Selective science

Across Europe, countries are emerging slowly from weeks of lockdown. Schools are opening in France from May 11, some shops in Italy and Spain, the two worst-hit countries, are up and running again, and in Germany the big car-makers are back at work. The lockdowns in these countries have been more severe than here. In some, people were not allowed out of the door save to buy food, let alone to exercise. The different pace of easing these controls reflects both the timing of the lockdowns and their severity.

Ministers in the UK feel the progress of the contagion here still lags behind most of Europe and are being “guided by the science” to keep the nation in check. But other countries are also basing their policies on expert advice and it is apparent that it differs from ours or, rather, it is discussed more openly.

In Switzerland, the head of infectious diseases, Daniel Koch, has stated unequivocally that children under the age of 10 do not transmit the virus because they do not have the receptors to catch the disease. The Swiss government has responded by revoking earlier advice that children aged under 10 should not interact with their grandparents. Dr Koch said that while the children did not pose a threat, their parents did, so meetings should be brief and contact limited.

Is this science shared by the experts on our Government’s Sage group and, if so, why have we not been told about it? Then again, perhaps the Swiss authorities have got this badly wrong, since they will risk spreading the disease to the most vulnerable group in their society.

But when the public is told that our policy is led by the science, it is essential to hear all the analysis, not just the evidence that fits a particular narrative.