“Now there is a clear, loud and public split” writes James Gallagher, BBC Health and science correspondent. Previously, scientists and politicians have “been following the same script” but as time has gone on the divide has become increasingly noticeable.
The Prime Minister’s recent revision of lockdown rules meaning increased numbers of people can social distance together in outdoor spaces, as well as certain primary school year groups being able to return from Monday, has sparked concerns among scientists.
How we can justify relaxing lockdown restrictions further, when the U.K. is still in risk category 4 and the reproductive R rate is still so near to 1, has been questioned by members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage).
Professor Peter Horby, member of Sage, raised such concerns on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme. He outlined his belief that another week or two of social measures would be far better than relaxing restrictions further and potentially returning to a compromising situation which would involve a loss of control.
Professor Sian Griffiths on BBC Breakfast acknowledged the conflicts of interest between scientists and politicians that have arisen. Whilst acknowledging that if scientists had the final say, lockdown would probably not be eased, the increasing pressure on the government as restrictions are still in place was also acknowledged.
Indeed, the government have had to think about the range of social problems that are being compounded as long as lockdown restrictions exist. Additionally, considerations that a temporary lifting of restrictions may boost morale in the long term and ensure better adherence to rules, if there was a situation where restrictions had to be tightened again, was also outlined.
Whilst views about the government’s most recent easing of measures are split, what seems particularly interesting is how this plays into a broader narrative of the nature of the formulation of policy and the power dynamics that underpin this.
Professor John Edmunds, member of Sage, admitted that it’s the ministers who have the final say with this clearly being “a political decision […] not a scientific” one.
Interestingly, even some politicians believe that the science needs to considered even more than it is currently. Andy Burnham, Greater Manchester Mayor and Labour politician, has spoken of how he believes that lockdown easing is premature.
Whilst it is commonly agreed that both the science and social impacts need to be considered, is it time to rethink how policy decisions are made during this time and in general, or are we fine as we are?
Amy Holliday
Featured image courtesy of mohamed Hassan on Pixabay. Image license found here. No changes were made to this image.