COVID-19: CREATING A "FIRE BREAK" BY USING A MASS-SIM SELF-ISOLATION

Better for Lives.  Better for Livelihoods.  Better for the Treasury.

BACKGROUND

This isn't an ideal solution, as there isn't one.  This idea is in recognition that:

• The virus is showing no sign of going away, and indeed will be with us for the foreseeable future
• There won't be a vaccine available in any quantity until 2021.  In any case that assumes successful development of a vaccine, which is not guaranteed.
• There therefore needs to be a strategy better than what the UK is adopting at the moment, to let us and the economy get back to some normality
  
• Elimination of the virus, whilst highly desirable, is not a realistic prospect.  We need to live with it.  But how best to do so?
  
• Cultural and geographical differences between South East Asia and the UK, and between Sweden and the UK, make solutions there not necessarily relevant to UK
• No action is not a realistic option.
• We need a strategy and action in England and UK at least as effective as the first lockdown, but in a much shorter time. 
  

 

INTRODUCTION

This is a big weekend for the Government and the fight against COVID-19.  We are going into the winter with infections far too high right across the UK.

In the North of England the infection rate is still climbing despite extensive restrictions, which clearly aren't working sufficiently.  Anger is building, especially amongst local political leaders in those areas.  

On other parts of the country the infection rates are already rising.  Oxford and Oxfordshire for example have reached "Red Alert" status, but because these areas are lower down the league table, less is being done than when the rate reached Amber.  

The thought of a long second lockdown like we had earlier in the year is not attractive.  We know the side-effects.

But doing nothing is not an option.  The NHS is under threat in those Northern areas and across the country, and we're not yet properly into the winter when the risks are far higher.  

However attractive it might be to follow Sweden's lead, with citizens taking their own decisions on what precautions they take, Sweden's approach simply isn't a sensible option for the UK.  Primarily because the NHS would likely be overrun, even with the Nightingale hospitals.  The ensuing dreadful consequences for COVID-19 sufferers and people with other health issues doesn't bear thinking about.

 

THE NEW RESTRICTION TIERS

It seems that the Government is considering three levels of restrictions, either applied nationally or locally:

• Tier 1:  Light-touch restrictions such as the Rule of 6 and mask wearing, tightened as the British Medical Association (BMA) has suggested

• Tier 2: Restrictions similar to already in place in much of Northern England

• Tier 3: Hospitality venues closed, and a lockdown much like in the Spring, but applied locally

Tier 4 would effectively be a full national lockdown.  Tier 0 would be a Swedish style approach, where very few restrictions such as their ban on gatherings over fifty people.

BUT WILL TIER 3 OR A FULL LOCKDOWN BE ENOUGH?

Tier 1 and Tier 2 restrictions are not working adequately.  So what about Tier 3 restrictions or a Tier 4 lockdown?  

The most likely outcome is only a small reduction in infections in anything under a month, but whole industries decimated.  

WHAT ABOUT THE NEW FINANCIAL SUPPORT OFFERS?

Rishi Sunak the Chancellor has just announced an extention to the new Job Support Scheme, terms JSS+, to make it more like the old Furlough scheme which will be ending at the end of October.  There will also be some extra support for some businesses in Tier 3 areas. 

Reimbursed to those businesses in arrears, many businesses will be unable to support the cash flow if they have no income.

Pending further details, this support package is unlikely to be enough to stop many businesses going to the wall, in which case the jobs that were supposed to be saved will be lost.

There has got to be a better way.  So here's an idea for debate.

A SHORT, SHARP MASSIVE "MASS-SIM SELF-ISOLATION"

As explained here, a short, sharp Mass Simultaneous Self-Isolation would act as a "Fire Break" to substantially remove the virus from circulation.  To be done nationally to be both effective and fair.

Not as a last resort, but as a proactive means to improve lives and livelihoods for millions of people. 

This is not just the Tier 3 restrictions, which have been called a "Circuit Breaker", though a proper Circuit Breaker would be far more restrictive.  

A "Fire Break" would be of fixed short length of two to three weeks, comparable to current Self-Isolation rules.  But to be shorter it would have to be sharper than a second lockdown.  The period would have to be fixed, come what may, and announced to the public as such.

It would mean an extended Bank Holiday with all but 'vital' activities stopped.  That means everyone making sure they have enough food and medicines so all supermarkets, high street pharmacies and other shops could close.   

This should be the case anyway, given the possibility of anyone being asked to self-isolate for 14 days.  I have a combination of:

• Fresh and refrigerated foods for around 7 days, plus
  
• Tins and frozen foods for at least another 7 days, plus
  
• Medicines and other essentials for at least 14 days

I suggest everyone does so likewise in any case.  Then if the Government orders a Fire Break would not be an issue for the vast majority of people.

ESSENTIAL vs VITAL vs TOTAL

In the first lockdown, all but "essential" businesses had to close.  This was the graph of new infections, based on testing of those who displayed symptoms:

Infections down by five sixths in three weeks.  But we want to reduce infection rates further in less than three weeks.

A 'total' fire break would be ideal.  Nobody meeting anybody outside their household for a short period.  But that isn't possible.

A 'vital' Fire Break acknowledges we are in the real world.  But taking out as much contact as we possibly can.  For example that would mean taking out food production and distribution.  Closing supermarkets, meat processing plants and storing imports.

A lower level of contacts than a standard 'essential' lockdown would make a Vital Fire Break inevitably faster to reduce infections.  

 

HOW LONG WOULD THE FIRE BREAK NEED TO LAST?

Any request to self-isolate is 14 days.  Most people display symptoms within 5 days, with a few reputed as going as far as 17 days.

If a household self-isolates together, anyone infectious but not yet symptomatic would infect the other household members in just a few days.  

So we might expect most people self-isolating to have displayed symptoms within 14 days, with a few as much as 21 days.  Anyone symptomatic would continue to self-isolate in accordance with guidelines.

Everyone else can then get on with life with the virus best-part eliminated. 

So 14 days, 21 days, or something in between?  Depends what level of residual undiscovered infections would be likely to exist at each duration.  To be on the safe side 21 days, but hopefully a shorter period would be a better compromise.

WOULDN'T A VITAL FIRE BREAK BE IMPOSSIBLE?

Having worked extensively over the years on Business Process Re-engineering, I am well aware that we need to cover a whole host of issues.  These are technical, logistical, financial, people and political.

There's certainly a number of 'dark orange' issues that will be tricky to handle.  But if there is a will, there is a way.  There is nothing that need be a fundamental red-flag showstopper. 

For example, what about cows and the food supply chain generally?  Whatever's necessary to reduce to the absolute minimum.

The same for industries such as steel furnaces, some of which may need to keep going with minimum staff.  Electricity generation would have to continue, and internet would be regarded as vital. Hospitals, prisons, care homes and domiciliary care would need to continue.  

Overall only the "vital".

The big issue is import of people and goods.  Whilst the borders should ideally be closed for the self-isolation period, thereafter there needs to be far more careful control of people and goods arriving.  The level of virus 'leakage' into the community, as New Zealand has found happens, will determine how long the country could go without needing another Fire Break.

 

IMPLEMENTATION TIMESCALES

We are effectively at war with an invisible enemy.  It is amazing what can be done in short order when needed. 

English schools appear to be coming up to half term:

• Some in week beginning 19 October, a week from next Monday 12th
• Some the following week beginning 26th
• Some both
  

Two weeks' notice seems reasonable.   During which time all the public can ensure they have supplies for three weeks, and all business and Government measures can be decided and put in place.

Announce that on Monday 12th, or the possibility of it to be confirmed later,  and some schools would only need to close for an extra week or two.  Delay, and more schooling would be lost.

 

SO WHY NOT?

A proper "Fire Break" in the form of a short sharp Mass-Sim Self-Isolation would be worth a shot.

At best it would allow the economy and life to get back to near-normal at a very low #NearZero level of infections.  That would be for some weeks or months before another Fire Break might be required:

That's at best.  At worst it would put us in a far stronger position going into the winter.

It should save Christmas for everyone, and help ensure students can go home.  Releasing many benefits for us all.

Better for Lives.  Better for Livelihoods.  Better for the Treasury.

Surely an idea worthy of serious consideration?

,