered. Not only that, but there are a large amount of unknown factors which need to be considered. The current state of a building and the equipment in place is important to consider, with the impact these may have in the future on risk taken into account. Overall risk profiles are needed but challenging to achieve as many people view the risk of a setting from different perspectives.
All risk assessments must be performed within the appropriate legislation. This covers government legislation, approved codes of practice and best practice guidance (such as the HTMs). To ensure that all standards and met and the process of derogation is appropriately followed, governance structures have to be followed. But these structures themselves can be difficult to navigate. The reporting of information gathered from the building (such as information from the building management system) can be challenging through these structures. How do we ensure the data is appropriately recorded, interpreted and presented? Do governance structures effectively allow for this process and make sure that the data collected useful and enables risk assessment? So, how should the data we collect from the building be presented? As with many things, it depends. What the intended use of the information is, how is needs to be interpreted and disseminated all matter.
Typical governance structures include water and ventilation safety groups. These groups serve to bring together estates, infection control, representatives from the relevant clinical units, contractors in order to assess risk and make informed decisions. Are such meetings suitable to address risk? The volume of data that must be presented, understood and used to inform decisions is massive, and these meetings are time-constrained. A lot of the processes will be informed by the risk appetite of the organisation. Information may not be available and work may not be possible. As such, appropriate record keeping and reporting is crucial. Taking this all in, governance strategies which to be implemented must be practical, realistic, effective, suitable and sufficient.
Sadly Dr Derren Ready from UKHSA is enjoying a marvellous holiday so we have a recording from him today. We are venturing into the field of community risk assessments and the considerations that are notably different from in the hospital. There are significant challenges, as highlighted by the consideration of the prison system where an outbreak might further restrain the liberty of the prisoners impacting significantly on their mental and physical wellness, thus careful balances need to be struck. In essence, the challenges of the community require a different set of questions to be answered in risk assessment.
In community risk assessment the first stages fall to information gathering and fact checking. Information gathering might focus on the clinical, epidemiological, microbiological or environmental factors. Context of the information should be considered. In public health we often act on suspicion as time is of the essence. In the initial stages there is often simply anecdotal information and there is a need to all the facts to be checked through this dynamic process.
UKHSA bases its risk assessment of five key areas. The first of which is severity which is the seriousness of the incident in terms of the potential to cause harm to individuals or to the population. This is graded from 0-4 where 0 has a very low severity like head lice in a school whilst class 4 are extremely severe illnesses which are almost invariably fatal, like rabies or Ebola virus outbreaks. The second area is uncertainty, how sure are we that the diagnosis is correct based on epidemiological, clinical, statistical and laboratory evidence. The third area is the likelihood of the organism spreading covered by an assessment of the infective dose, virulence of the organism, mode and routes of transmission, observed spread and susceptibility of the population. Again the areas are graded from 0 to 4 allow qualification of the potential risk. The fourth area is intervention, what could be done to alter the course of the outbreak? This ranges from minimal, non invasive procedures like handwashing to an urgent mass immunisation campaign or withdrawal of all contaminated food products. Clearly some outbreaks don’t lend themselves well to specific interventions an example would include responding to a cluster of vCJD disease where remedial intervention is particularly challenging. The last key area is context. The easiest way to consider this is to think about the broader environment in which the event is occurring. Factors like public concern, attitudes, expectations, strength of professional knowledge and politics have the potential to influence decisions about the appropriate response to an outbreak.
The best way to approach this complex process is through the use of a dynamic risk assessment where the risk assessment is continually reviewed throughout the outbreak. This allows UKHSA to make the best possible decisions based on the best information available. These dynamic risk assessments can be classified an routine, standard or enhanced based on the response required to an event. The take home message is very much that risk is not static and we need robust frameworks to ensure we make the right decision at the right time.
In our final talk of this morning, we have our own soon to be Dr Sam Watkins from UCL/UKHSA. Sam’s research interest in detection of surface based pathogens in the hospital. Surfaces can be come contaminated and play an important role in the spread of infection around the hospital. Once considered tenuous, the role of surfaces in the persistence of healthcare associated infection is now well established for several pathogenic organisms. The current standard is for surfaces to be visibly clean but there is no guidance on assessment of microbiological hygiene of surfaces. It’s extremely important to remember that just because something looks clean, doesn’t mean it isn’t crawling with bugs! Again, we must consider that a one size fits all approach cannot be enforced across the NHS as we have so many different situations and patient requirements.
Sam’s research focuses on development of new tools for assessing surface-based transmission risk. Surface sampling can be many different things from contact agar plates, to specific swabbing or sponges, to PCR identification of specific viruses in a outbreak scenario all of which have different purposes. All of this information can help support clinical risk assessment and the actions of infection prevention and control. Currently surface sampling is most commonly used as a retrospective measure after a clinical incident during outbreaks. Sadly there is little guidance or framework in place to guide process in this area. Furthermore, the identification of a pathogen on the surface doesn’t provide sufficient information on if this is the cause of the outbreak. Sam’s work has been to gather prospective evidence gathering through surrogate markers which mimic a microorganism in the environment without posing any infectious risk. In Sam’s work, he has been using cauliflower mosaic virus across an outpatient and inpatient haematology oncology unit. Three markers derived from the genome of the cauliflower mosaic virus were used and inoculated on various risk level surfaces. After 8 hours the swab samples were collected from pre defined sites. The movement of the surrogate markers across the unit were investigated over the course of five days. Within 8 hours there was widespread movement of the markers across the outpatient unit. A slightly less dramatic spread was noted in the inpatient site. From this we see that there is huge variability in the dissemination of markers, markers deposited on high risk sites where identified in a greater number of places. Paediatrics certainly adds an additional dimension to this work, with children spreading viruses through an exciting game of hide and seek in the department! An important take home message here is that a one size fits all approach is unlikely to be successful, given the highly varied nature of clinical settings. A unique approach to surface-based transmission risk assessment and mitigation may therefore be needed.
With the morning session drawing to a close. We look forward to a delicious lunch, more coffee and interactive case based discussions this afternoon!
If you want to find out more about environmental infection prevention and control and future events you can check out the Environment Network here. Girlymicro has also previously posted about risk assessment and the role of the environment in healthcare settings, links to more posts can be found here. The main theme of the day was that we all need to get out of our silo’s and talk more, so let’s start that change by being bold, starting conversations and getting out of our boxes!
Girlymicro 