This is the entire problem with SAGE thinking. Closing pubs in itself isn't the solution. The problem is that we've adopted a 'tolerate a high rate of infection & deaths, as long as they aren't rising' strategy rather than a zero covid strategy. 1/N
Conversation
SAGE advisors seem to be focused on maintaining R at 1, which at a high rate of infection, just maintains the same rate of infection and deaths. A zero covid strategy aims to reduce infection and deaths to zero. This requires a multi-pronged approach. 2/N
2
4
4
BJ in the daily briefing yesterday says we're having >80 deaths/day - but even 1 death is one too many. If that's how BJ feels, the govt strategy certainly doesn't reflect it. The govt seems happy to continue, as long as cases and deaths aren't rising. 3/N
1
1
3
Continuing at 80 deaths/day which is the govts stated aim would mean 7,200 deaths over 3 months - which are completely avoidable. By contrast, Scotland is aiming for elimination because of the policies they followed, with slow easing of lockdown, and clear communication. 4/N
2
2
2
A 'whack-a-mole' reactive strategy where we react every time the infection rates start rising is a consequence of tolerating such high levels of infection. Why aren't SAGE advisors pushing for a zero covid strategy, rather than reactive interventions that may or may not work?
In the long term, the current strategy will lead to far more uncertainty, as there isn't much to stop infection rates from rising, and will lead to far more cases, and deaths. And will harm the economy even more due to long-term uncertainty to businesses.
2
2
8
A zero covid strategy is the only strategy that can provide certainty over the long-term, and allow life to almost go back to normal. But it means we have to prioritise infection control over everything else for a short period of time, including closing borders, where needed.
2
5
10
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Show