I'm frankly surprised they should be surprised about this - wanting to talk to a hospital about their issues with resistant germs is like asking a restaurant about the roaches in their kitchen...
Without a public conversation about resistant bugs, the causes (drug overuse) will never be addressed.
Funny, I've been to plenty of conferences and talks about it and I've never seen a journalist.
They just want to churn out articles like this one: FIND OUT ABOUT THIS ONE DEADLY BUG THAT NOBODY WANTS TO TALK ABOUT. No surprise they get few responses.
The article whose reporting this one focuses on [0] is quite long and strikes me as being well-researched, thorough in its explanations, and not over the top in its take on the issue. Sure, there's a little bit of intrigue, but that just makes for interesting reading.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/06/health/drug-resistant-can...
At least someone is not doing their job, it seems, which is when journalism is most important.
1) Nolan Principles of Public Life https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-...
> 5. Openness
> Holders of public office should act and take decisions in an open and transparent manner. Information should not be withheld from the public unless there are clear and lawful reasons for so doing.
> 6. Honesty
> Holders of public office should be truthful.
2) The Professional Standards Organisation's Standards for members of NHS boards and Clinical Commissioning Group governing bodies in England
> Honesty: I will act with honesty in all my actions, transactions, communications, behaviours and decision-making, and will resolve any conflicts arising from personal, professional or financial interests that could influence or be thought to influence my decisions as a board member
> Openness: I will be open about the reasoning, reasons,and processes underpinning my actions, transactions, communications, behaviours,and decision-making and about any conflicts of interest
We could argue that the principle of "Duty of Candour" applies. https://www.cqc.org.uk/guidance-providers/regulations-enforc...
In England I'd be pushing hard for these hospitals to be more open about what's happening and what they're doing to fix it.
If a restaurant has roaches it's their own fault. If a hospital has to fight back a resistant germ it doesn't show they did anything wrong.
Restaurant's don't create viruses, they just pass them on, usually unwittingly (and sometimes despite good hygiene practices) but one nasty outbreak traced to a restaurant can destroy a reputation (and kill a business).
The classic case being Heston Blumetnthal's 'Fat Duck' restaurant where 240 people suffered gastroenteritis (nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea) due to norovirus, probably carried in Oysters:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2011/dec/05/fat-duc...
Who is to blame here? Maybe the Oyster farmer, but maybe the distributor. It could have been a single employee with norovirus in the restaurant (or anywhere in the distribution chain).
Most likely no-one did anything wrong and this was just "one of those things"
"We also received full support by our insurers who found no fault in our practices following a report from a leading UK independent specialist. There is still no guaranteed safety measure in place today to protect the general public with regards to shellfish and viral contamination. For this reason we still do not serve oysters or razor clams at the Fat Duck."
> Restaurant's don't create viruses
They can dramatically amplify the viral / bacteria presence though. Norovirus is pretty nasty (potentially fatal). Very small amounts of norovirus will cause illness. This is why excellent hygiene is needed in restaurants.
Fat Duck was slow to respond to the incident; they had staff working who should not have been working due to sickness; they were using the wrong cleaning products.
http://www.elizabethonfood.com/files/Liesbeth%20Auerbach/fil...
Saying "Fat Duck was criticised for poor food hygiene practices" is a little different to saying "Several weaknesses in procedures at the restaurant may have contributed to ongoing transmission."
The report simply says that they relied too heavily on using alcohol gels which don't work so well on norovirus.
It also says that they are unsure if it was The Fat Duck's staff that continued to infect customers or if the Oysters they continued to use continued to be infected.
Yes, excellent hygiene is needed in Restaurants but excellent hygiene won't always stop a norovirus.
One thing not mentioned here (that I suspect might be a factor) is that restaurants that serve tasting menus are more at risk of causing an outbreak like this. If everyone eats a large number of identical courses each with a diverse number of ingredients the possibility of one of those ingredients infecting a large number of people is surely greatly increased.
> The classic case being Heston Blumetnthal's 'Fat Duck' restaurant...
The Fat Duck is still open, has three Michelin stars and is booked out months in advance. Possibly not the best example of a reputation being destroyed or a business being killed.
It lost a Micehelin star for a while which is often portrayed as a disaster for a restaurant but, as you rightly point out, it bounced back.