Throwing caution to the winds ; or, how not to cope with a pandemic

Johnson wants everybody to think that he has learned his lessons, and that he is now more sensible and 'cautious.' In this, the 'useful idiots' of the faction of Conservative MPs known as the 'Covid Recovery Group' (a misnoner if ever there was one) play an absolutely crucial role. If the prime minister does something ill-advised, they can always be counted to say something which is even more stupid. So, in contrast to them, the prime minister appears to be the acme of judicious common sense.

I have to take it granted that my pleas for altruism, internationalism, and the prioritisation of the health of the Global South (in my blogpost, 'Reflections on vaccine nationalism' of last week) will go unheard. So, therefore, against all scientific evidence, we are determined to treat this virus as a purely national phenomenon, one that will magically cease transmission at borders, or is omehow minded to obey the government's half-hearted quarantine scheme.

The proposed re-opening of schools on March 8th has already been criticised for potentially spreading the virus. The problem is that apparently simple measures, such as fitting mobile air-filtration devices, which should have been undertaken months ago, have not happened. ('Williamson, you're in detention. Write the following a hundred times: "I must learn to be a half-competent Secretary of State for Education." No, on second thoughts, don't bother. Williamson: it's my considered opinion that you're probably beyond redemption.') My purpose here, however, is to criticise three underlying unspoken assumptions behind the policies which have ostensibly endeavoured to combat the pandemic, and which have fatally undermined us in our collective response to it.

First, there is the assumption that there is a 'magic bullet', whether mass testing or vaccination, which will reduce the pandemic to manageable proportions.

Second, the belief that a 'zero Covid' strategy is unworkable.

Third, that the NHS is necessarily the most important 'front line' against the disease.

No rational person pretends that it is at all likely this disease will be completely eradicated. (The only infectious disease ever to have disappeared entirely from the face of the Earth is smallpox, and that task took almost two hundred years). However, the problem of 'living with' the disease needs effective public health measures to keep it under control (such as generous payments for those who have to isolate ; an effective contact tracing and testing system undee the aegis of local authorities ; and, for the next few months, stringent border controls). As I pointed out in a blogpost in July 2020, as medieval and Renaissance Italy learned from its experience in dealing with bubonic plague, no one measure is the 'catch all' solution. A panoply of measures have to be taken. The government has found the fact that these measures are best undertaken by local authorities which should be well resourced to undertake these tasks (rather than by 'outsourced; and privatised companies) extremely ideologically difficult to accept. We are not going to be able to 'live with' this disease unless we are minded to minimise its impact effectively.

Adequate public health, which is the responsibility of every government department, is the 'front line' against the virus and any future pandemics. The NHS should be the last resort when public health measures have failed. (The issue that, as a nation, we have never confronted the trade-off of an 'efficient' and underfunded NHS and its inability to cope with high patient demand, is important, but cannot be dealt with here). Overcrowded housing, insecure and exploitative employment, food lacking nutritional value, and degraded and polluted environments all contribute to abysmal public health outcomes. It is no accident whatsoever that Sars Covid-2 is becoming an endemic disease in those areas where these conditions are extremely prevalent.