COVID-19: HAS PM JOHNSON DONE ENOUGH?

Today Wednesday 23 September I was interviewed live on BBC Radio Oxford by David Prever, 3hr 20min in, available until 22 October.  We were discussing PM Johnson's announcements yesterday, so I talked about four things:

• The 6 months of restrictions in prospect, and what that meant for football clubs, live music and the night-time industry.  "I want to see these places open"
• The "limbo" that the UK Government has put us in, which is by doing "too little too late"
• What the UK Government should have done, which is #NearZero, and sadly a month's lockdown.  Though as light as possible, such as leaving outdoor or well-ventilated hospitality open.  That is why it would have been "easier in the summer", alongside schools and universities being on holiday
• The importance of adequate "financial support" from the Government, and that means for a shorter time than the six months now in prospect.  Lower cost to the Government in support payments and lost taxes

There are some other improtant practical aspects to a lockdown that I didn't have chance to cover on air, but cover here.

David had introduced the conversation by saying "Do the measures go far enough?".   During the conversation, he said on Monday that "the Chief Scientists didn't mince their words, they predict 50,000 cases a day by the end of October" yet for Tuesday's measures "there wasn't a great deal that changed".  Too little, too late.

Half an hour later the news bulletin included a clip (4h00) of a member of the SAGE group advising the Government, Professor John Edmunds of London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicione (LSHTM). He said  “stringent measures... will be too late again... let the epidemic double and double and double... didn’t learn from mistake back in March, and unfortunately about to repeat it”  Precisely.  Too late.  And too little.


WHY #NEARZERO?

There's talk today that the Swedish epidemiologist Anders Tegnell may have visited Downing Street, to share ideas about what Sweden has done.  He had previously said that the Swedish approach wouldn't suit the UK.  Here's an analysis as to why that would be the case.  A key issue is the likelihood of over-running the NHS, even with the Nightingale hospitals in place, though there are also other significant reasons.

Indeed the UK Government had other options, such as New Zealand's "Elimination" approach, known in the UK as "ZeroCOVID".  This has been proposed by the Independent SAGE group and the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Coronavirus in Westminster.  Great ambition, but if New Zealand can't make it work in their geographically seperate situation, how could the UK?  Zero is just not feasible  in practice for the UK.

So what should the UK do?  Here's the analysis of the options, and why #NearZero is best.  Or indeed given no option is ideal, least worst.