A/HRC/45/12 preparedness, despite repeated alerts from international authorities about the grave risks presented. 33. In most countries, the ability to take bold, decisive action to prevent exposure to the COVID-19 virus was made more difficult because of an underinvestment in the progressive realization of socioeconomic rights; better realization of those rights could have helped to mitigate the impact on national economies. For example, acknowledging the possibility of an outbreak similar to the SARS outbreak faced in 2003, health officials and researchers identified various measures that needed to be taken, including improving housing conditions to prevent crowding.29 34. The pandemic has revealed the serious fragility of health-care systems and infrastructure worldwide, in terms of shortages of human resources and equipment. This can be attributed not only to the current disruption of global supply chains, 30 but also to decades of privatization of, and funding cuts to, health-care systems, which left countries and their hospitals unprepared and unequipped to manage the unforeseen crisis, causing a collapse of hospitals and considerable delays in the responses to the pandemic. In addition, a shortage of testing capacity, which hindered contact tracing, led to a proliferation of regional outbreaks, and places of concentration of infection going undetected for some time. This included places of high risk, such as hospitals and retirement homes, which also lacked protective equipment, contributing to a large increase in the number of infections registered nationally. 35. The COVID-19 pandemic is exposing the deep divide in how health care is understood in different countries. While some countries have systems that are publicly funded and almost entirely free for anyone, others, including some high-income countries, do not have universal health care, with many citizens unable to pay for treatment and private medical insurance. Once more, the economically and socially disadvantaged groups are the most affected, with limitations on access to health care. Evidence suggests that, in many countries, more centralized, solid, publicly funded systems with universal coverage and a strong chain of command and control could have responded better to the crisis. Such systems have been more suitable for scaling up testing faster, coordinating responses, pooling resources, reducing death rates and guaranteeing essential health services for all. Other human rights, such as to water and housing, have also been neglected, contributing to the inability to effectively prevent exposure among huge swaths of the population. 2. Science, policy and participation 36. The role of science in responses to the coronavirus crisis was, unsurprisingly, critical. The rejection of the science of COVID-19 has strong parallels to the rejection of the science of the deadly impacts of pollution and toxic chemicals. The cost to economies of taking late action or lifting restrictions too early has arguably been greater than what the impact would have been had strong measures been taken quickly and retained adequately. 37. With respect to exposure to hazardous substances, an overwhelming number of States are unwilling to question bogus economic arguments, cowardly citing scientific uncertainty and incomplete financial narratives to delay taking measures that are unfavourable to powerful interests, but nevertheless required to fulfil human rights and the duty owed to the public. As COVID-19 infections rose, far too many States did not heed the advice of their public health experts. Instead of following scientific advice to adopt more rigorous testing and containment measures, certain government leaders proffered disingenuous arguments in support of their approaches, particularly the economic justification of not imposing a lockdown, effectively sacrificing the lives of their citizens, in particular those in low-income and minority communities, workers and older persons. 38. Some political leaders have gone as far as to treat the virus as a “little flu”, contributing to, in their countries, the highest number of infections and deaths registered 29 30 See www.who.int/gard/publications/The_Global_Impact_of_Respiratory_Disease.pdf. See www.who.int/westernpacific/internal-publications-detail/critical-shortage-or-lack-of-personalprotective-equipment-in-the-context-of-covid-19. 9