Experts divided over circuit break to halt spread of infection
EXPERTS are divided over government proposals to put the UK into another national lockdown as a “circuit break” to halt the spread of Covid-19.
Some are saying the move is “premature” and not evidence-based.
But others warn that plans for a two-week lockdown proposed by scientists from the government’s Sage advisory group don’t go far enough – and it is too short to stem the rise in infection rates.
Professor Robert Dingwall, an expert in public health at Nottingham Trent University, said that while hospital admissions for coronavirus had seen a marginal increase, there was no evidence that the NHS was overwhelmed, which is the justification for a “circuit break”.
Professor Dingwall, who advises the Government on pandemic policy, said the rise in infections was largely being seen in people under 50 who do not need to be in hospital.
Speaking in a personal capacity he said: “This is not urgent and we do not need to take urgent measures at this point. The latest evidence shows positive Covid tests could be levelling out.
“We also have to ask, is this rise in infections challenging the capacity of the NHS? The answer to that is no. It may be that we have rising infections, and partly this can be explained because we are doing a lot more testing.
“But this does not necessarily mean there are a lot more very sick people out there. It may be that things can settle at higher levels of infection before we take such drastic measures.”
He also questioned the overall benefits of a circuit break.
He said: “What is the point of a circuit break? The collateral damage is so huge and this really is stamping on people.
“It will not ultimately stop the spread of this infection. None of these policies can do that. All we can do with a novel virus is try and slow its spread using social and behavioural methods. It would be acting prematurely to impose these strict measures at this time.”
Professor Dingwall warned that mixed messaging and changes in policy could see growing numbers of people stop adhering to government advice.
He said: “At the moment it is illegal for seven children to go and feed ducks together but legal for 30 people to go and shoot ducks. There is a feeling that the public will get fed up with the anomalies in these restrictions and will ultimately accept that people will die of coronavirus, as they do of flu and other viruses every year, and insist on getting on with their lives.”
Public health expert Dr William Bird told BBC Breakfast yesterday: “I am just not confident about a circuit break.
“I am totally confident we need to do local lockdowns, as they seem to be working very well. Leicester’s figures dropped dramatically during their lockdown. They are not popular, obviously, but I think it emphasises to everyone that their area is affected. But I think at the moment we’re going to find a national circuit break is going to be unsustainable.
“Most of the cases we are getting for testing are children. There is evidence for the last 50 years that every third week of September there is a massive spike of infections and also admissions to hospital for children, especially younger children with respiratory infections. It’s nothing to do with coronavirus, it’s normal stuff.
“There are a group of viruses which cause a temperature which are not coronavirus or flu, and that’s what we see every year.
“And people are struggling to get a test, so we have to assume high temperatures are coronavirus even though a lot of them won’t be.
“If we can just manage these local lockdowns it will just keep those levels bumbling along a little bit lower. What we can’t do is stop everyone from getting it, so all we are doing with local lockdowns is keeping numbers manageable for the local NHS.”
Dr Simon Clarke, Associate Professor in Cellular Microbiology at the University of Reading, disagreed. He said: “With a fast-increasing number of infections, it’s imperative that the country gets ahead of the curve and prevents an even more rapid acceleration.”
‘It will not stop the spread’