As the FT is reporting this morning, there is a growing demand from Tory MPs for the government to fix a date to end the current half-hearted lockdown that the country is facing. Their apparent logic is that if vaccines are delivered on schedule by mid-February then the vulnerable in the community will have been protected by early March, and so lockdown should end.
This logic is, of course, that of the Great Barrington Declaration. As I noted last October:
The Great Barrington Declaration had nothing to do with epidemiology and a great deal to do with far right economics.
The declaration is even named after the headquarters of the market-fundamentalist US think tank where it was signed.
What it demanded was that the vulnerable in society - who were well over 10 million people in the UK - be locked down and that the rest of society be free to continue their lives.
There was, of course, no evidence as to how this might work.
Nor was there any consideration of the fact that there are those who are defined as vulnerable who co-habit with those who are not e.g. those parents over 60 who still have children at home - of whom there are very great many. It was just suggested that isolation ‘should be arranged'.
As is usual for market enthusiasts, dogma and not reality was what mattered. And it still very obviously does to Tory MPs.
The dogma was obvious. It was that state intervention could be kept to the minimum scale possible and that markets should be left open and uninterrupted to the greatest possible degree. The price to be paid was locking up the elderly, they thought, until vaccination was possible.
It's easy to see how the current position of Tory MPs comes straight from this. But they ignore three things.
The first is that we do not as yet know how effective the vaccines really are.
The second is that no one knows if those who have been vaccinated can still transmit the disease.
The third is that there remains the problem that most in ICUs are now below the age where vaccination is a priority, even if it remains true that most deaths are in the more vulnerable groups. The NHS is not just being overwhelmed by the elderly. Its resources are being stretched to the limit by those who are younger, and it is not the elderly who are transmitting the virus to these younger people, because the elderly are, almost without exception, trying to stay out of harm's way.
In other words, vaccinating the elderly is not going to end the coronavirus crisis in the NHS, or in society. It is going to help, we hope. But whatever is achieved by mid-February is not going to end this. The chance of that seems exceptionally remote.
I noted Prof Devi Sridhar discussing the possibility of risks this coming autumn and next winter on Channel 4 News last night. I have little doubt she has good reason for her concern. And the biggest enemy of those, like her, who are seeking to challenge the government into taking appropriate action is the indifference to evidence of market fundamentalists whose only goals are the creation of profit opportunities and the minimisation of state intervention to protect people, with the simultaneous goal of minising public spending.
Dogma is driving these Tory MPs. Care should be. It's a sad day when mainstream politicians have reached such depths of indifference to suffering.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
A yes, such indifference to suffering. When the vulnerable are protected let the country start to get back to normal.
Allow people to see their family and friends, return to work and restart their businesses which have been forcibly closed and rebuild their livelihoods. Have schools open so children can get a proper education. Let people do things socially together and enjoy group activities and their interests and hobbies.
How callous.
Callous indeed.
To those who will die as a result.
To those who will get long-Covid.
To those who have to care for them.
To those about whom you really do not care.
And all for the sake of the profit about which you do care.
The first thing you do is hurl abuse and make claims about what I said which are simply not true. You are a disgusting little man, aren’t you? Well, two can play at that game.
So when would you re-open the country and end lockdown?
When everyone is vaccinated?
It’s easy to sit on the sidelines when you don’t actually have to be accountable for your claims and decisions, and can make up any old nonsense to support them.
Or as the government are planning, when the most vulnerable people are vaccinated and so the rest of us, who are very unlikely to die of Covid can move on with our lives by starting to reopen the economy.
You seem to forget that people die of all sorts of things every day, yet we don’t shut down the country for that.
You also seem to forget that people’s families, relationships, jobs and business are people’s lives – though you don’t seem to care about those things at all because they can’t be packaged up as neat statistics you use to hurl abuse at the government with.
Maybe it’s because your life hasn’t been affected much. I’m guessing your daily routine of writing spiteful blogs hasn’t changed much, your grant bung income hasn’t suffered and judging by the way you abuse people here, don’t have that many relationships left. It must be pretty sad existence.
With respect, you said I was callous. I simply used the same term to describe the policy you espoused and yet you say I hurled abuse, but apparently you did not?
When would I reopen? When independent sage think it wise to do so. They imply that may be some time right now. And certainly not soon.
And as to the claim most are very unlikely to get Covid, when most in ICU are under 60 and my teenage son was quite unwell with it, I suggest you are deeply misinformed.
I will ignore the rest. I spent too much of the morning talking to and worrying about a friend with a serious health diagnosis whose treatment is bound to be impacted by ICU availability. But, as you say, of course I have no connection with the real world or real people, because you know that, of course.
I feel sorry for my friend, but really do have hope they will be ok.
I also feel sorry for you and your anger. I hope you too will be ok. But I am not so sure in your case.
Jolene,
So, under this scenario you are able to reopen your business, see your family and send your children to school as a matter of individual choice. If statistically a number of people over the age of say seventy, plus a number of those with an underlying condition say asthma, were lined up in front of you , would you be willing to go down the line and personally select those individuals – number in line with the statistics – who would die as a result?
I am genuinely interested in the logic here. If the free market way of thinking emphasizes personal choice and personal responsibility, logic suggests that you should be willing to do this. The people in the line are not there due to their individual choice. So to exercise your right to choose to benefit but to offload the responsibility onto ‘the market’ is inconsistent.
So genuine question: what is the logic?
Jolene
If the virus is fully suppressed to the extent that anyone who has the virus is identified, quarantined and provided for, then it can be held back and allow many people to return to ordinary life.
Locking down too little too late with insufficient financial support to those who need to isolate is a shitty business decision. It costs more in £ and in lives.
Dear Jolene,
There is an assumption that only those who have elderly are at risk and as they are not economically that active, society would return to normal with the elderly locked down/vaccinated. But those with underlying health conditions are also at risk and many of those work. If millions of them have to lock down, who drives the buses, serves the coffees, helps you with your shopping, cares for your parents, teaches your kids, cuts your hair, and buys your goods? The underlying assumption is that normal economic activity can return when millions of people are locked into their homes. Note that those with underlying health conditions are not priortized for vaccinations so would be forced into being economically inactive. The only way to acheive normal economic activity is a zero covid strategy as evidenced by those societies who followed that strategy. Of course that entailed massive government intervention.
The professional public health advice is that we cannot dare live with this virus. We must virtually eliminate it. The professionals insist that the ‘protecting the vulnerable’ story on which you rely, is false. The vulnerable rely wholly on close interaction with healthy, younger people, in order to survive safely. The Great Barrington Declaration presents a proposition that cannot be delivered. It is false. The only way to return to a viable economy is to defeat the virus.
That is why this is a “pandemic” and not an inconvenience. This is a plague, and it is made sufficiently hygienic for people like you to ignore the grim reality, only because you have obviously been seduced by the supposed ability of people to appear to function almost normally, save for unreasonable restrictions. In fact this illusion is the product of the efficient hygiene that civilised society ensures accompanies the destruction of health and lives around you ; which now occurs hidden from view, without you having to see it up close, or experience it (save if the virus affects you and yours directly).
The virus appears hygienic only because the people who suffer and die do so out of sight, at home, or mainly in a care home or hospital; conveniently hidden from public view. The horror has been removed from the delicate sensibility of polite society. It is a living nightmare for the NHS workforce. Over 80,000 have died – and they have all died discreetly; just so you can speculate how easy it is to solve it, or at least ignore it, or pretend it is no big deal.
Heaven help us.
Unfortunately you are misinformed if you think this virus only effects the elderly. Perhaps you should tell that to my former colleague who lost her husband just before Christmas, or to her 2 young children who will never see their daddy again. No underlying health conditions, and in fact, thought just as you do. Is that a price you think is worth paying so that you can get on with your life? And what about the people who can’t get treatment for other illnesses because hospitals are full of Covid cases? This is not just a disease that effects the elderly. It effects us all.
Well said.
As with many modern politicians, their aim is to over simplify things – whether it is their genuine or willful ignorance over the reality of sovereign money creation which leads to baseless fears.
I saw Dr Sridhar last night too, and wondered if the vaccine stopped Covid dead or just the symptoms and rendered a person an asymptomatic carrier?
We also noted last night sadly that vaccinating teachers is still not see as a priority!!? I’m sorry but expecting people to work cooped up with those that may have Covid is simply unacceptable whether they be NHS or teaching staff.
BTW – latest from my brother the lorry diver is that ferries from Rosslare are well down on lorry numbers and one ferry service has been withdrawn. The big issue is paying import taxes apparently with the British Government expecting individuals to pay them at borders – anyone including hauliers who are just parking up and getting out – it’s too much hassle.
What a crappy, ad hoc system from a nation that apparently has always supported ‘free’ trade’.
Needless to say, like many others said brother will be looking for work on the European mainland.
As you say, while it seems the younger are less likely to suffer serious life-threatening symptoms, it does happen. And then there is long COVID.
Even assuming the vaccine gives long term immunity (long enough to drive the virus out of circulation before it mutates sufficiently to get around the vaccination) repeating the mistake of unlocking too early, before the majority of people have been vaccinated, will leave millions liable to infection, and (probably) tens or hundreds of thousands needing hospital care and similar numbers with debilitating long term health impacts.
It is hardly rocket science. The countries that have done best economically are the ones that have done the best at keeping the virus under control. Prompt lockdowns, strict quarantine, and most importantly a competent system of test, track and trace. The UK has been one of the very worst at keeping the virus under control and so is doing poorly economically too. Brexit is piling Pelion upon Ossa.
It is absolutely tragic to look back at what happened in November and December. Cases were going up so we locked down in early November. Cases stabilised and fell back substantially (from about 25,000 to about 15,000 per day, although not to near zero), and daily deaths reacted slower and didn’t fall much (from around 500 per day to 400 per day). That’s right, we unlocked when there were still a hundred thousand new cases, and several thousand deaths, each week.
We unlocked in early December and cases immediately started to rise again. Not just because of the new variant, but when you release restrictions and increase social interactions then the rates will go up again anyway. The last month has been disastrous – another 1.5 million infections and nearly 30,000 deaths. And then we locked down in early January, and it seems cases might be falling back a little again.
The government is warming up to declare a vaccination victory in February – all the most vulnerable are protected, and we can go back to normal life – although of course the protection takes some time to develop, and most need a second dose. We would have to be absolutely stark raving mad, almost psychopathic, to unlock again until daily case numbers were back down at 1,000 per day or less (and daily deaths around 10) like it was over the summer. If we don’t wait, cases will peak again, and so will the early excess deaths, not to mention the long tail of poor health for those who recover.
We are talking about the lives of tens, hundreds of thousands, millions of people. We have been thoroughly desensitised to 50,000 or 60,000 people being infected every day. We have forgotten how shocking it was when daily deaths went above 100, 200, 500, 1000 last spring. The death rate has shot up, but it has been running at over 400 per day since early November. The number of deaths has doubled from 45,000 to nearly 90,000 in the last two or three months. Once December is added, the excess deaths last year could be over 100,000.
It is like fighting the First World War, when one death is a tragedy but many thousands is just a statistic. To put this in context, nearly 20,000 British soldiers were killed (and another 40,000 injured) on the first day of the Somme.
Andrew
I agree with all that
The idea that a vaccine lets us return to ‘normal’ is mad. The vaccine does not end transmission. Until we get to mass vaccination this is by no means over, and we have a long way to go.
Richard
May I draw attention to the particular methodology of manipulation that I seem to perceive has become the current norm of politics? Perhaps I misread what I see, but this is my sense of what is unfolding.
From the very beginning of the March lockdown our Public Health or Social Psychologist Professionals, including its typical academic spokespersons (such as Sridhar, Edinburgh University; Reicher, St.Andrews University; Pagel, London University; even Pennington, Emeritus) have been insisting that for self-isolation to work for a community that is trying very hard to execute lockdown effectively in spite of Government policy or implementation weaknesses; it is necessary that best practice, as carried out in other countries with success (even in New York) depends on self-isolation being supported by full Government support to the isolated individual; finance (payment if required), food, accommodation, with personal accessible direct help.
Given the crisis we are in, this message of support for self-isolators (those we most need to isolate, and in poorer and most at risk communities, those least able to do it), is beginning to be noticed politically. Suddenly, what do I find is the response? Today, wherever I turn on the BBC (Radio 5 live, BBC Scotland ‘Call Kay’) the same confrontation is set up; do we need support, or do we really need the force of the law here, a crackdown on miscreants. This is starkly illustrated by Kay Adams phone-in strapline for the day: Carrot v. Stick. This seems to me confrontational politics with a whiff of Trumpism about it. I am genuinely shocked at the sheer crudity of it; and of course it raises a storm among the Holy Wullie finger-pointers that love this kind of opportunity to become righteous and enraged. Am I imagining this?
No,. you are not
You know John, my partner and I heard that too and felt EXACTLY the same as you do when confronted with it – if that helps?
By now, we should have had more information about what has been happening in our airports that seem to have not be controlled as well as say Australia . Maybe this new variant of the virus should be called ‘Heathrow Covid’. I think the role of our airports should be investigated.
My brother recounted a tale told to him by someone working at Heathrow where a party of well heeled BRITs flew out to their holiday homes on New Year’s eve only to be held at Zurich in Switzerland and being made to return to blighty having been refused entry.
Was it Friedman who said “the only social responsibility of government is to ensure business increases its profits.”?
He later admitted he got that wrong
“It’s a sad day when mainstream politicians have reached such depths of indifference to suffering”
I find this statement a bit odd. The current crop of toryscum politicians are no different to the previous bunch in their indifference to suffering – indifference to suffering is a requirement to be in the toryscum party. The latest, “unforced error”/Toryscum scandal (& indifference/incompetance) is food parcels:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/food-parcels-free-school-means-government-b1785989.html
Where things get entertaining is not the article itself but the BTLs – which provide the background which the supine journalists (?) are unwilling or are unable to do. Steve Hill nailed it.: “And when the government, with no competitive tender, awarded the contract to Chartwells, part of catering giant Compass Group, chaired by Tory donor Paul Walsh, did it occur to any minsterial numpty to specify what standards might or might not be “acceptable”. Or was it, as usual, a case of “here you go, fill your boots”. (PS some children might starve)?”.
Readers who would like to see how the future will shape up for UK serfs at the lower end of the social spectrum are encouraged to watch this “forward looking” film https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMCsRd3Rfgg. minute 6 – & the working poor (full time work – cann’t afford to keep themselves) is “interesting” given that the Uk is there right now (& is a real “back to the past” moment). The Uk is and has been for more than 40 years one large toryscum “experiment” where bad outcomes (which occur most of the time) carry no consequences whatsoever and where there is not so much Toryscum “indifference to suffering” as a point blank refusal to acknowledge that it even exists or if it does, it is the fault of the sufferer.
If there is any good that could come from the Covid pandemic, it is (hopefully) the death of populism in politics. The rise of populism and its evil twin demagoguery has been an alarming aspect of politics around the world over the past 10 years or so. All populist leaders have two things in common; they declare support for the ordinary people and in particular ‘ the left behind’, telling them that the political elite have sold them out, then they give their supporters something or someone to hate. Donald Trump for instance railed against the ‘political establishment’ as embodied by Hillary ‘lock her up’ Clinton, China and drug fuelled Mexicans trying to cross the US border. In the UK the mantras of the arch Brexiteers were ‘taking back control’ from the dastardly EU and of course securing our borders from all those nasty immigrants.
With the arrival of Covid, all those populist leaders have shown their true colours. Far from supporting the ordinary people of their country, they have attempted to deny the seriousness and in some cases the reality of Covid. Instead of protecting the citizens as their first priority, they seem far more focussed on safeguarding the economy which, all too often involves ensuring and in some ways enhancing the prospects for their wealthy friends (e.g. PPE contracts). Meanwhile, those leaders who truly have the welfare of ordinary citizens front and centre, have come out with their reputations enhanced. Nicola Sturgeon and Jacinda Ahern in particular have demonstrated an empathy totally lacking in those of a populist persuasion.
So when we finally emerge from Covid, my earnest hope is that Populism will be seen, particularly by those who were the target audience for the deceit that it really is.
British capitalists, and their forebears, the pirates, the slave traders, the drug runners, have always shown a disregard for human suffering during a crisis, and an eye for making a quick buck while the chaos ensues.
The Irish famine is a good example. The Tory landlords continued to export quality food whilst up to 2 million starved to death. The bastards made speeches in the House of Lords boasting about holding to free market principles despite “difficulties.” The army “escorted” the food laden wagons to the ports to prevent folk starving to death interfering with the market.
In 1910, the Raj in India held a Durbah in honour of the Emperor of India, our own GeorgeV. It was basically a massive orgy of consumption by the super wealthy in the middle of a famine caused by a poor harvest. Millions of people died from hunger whilst the toffs enjoyed their banquet.
These cases illustrates that Tories only care about money and profit and have always done so. They are basically telling us to sell our grannies (so what if a few thousand old and sick die off) just like they do.
And still they are polling at roughly 40%? Wtf?
Why is the Labour Party giving them a free pass on this? Nye Bevan and Keir Hardy must be spinning in their graves.
Totally agree with you. A sense of the mentality of Field Martial Haig in WW1 trenches lurks beneath the surface of many in the current political class. As we used to say, the “I’m alright class.”