Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman
As I said previously it'll be interesting to see which countries adopt this approach and (if published) the emerging scientific evidence for it and ultimately the outcomes that result.
I've been fairly cynical so far today so to continue in that vein a British Establishment echo chamber supporting reopening the economy might not necessarily give the best health outcomes in the medium to long term. Personally I was half surprised Blair didn't sign the discredited Great Barrington declaration.
The United States certainly appears under a lot of Covid pressure at the minute so I'd be keen to see if they adopt this approach.
|
One of the useful aspects of the UK government’s very early decision to treat this as a public health issue rather than a civil contingencies emergency is that it has left policy, where it was already devolved, in the hands of the devolved governments. The UK government has provided additional support in some areas, especially logistics with lab testing and military support, but the day to day decisions on how to organise lockdowns and now, how to organise vaccine rollout, are in the purview of Welsh Labour and the SNP.
Obviously there have been variations in the way lockdowns have been timed and how severe each tier of lockdown is, however overall, they have much more in common than not. Given Nicola Sturgeon, in particular, never normally misses an opportunity for differentiation and constitutional mischief making, this speaks volumes about how far the UK government is motivated by keeping the economy open and how far it’s actually following the science. It will be educational over the next few weeks to see whether the vaccine rollout strategy in Scotland or Wales diverges significantly from England.
British establishment echo chambers are anathema to Scottish nationalists. If that’s what is driving the emerging discussion around vaccinating more people once rather than fewer people twice, then we can expect Sturgeon not to touch it with a 10ft pole.