Does this graph suggest that if had stayed in lockdown a bit longer (don’t know what a “bit” would be) that we might have got to such few hospital admissions that the virus would’ve been significantly reduced in communities?
(Apologies for my ignorance)
eta: furlough scheme would’ve had to continue at an actually supportive rate for employees and businesses and mental health support
To achieve much more than was managed over summer, what would have been required was the belief that eradication of the virus was actually possible and feasible. The authorities here did not believe in that plan, and this is not surprising because it is tricky to achieve, and because the establishment see this country as a global hub and had no appetite for ongoing travel restrictions and strong border measures.
Another way of putting that is that even the strongest lockdown measures we had at any point would not have been expected to push cases down to nothing, just to low levels. Even for a region such as the South West which was relatively less affected by the first wave, and where lockdown was early enough relative to their epidemic curve to do a lot of good, they only achieved a handful of days over summer where they had 0 recorded hospital admissions/diagnoses. And on the other hand, even a region like the North West where press reports painted a picture of an epidemic that never really ended, by August daily hospital admissions there were down to a level that didnt massively stand out compared to other large regions.
I suppose I would say that the original lockdown and the pace of easing of restrictions was enough to give us a several month long window of opportunity, where levels of infection in the community were low enough in July and parts of June and August that there was a real opportunity to get on top of things further using a proper test & trace & isolate system. But the chances are that data from such a system would have told authorities about outbreak situations that they had no will do deal with properly, eg workplace outbreaks that, to manage effectively across the board, would have required new measures which were incompatible with their economic agenda. And there are not many opportunities to compare ourselves to countries in Europe to see what we did wrong, because they mostly all made similar mistakes, the pace of relaxation of measures was broadly similar and they all ended up facing similar 2nd wave viral resurgence. And they probably dont view all the mistakes as actual mistakes, but rather an inevitable consequence of them thinking that it was inevitable the virus would come back big time for autumn/winter and that they should use the summer as an opportunity to temporarily resume various economic activities.
Much may be claimed about what would have been done differently with the benefit of hindsight here and across the world, but in most cases I dont think hindsight was actually required, rather it was a question of what fundamentals were baked into their cold calculations and expectations. Something very large would have to have been added to the mix to get countries to follow a very different strategy, such as if there was never much reaonable chance of a vaccine ever coming. So long as a vaccine offered them a long term solution, things boiled down to a numbers game where it was all about trying to do normal economic activities when possible, and resorting to drastic restrictions only when the hospital numbers threatened a system collapse. Its mostly only been smaller countries with somewhat different economies and sense of what was possible in terms of border and travel restrictions, where efforts to actually minimise the number of deaths appear to have been done more sincerely.