Coronavirus

[Spy Bee]

3 minutes ago, TheHowieLama said:

Don't take it too personally man but you have to accept that you have spent the last 6 months of your life trying to downplay the severity of the situation using data and "studies" from possibly the biggest rag-tag bunch of "experts" ever assembled. For you, a pivot from there to a strategy that protects the most vulnerable is going to be met with some skepticism.

 

I'm going to take exception with the rag-tag bunch of experts bit. These are scientists, with lots of experience and qualification in the relevant fields. To dismiss them, reflects badly on you, not me.

 

I have tried to offer balance, where mainly there is only hysteria. I am as frustrated as everybody else, and I would like to see a plan in place.

 

I bid you farewell.

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, Spy Bee said:

(in some rather sad tag team news, Animal out of Legion of Doom has died, at the age of just 60)

No way?! 

[TheHowieLama]

1 minute ago, Spy Bee said:

I'm going to take exception with the rag-tag bunch of experts bit. These are scientists, with lots of experience and qualification in the relevant fields. To dismiss them, reflects badly on you, not me.

 

I have tried to offer balance, where mainly there is only hysteria. I am as frustrated as everybody else, and I would like to see a plan in place.

 

I bid you farewell.

Dude - you quoted an out of work opthamologist's opinion as gospel.

[Sugar Ape]

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

And many more are agreeing the opposite. 

 

1 hour ago, Spy Bee said:

Evidence that.

Will this do?

 

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/09/21/covid-19-an-open-letter-to-the-uks-chief-medical-officers/

 

Covid-19: An open letter to the UK’s chief medical officers

September 21, 2020

 

A group of experts have written to the UK CMOs and GCSA, expressing concern about a second wave of covid-19

 

Professor Chris Whitty; CMO, England
Dr Frank Atherton; CMO, Wales
Dr Gregor Ian Smith; CMO, Scotland
Dr Michael McBride; CMO, Northern Ireland
Professor Patrick Vallance; Chief Scientific Adviser, 

 

Dear CMOs 

 

We write to express our grave concern about the emerging second wave of covid-19. Based on our public health experience and our understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we ask you to note the following: 

1. We strongly support your continuing efforts to suppress the virus across the entire population, rather than adopt a policy of segmentation or shielding the vulnerable until “herd immunity” has developed. This is because:
   a) While covid-19 has different incidence and outcome in different groups, deaths have occurred in all age, gender and racial/ethnic groups and in people with no pre-existing medical conditions. Long Covid (symptoms extending for weeks or months after covid-19) is a debilitating disease affecting tens of thousands of people in UK, and can occur in previously young and healthy individuals.
   b) Society is an open system. To cut a cohort of “vulnerable” people off from “non-vulnerable” or “less vulnerable” is likely to prove practically impossible, especially for disadvantaged groups (e.g. those living in cramped housing and multi-generational households). Many grandparents are looking after children sent home from school while parents are at work.
   c) The goal of “herd immunity” rests on the unproven assumption that re-infection will not occur. We simply do not know whether immunity will wane over months or years in those who have had covid-19.
   d) Despite claims to the contrary from some quarters, there are no examples of a segmentation-and-shielding policy having worked in any country. Notwithstanding our opposition to a policy of segmentation-and-shielding, we strongly support measures that will provide additional protection to those in care homes and other vulnerable groups.
2. We share the desire of many citizens to return to “normality”. However, we believe that the pandemic is following complex system dynamics and will be best controlled by adaptive measures which respond to the day-to-day and week-to-week changes in cases. “Normality” is likely to be a compromise for some time to come. We will need to balance suppressing the virus with minimising restrictions and impacts on economy and society. This is the balance that every country is trying to find—and every country is having to make trade-offs. This might mean moving flexibly between (say) 90% normality and 60% normality. We believe that rather than absolute measures (lockdown or release), we should take a more relativistic approach of more relaxation/more stringency depending on control of the virus.
3. Controlling the virus and re-starting the economy are linked objectives; achieving the former will catalyse the latter.  Conversely, even if policies to promote economic recovery which cut across public health objectives appear successful in the short term, they may be detrimental in the long term.
4. As evidence accumulates for airborne transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, measures which would help control the virus while also promoting economic recovery include mandating face coverings in crowded indoor spaces, improving ventilation (especially of schools and workplaces), continuing to require social distancing, and continuing to discourage large indoor gatherings, especially when vocalisation is involved. With measures like these, much of society will be able to function effectively while keeping the risk of transmission relatively low.
5. As we move beyond the acute phase of the pandemic, it is important to restore routine medical appointments (e.g. for long-term condition review and patient concerns that may indicate new cancers). We believe that a combination of remote appointments (online, phone and video) plus face-to-face appointments with appropriate personal protective equipment will allow this to happen safely. We recommend a communication campaign to inform the public that the NHS is now open for most routine business.
6. In a complex system, we should not expect to see a simple, linear and statistically significant relationship between any specific policy intervention and a particular desired outcome. Rather, several different policy measures may each contribute to controlling the virus in ways that require complex analytic tools and rich case explanations to elucidate.
7. While it is always helpful to have more data and more evidence, we caution that in this complex and fast-moving pandemic, certainty is likely to remain elusive. “Facts” will be differently valued and differently interpreted by different experts and different interest groups. A research finding that is declared “best evidence” or “robust evidence” by one expert will be considered marginal or flawed by another expert. It is more important than ever to consider multiple perspectives on the issues and encourage interdisciplinary debate and peer review. While government must continue to support research, some decisions—as you will be well aware—will need to be made pragmatically in the face of uncertainty.  

 

We thank you for your continuing efforts to get us through the pandemic. 
 

Trisha Greenhalgh, Professor of Primary Care Health Sciences, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

 

 

Full list of signatories:

 

Dr Nisreen A Alwan, Associate Professor in Public Health, University of Southampton.

 

Professor Debby Bogaert, Professor of Paediatric University of Edinburgh.

 

Professor Sir Harry Burns KBE, University of Strathclyde and Past Chief Medical Officer, Scotland.

 

Professor KK Cheng, Professor of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Birmingham.

 

Dr Tim Colbourn, Associate Professor of Global Health Epidemiology and Evaluation, UCL Institute for Global Health.

 

Dr Gwenetta Curry, Lecturer of Race, Ethnicity, and Health, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh.

 

Dr Genevie Fernandes, Research Fellow, University of Edinburgh and Action Team Member, Royal Society's DELVE Initiative.

 

Dr Ines Hassan, Senior Policy Researcher, Global Health Governance Programme, University of Edinburgh.

 

Professor David Hunter, Richard Doll Professor of Epidemiology and Medicine, University of Oxford.

 

Professor Martin McKee, Professor of European Public Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Past President, European Public Health Association; Research Director, European Observatory on Health Systems & Policies.

 

Professor Susan Michie, Director of UCL Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London.

 

Professor Melinda Mills, Director, Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science, University of Oxford; Member of Royal Society’s SET-C (Science in Emergencies Tasking – COVID) committee; Member of ESRC/UKRI COVID Social Science Advisory group.

 

Professor Neil Pearce, Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

 

Professor Christina Pagel PhD MSc MSc MA MA (Professor of Operational Research & Director of the Clinical Operational Research Unit, University College London.

 

Professor Maggie Rae, President, Faculty of Public Health.

 

Professor Stephen Reicher, Professor of Psychology, University of St Andrews.

 

Prof Harry Rutter, Professor of Global Public Health, University of Bath.

 

Prof Gabriel Scally, Visiting Professor of Public Health, University of Bristol.

 

Professor Devi Sridhar, Chair of Global Public Health, Edinburgh Medical School.

 

Dr Charles Tannock, Consultant psychiatrist.

 

Prof Yee Whye, Professor of Statistics, University of Oxford.

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, Sugar Ape said:

 

Will this do?

 

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/09/21/covid-19-an-open-letter-to-the-uks-chief-medical-officers/

 

Covid-19: An open letter to the UK’s chief medical officers

September 21, 2020

 

A group of experts have written to the UK CMOs and GCSA, expressing concern about a second wave of covid-19

 

Professor Chris Whitty; CMO, England
Dr Frank Atherton; CMO, Wales
Dr Gregor Ian Smith; CMO, Scotland
Dr Michael McBride; CMO, Northern Ireland
Professor Patrick Vallance; Chief Scientific Adviser, 

 

Dear CMOs 

 

We write to express our grave concern about the emerging second wave of covid-19. Based on our public health experience and our understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, we ask you to note the following: 

1. We strongly support your continuing efforts to suppress the virus across the entire population, rather than adopt a policy of segmentation or shielding the vulnerable until “herd immunity” has developed. This is because:
   a) While covid-19 has different incidence and outcome in different groups, deaths have occurred in all age, gender and racial/ethnic groups and in people with no pre-existing medical conditions. Long Covid (symptoms extending for weeks or months after covid-19) is a debilitating disease affecting tens of thousands of people in UK, and can occur in previously young and healthy individuals.
   b) Society is an open system. To cut a cohort of “vulnerable” people off from “non-vulnerable” or “less vulnerable” is likely to prove practically impossible, especially for disadvantaged groups (e.g. those living in cramped housing and multi-generational households). Many grandparents are looking after children sent home from school while parents are at work.
   c) The goal of “herd immunity” rests on the unproven assumption that re-infection will not occur. We simply do not know whether immunity will wane over months or years in those who have had covid-19.
   d) Despite claims to the contrary from some quarters, there are no examples of a segmentation-and-shielding policy having worked in any country. Notwithstanding our opposition to a policy of segmentation-and-shielding, we strongly support measures that will provide additional protection to those in care homes and other vulnerable groups.
2. We share the desire of many citizens to return to “normality”. However, we believe that the pandemic is following complex system dynamics and will be best controlled by adaptive measures which respond to the day-to-day and week-to-week changes in cases. “Normality” is likely to be a compromise for some time to come. We will need to balance suppressing the virus with minimising restrictions and impacts on economy and society. This is the balance that every country is trying to find—and every country is having to make trade-offs. This might mean moving flexibly between (say) 90% normality and 60% normality. We believe that rather than absolute measures (lockdown or release), we should take a more relativistic approach of more relaxation/more stringency depending on control of the virus.
3. Controlling the virus and re-starting the economy are linked objectives; achieving the former will catalyse the latter.  Conversely, even if policies to promote economic recovery which cut across public health objectives appear successful in the short term, they may be detrimental in the long term.
4. As evidence accumulates for airborne transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, measures which would help control the virus while also promoting economic recovery include mandating face coverings in crowded indoor spaces, improving ventilation (especially of schools and workplaces), continuing to require social distancing, and continuing to discourage large indoor gatherings, especially when vocalisation is involved. With measures like these, much of society will be able to function effectively while keeping the risk of transmission relatively low.
5. As we move beyond the acute phase of the pandemic, it is important to restore routine medical appointments (e.g. for long-term condition review and patient concerns that may indicate new cancers). We believe that a combination of remote appointments (online, phone and video) plus face-to-face appointments with appropriate personal protective equipment will allow this to happen safely. We recommend a communication campaign to inform the public that the NHS is now open for most routine business.
6. In a complex system, we should not expect to see a simple, linear and statistically significant relationship between any specific policy intervention and a particular desired outcome. Rather, several different policy measures may each contribute to controlling the virus in ways that require complex analytic tools and rich case explanations to elucidate.
7. While it is always helpful to have more data and more evidence, we caution that in this complex and fast-moving pandemic, certainty is likely to remain elusive. “Facts” will be differently valued and differently interpreted by different experts and different interest groups. A research finding that is declared “best evidence” or “robust evidence” by one expert will be considered marginal or flawed by another expert. It is more important than ever to consider multiple perspectives on the issues and encourage interdisciplinary debate and peer review. While government must continue to support research, some decisions—as you will be well aware—will need to be made pragmatically in the face of uncertainty.  

 

We thank you for your continuing efforts to get us through the pandemic. 
 

Trisha Greenhalgh, Professor of Primary Care Health Sciences, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

 

 

Full list of signatories:

 

Dr Nisreen A Alwan, Associate Professor in Public Health, University of Southampton.

 

Professor Debby Bogaert, Professor of Paediatric University of Edinburgh.

 

Professor Sir Harry Burns KBE, University of Strathclyde and Past Chief Medical Officer, Scotland.

 

Professor KK Cheng, Professor of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Birmingham.

 

Dr Tim Colbourn, Associate Professor of Global Health Epidemiology and Evaluation, UCL Institute for Global Health.

 

Dr Gwenetta Curry, Lecturer of Race, Ethnicity, and Health, College of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine, University of Edinburgh.

 

Dr Genevie Fernandes, Research Fellow, University of Edinburgh and Action Team Member, Royal Society's DELVE Initiative.

 

Dr Ines Hassan, Senior Policy Researcher, Global Health Governance Programme, University of Edinburgh.

 

Professor David Hunter, Richard Doll Professor of Epidemiology and Medicine, University of Oxford.

 

Professor Martin McKee, Professor of European Public Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Past President, European Public Health Association; Research Director, European Observatory on Health Systems & Policies.

 

Professor Susan Michie, Director of UCL Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London.

 

Professor Melinda Mills, Director, Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science, University of Oxford; Member of Royal Society’s SET-C (Science in Emergencies Tasking – COVID) committee; Member of ESRC/UKRI COVID Social Science Advisory group.

 

Professor Neil Pearce, Professor of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

 

Professor Christina Pagel PhD MSc MSc MA MA (Professor of Operational Research & Director of the Clinical Operational Research Unit, University College London.

 

Professor Maggie Rae, President, Faculty of Public Health.

 

Professor Stephen Reicher, Professor of Psychology, University of St Andrews.

 

Prof Harry Rutter, Professor of Global Public Health, University of Bath.

 

Prof Gabriel Scally, Visiting Professor of Public Health, University of Bristol.

 

Professor Devi Sridhar, Chair of Global Public Health, Edinburgh Medical School.

 

Dr Charles Tannock, Consultant psychiatrist.

 

Prof Yee Whye, Professor of Statistics, University of Oxford.

This will be ignored. 

[Sugar Ape]

Hell of a lot of false positives today. 

[Bjornebye]

I'm not looking forward to seeing that death rate start rising. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

3 hours ago, Spy Bee said:

At PMQ's Johnson has confirmed that the strategy is to suppress the virus until a vaccine is available. A vaccine might never be available.

 

Are you guys really happy with that?

 

 

Nope, I’m definitely not happy. I would have preferred much stricter curtailment of freedoms much, much earlier and for a period that virtually stopped this rather than allow it to peak then slowed it at great cost. That ship then sailed, so then I would have preferred stricter curtailment of freedoms, for longer. Then that ship sailed. Now we are in the place where we will half ass it until a vaccine comes out. 

[Mudface]

14 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

I'm not looking forward to seeing that death rate start rising. 

It already is, sadly- the 7 day rolling average has tripled in a fortnight. Still relatively low, but hospitalisations and numbers on ventilators have doubled in the last ten days too. Grim as fuck, and those laughable new restrictions yesterday aren't going to make a fuck of difference.

[Moo]

I often wonder if this is still possible, but I know it's a pipe dream with this shower of useless lying so and so's in charge:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/22/pandemic-zero-coronavirus-britain

[Bjornebye]

2 minutes ago, Mudface said:

It already is, sadly- the 7 day rolling average has tripled in a fortnight. Still relatively low, but hospitalisations and numbers on ventilators have doubled in the last ten days too. Grim as fuck, and those laughable new restrictions yesterday aren't going to make a fuck of difference.

Winter is definitely coming. 

[Colonel Bumcunt]

All I've heard so far here, with our outbreak, is a bunch of PR bullshit.  In our case, the public health lead (not the Director of Public Health, her general) is an American woman, who sounds like she invented penicillin, data protection laws, is a surgeon, and has seen this movie tons of time before and know exactly what to do.  Public Health have actually achieved nothing for years, decades, ever in the UK.  What, some flimsy Foot and Mouth response? Tell people to stop smoking?

 

She is in direct conflict with the lead GP here who completely disagrees with her on everything.  The public back the GP, which has wound-up the local authority and public health, they now actively hate him and are seeking to undermine him.  

 

The politicisation of public health roles has created this.  Much like the creation of PCC's to politicise police chiefs.  It's all damage-limitation, risk-aversion, and silver-tongued sociopaths. 

 

This is happening in all your areas, you just don't know it.  I only get to see it here because I'm in the middle of these meetings and see the behind-the-scenes antics. 

  

 

 

[Mudface]

10 minutes ago, Moo said:

I often wonder if this is still possible, but I know it's a pipe dream with this shower of useless lying so and so's in charge:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/22/pandemic-zero-coronavirus-britain

We got Super Saturday/ Independence Day barely two weeks after that article.

[Mudface]

32 minutes ago, Mudface said:

It already is, sadly- the 7 day rolling average has tripled in a fortnight. Still relatively low, but hospitalisations and numbers on ventilators have doubled in the last ten days too. Grim as fuck, and those laughable new restrictions yesterday aren't going to make a fuck of difference.

Summary from the Guardian-

 

Hospital numbers, and ventilation cases, rising in England, Scotland and Wales, latest figures show. The UK coronavirus dashboard also covers hospital figure.

• There were 275 hospital admissions for coronavirus patients in England on Monday, the most recent day for which figures are available. That is up from 237 the previous day, and the highest daily figure since late June.
• There are now 1,381 patients in hospital in England with coronavirus. A week ago the figure was 894.
• In Scotland there were 73 coronavirus patients in hospital on Tuesday (the most recent day for which figures are available on the dashboard). A week earlier was 48.
• In Wales there were 93 coronavirus patients in hospital on Tuesday (the most recent day for which figures are available on the dashboard). A week earlier was 53.
• There are 192 coronavirus patients on mechanical ventilation in hospitals in England. A week ago the figure was 107.
• In Scotland there were 10 patients on mechanical ventilation in hospital on Tuesday (the most recent figure for which figures are available on the dashboard). A week earlier the figure was six.
• In Wales there were 18 patients on mechanical ventilation in hospital on Tuesday (the most recent figure for which figures are available on the dashboard). A week earlier the figure was six.
• In Northern Ireland there were two patients on mechanical ventilation in hospital on Tuesday (the most recent figure for which figures are available on the dashboard). A week earlier the figure was two.

[Colonel Bumcunt]

Let's face it, we were having 15,000 cases a day during the spring, perhaps more.

This current total is high, but it's not in the same ballpark as what happened previously.

[Mudface]

5 minutes ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

Let's face it, we were having 15,000 cases a day during the spring, perhaps more.

This current total is high, but it's not in the same ballpark as what happened previously.

It's the trend though, rather than the absolute figures. Numbers of positive cases aren't directly comparable to back then as we were testing far fewer people, but hospitalisations and patients on ventilators are rising rapidly. As we saw in March, things can get out of hand really quickly if action isn't taken quickly enough and yesterday's tinkering doesn't look anywhere near sufficient.

[Strontium]

5 minutes ago, Colonel Bumcunt said:

Let's face it, we were having 15,000 cases a day during the spring, perhaps more.

This current total is high, but it's not in the same ballpark as what happened previously.

 

Yeah, but just look at this predicted graph of deaths that I just pulled out of my arse, and will present as inevitable fact until I am proven wrong, at which point I will completely ignore my predictions of doom:

 

[Colonel Bumcunt]

1 minute ago, Mudface said:

It's the trend though, rather than the absolute figures. Numbers of positive cases aren't directly comparable to back then, but hospitalisations and patients on ventilators are rising rapidly. As we saw in March, things can get out of hand really quickly if action isn't taken quickly enough and yesterday's tinkering doesn't look anywhere near sufficient.

ICU and ventilators are rising rapidly, but not seemingly exponentially?

I mean, we were at 3,000 cases last week, which should probably translate into more ICU visits one week later than perhaps we are seeing? 

[Mudface]

Just now, Colonel Bumcunt said:

ICU and ventilators are rising rapidly, but not seemingly exponentially?

I mean, we were at 3,000 cases last week, which should probably translate into more ICU visits one week later than perhaps we are seeing? 

Well, they've both doubled in little more than a week after being pretty steady since about the start of August.  

[Strontium]

On Monday I had one poo and on Tuesday I had two. This means that by Christmas I will be having more than one million poos a day. It's a frightening prospect, for both me and the plumber.

[Elite]

1 minute ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

On Monday I had one poo and on Tuesday I had two. This means that by Christmas I will be having more than one million poos a day. It's a frightening prospect, for both me and the plumber.

So essentially the more you live, you more full of shit you become?

[TheHowieLama]

@Stront19m Dog™

 

Full of poo.

 

 

Needs a trademark

[Bjornebye]

11 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

On Monday I had one poo and on Tuesday I had two. This means that by Christmas I will be having more than one million poos a day. It's a frightening prospect, for both me and the plumber.

Pathetic. 

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, Stront19m Dog™ said:

On Monday I had one poo and on Tuesday I had two. This means that by Christmas I will be having more than one million poos a day. It's a frightening prospect, for both me and the plumber.

Your math is fucking awful. If you only poo on Mondays and Tuesdays you will be having 33,554,432 poos on the Tuesday before Christmas Day.

 

I reckon you could be the inspiration behind a horror movie.

[Sugar Ape]

5 hours ago, Bjornebye said:

And many more are agreeing the opposite. 

These experts don’t count either obviously. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/sep/23/england-new-covid-rules-too-little-too-late-for-the-second-time?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Scientific advisers to the government have warned that pub curfews and other new measures in England will fail to stop the exponential spread of Covid-19, as sources confirmed that ministers have departed from their “follow the science” mantra.

 

A member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), who did not wish to be named, told the Guardian that “the scientific advice is that stronger restrictions should apply overall”, but said a “delicate balance” had to be struck between tighter measures and achieving good compliance.

 

The new rules, announced by Boris Johnson on Tuesday, urge people to work from home if they can, while pubs and restaurants will close at 10pm, weddings will be limited to 15 people and shop and hospitality staff will be required to wear face masks. While Scotland and Northern Ireland have banned different households from meeting indoors, England’s restrictions are more relaxed, banning only groups of more than six.

 

Prof Cath Noakes, a member of Sage at Leeds University, did not comment on the group’s advice to ministers but, speaking in a personal capacity, said she doubted the new measures would prevent an exponential rise in coronavirus cases over the coming months.

 

“I think it’s unlikely the measures will be sufficient to bring the R back down below 1. I don’t think they will cut it,” she said. The R value of the epidemic is the number of people, on average, that an infected person infects. When R is above 1, the epidemic is growing.

 

Noakes, a specialist in the transmission of airborne infections, said closing the pubs at 10pm still allowed people to meet up in groups of six and spend several hours together without wearing masks before going back to their families. “It doesn’t bode well,” she said.

 

Though not in favour of banning all contact between different households because of the impact on people’s mental health, she suggested tightening existing rules. “You can have five people in your home today, and a different five tomorrow. It is quite loose. The more networking we have, the more likely the virus is to spread,” she said.

 

The new measures, considered too light-touch by many scientists, were announced after the government called on advice from experts beyond Sage, including Prof Sunetra Gupta at Oxford University, who believed too much weight had been given to worst-case scenarios in planning the UK’s response. According to the Spectator magazine, ministers also consulted Sweden’s chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, who was behind that country’s more voluntary lockdown.

 

Noakes’s concerns echoed those of Prof John Edmunds, who is also on Sage, and is head of the faculty of epidemiology and population health at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Edmunds told the BBC’s Today programme on Wednesday that he feared, for the second time, the government was doing too little, too late.

 

“Overall, I don’t think the measures have gone anywhere near far enough. In fact, I don’t even think the measures in Scotland have gone far enough,” he said.

 

The failure to bring in stricter measures raised the chances that even tougher rules would be needed later, he said. “I suspect we will see very stringent measures coming into place throughout the UK at some point, but it will be too late again. We will have let the epidemic double and double and double again until we do take those measures.”

 

Prof Peter Openshaw, who sits on the government’s New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats advisory group, which feeds into Sage, told BBC Radio 5 Live he believed a ban on households mixing indoors in England could be announced “very soon”. “I would think if we wait two or three weeks, it will be too late. It ought to be instituted sooner rather than later,” he said.

 

While the latest rise in cases began in younger age groups, Noakes said infections would inevitably spread into older, more vulnerable groups. “As the cases rise, we would expect to see more deaths, but also more people who are sick, off work, more people who have long-term effects, and more people who require hospital care. All of that will stretch our health system,” she said.

 

“Even if the cases are within a younger age group, as long as it’s growing, eventually it will spill over into older, more vulnerable groups. You cannot isolate people forever, it’s virtually impossible.”