Traffic lights code that may help to get UK moving again
A TRAFFIC light system could be used to grade the risk of activities while “very gradually” lifting lockdown, scientists advising the Government have suggested.
They warned that an abrupt lifting of restrictions could lead to an increase in infection rates and a loss of public trust in health policy.
Instead, they recommended a slower approach which could see trials of easing measures, in places with low transmission, before policies are rolled out.
The advice was revealed yesterday when more than a dozen documents considered by the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) were made public.
They included a report on the problems with widespread antibody testing and suggestions for how lockdown could begin to be lifted.
A paper by the scientific pandemic influenza group on behaviour (SPI-B) and discussed at a Sage meeting on April 2, said relaxing restrictions too quickly may lead people to believe that the risk of catching coronavirus has plummeted, or even ceased.
It said: “If there is then an increase in infection rates that necessitates a reintroduction of restrictions, this is likely to be seen as a serious failure of policy and trust in public health advice will be lost, leading to lower adherence to advice to restrict, or to resume activity.”
To avoid this, the behavioural experts recommended “trialling easing restrictions very gradually”. They added that decisions around which restrictions to ease should be explained carefully to maintain public support. “For example, it may be difficult to justify easing restrictions solely for economic activities without any easing of restrictions for low-risk activities with significant social and psychological benefit,” the report said.
The group raised the idea of a traffic-light system like the one used on food packaging.
Activities could be divided into high-risk ones that should be avoided, medium-risk ones that can be done “rarely and carefully”, and low-risk ones that can be done freely, the experts said.
Other suggestions included rapid pilot trials to assess the effect of easing a restriction in one area, and alterations in workplaces to encourage physical distancing and better hygiene. Appearing before the Commons Health and Social Care Committee yesterday, Sir Patrick Vallance, chief scientific adviser and chair of Sage, said government decisions were “informed by science, not led by science”.
He added: “Judgments are based on scientific information, not scientific certainties which enable us to make absolute decisions.”
The papers also revealed that PM Boris Johnson introduced the nationwide lockdown after modelling suggested it was “very likely that we will see Intensive Care Unit capacity in London breached by the end of the month”.
The documents also showed that SPI-B recommended the public be told to stop shaking hands on March 3 – the same day that Mr Johnson told a press conference he was still doing so.
Complacent
A Downing Street spokesperson yesterday said the Prime Minister would not have seen the advice at the time.
Shortly before Mr Johnson ordered the UK lockdown, scientists warned that guidance needed to be toughened up.
At a Sage meeting on March 23, the day the Prime Minister announced the new policy, a paper drawn up by behavioural experts said: “The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging.”
The report also warned that the current guidance lacked clarity with regards to recommended behaviours. It said phrases such as “try to” should be swapped for direct instructions to “do” and that phrases including “non-essential”, “gathering” and “as much as is practicable” could be confusing as they are open to interpretation.
A list of documents discussed at Sage’s meetings shows around 120 documents, but only 28 have now been published.
The Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “Where some of the evidence remains under live consideration for policy decisions, it isn’t appropriate to publish at this time.”
Papers that have not been published include one on when to stop contact tracing and others on the use of face masks and the impact of school closures.
Meanwhile, scientists at the University of Edinburgh argued that shielding for the vulnerable should be stepped up, while restrictions are eased for everyone else.
They said society should be divided into three groups: the most vulnerable, the “shielders” who come into close contact with them and the general population.
The first two groups could be protected from infection while those less at risk get back to work.
Co-author Prof MarkWoolhouse, who is also on Sage, said: “By targeting protection to those that need it most, the strategy helps to ensure that the health system is not overwhelmed by severe cases, while giving policymakers greater leeway to partially relax social-distancing measures for the majority of the population.”