Sir Patrick Vallance acknowledges UK needs lockdown handbook for future pandemics as cases rise

Sir Patrick Vallance announced today that authorities are preparing a quarantine guideline for future pandemics.

The government’s chief science adviser told MPs that experts are investigating which parts of the Covid restrictions are working best in the UK and around the world.

Speaking to parliamentarians from the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, Sir Patrick suggested that severe restrictions could play a role in future epidemics.

He said: “I think it’s going to be incredibly important now to look internationally and nationally to research and examine which components of the constraints are most important.

“The world should learn from this, so there is an advice guide for the future, and also to take into account the different characteristics of viruses.”

Earlier, a member of No10’s Covid poke unit hinted that despite the increase in cases and hospital rates, Brits are no longer changing their behavior because they are less afraid.

Professor Ann John, co-chairman of SAGE’s behavioral subgroup, told lawmakers that infections are more mingling with each other than they did when they were at the same level as the Omicron increase in December.

He admitted that the Spi-B group had advised the government how to use fear to change people’s behavior at the start of the pandemic, but said the scare tactics were soon abandoned.

In the UK, the number of infections and hospitalizations has increased since Freedom Day, when all restrictions were lifted and Britons were called to “live with the virus”.

Later in the committee, Sir Patrick suggested that lifting restrictions might not last forever and future pandemics would likely require some kind of lockdown.

He said “countless articles” have been published about the effectiveness of the restrictions, but it’s hard to discern which ones are helpful.

Sir Patrick dismissed a controversial paper by John Hopkins University economists who claimed that quarantines had reduced deaths by only 0.2%.

The newspaper said that staying at home (2.9%), closure of schools (4.4%) and closure of workplaces (10.6%) are more effective individually.

However, some experts accused the researchers of “gathering information”, arguing that the document was limited because it combined different restrictions applied in different places and times.

Sir Patrick said future containment proposals should take into account the virus the world is facing or the type of Covid that has been seized.

He said: “The transmissibility associated with Omicron is different from the transmissibility associated with the Alpha or Wuhan strain, and the measurements will likely have a different impact as well.

“So I think it’s important work to do to take a careful look at specific actions during the quarantine and which ones have the greatest impact on transmission and conditions.”

Earlier in the session, Professor John suggested that people’s response to the increase in cases was slowing as messages from the government dwindled.

He said: “Where infections are on the rise or there are compulsive behaviors, it seems like common sense that people follow their behavior and sometimes they have it, sometimes they don’t.

“I think ‘pingdemic’ was really effective in changing people’s behavior and how they got involved.

“We’re currently seeing a much smaller response to increased infections and hospital admissions.”

He admitted that one of the 11 papers the Spi-B group presented for the first time at SAGE advocated a fear-based approach.

“Perceived threat level should be increased among those who content themselves with the use of strong emotional messages,” the minutes of the group meeting on March 22, 2020 said. it was said.

But the psychiatrists, sociologists, anthropologists and ethicists who advised government communications later left the board, he said.

Professor John said: ‘We never suggested raising anxiety levels. I think it was presented as part of the evidence in terms of the pandemic.

“And if you look at all of our documents after that, we strongly recommend that fear doesn’t work. Well, we have given some basic principles in the field of communication.

‘Messages had to be simple, reasons had to be explained, consistency was important. There were basic principles: fear was not one of them.