This week's headline from 'MD' (their medical writer) in Private Eye:
Lose-lose scenario
Pandemic planning is the ultimate lose-lose scenario. The lives and livelihoods lost from the virus have to be balanced against the lives and livelihoods lost from the 'treatment'.
This virus is causing a surge of deaths particularly in the sick and elderly, whereas lockdown is causing a smaller surge in non-Covid deaths and a steady, sustained increase in harm to those who have their whole lives ahead of them.
Brutally put, 100 percent of us are making sacrifices to save 0.5 percent of us (or less). Children are being harmed to save adults; the poor are being harmed more than the rich; and some people have become so conditioned to 'stay at home' that not even a medical emergency will tempt them to seek help.
Given such staggering complexity, the best one can hope for is an overall 'harm minimisation' strategy. To get there, experts from all disciplines need to subject their models and data on the benefits and harms of any strategy to full public scrutiny. And politicians need to admit their errors in real time.
It has taken us more than three months to move from Patient Zero to mass testing and tracing. It would be churlish not to welcome Matt Hancock's 100,000 tests a day (even though they included requests and promptly fell again) but thousands more lives might have been saved by earlier action. It is time for an apology.
Meanwhile, after the mothballing of the little-used Nightingale hospital in London, questions will be asked about the money and precious resources spent on the hospital - but it's worth noting that the NHS needs extra capacity in case it gets a second spike in infection.