It’s not hard to understand Boris Johnson’s dilemma. He will hate the idea of a second lockdown, but his scientific advisers tell him it’s the best way to fight a second wave. He’s not sure if their fears are exaggerated, but how is he to know? There are not very many expert voices around No10 to challenge the SAGE committee’s assumptions.
One idea could be reaching out to Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s chief epidemiologist, who has just been interviewed by Andrew Neil for our new Spectator TV. The Swedes were able to identify the exaggerations in the Imperial College London assumptions first time around – and might be able to check the assumptions No10 is being given this time.
Sweden’s public health authority is well-stocked with experienced epidemiologists: Tegnell has experience in the field with Sars and Ebola and has seen first hand the problems of modelling. When Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College model was published, its verdict for Sweden was grim “Because no full lockdown has been ordered so far,” it said, the virus had kept growing exponentially in Sweden with a R-number of 2.6:
Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in