Thread by @toxvaerd1

I think they made two early tactical errors that made it difficult to formulate a comprehensive strategy. (1) lack of early and widespread random texting meant they didn’t understand the scale of the problem. They had only dim idea of speed of spread and of asymptomatic ratio.

https://twitter.com/jonheathcote/status/1322963686630264841

(2) by design, they set up silos of expertise that seem to have had minimal mutual communication and coordination. Each would give independent advice on different aspects, and each largely ignoring effects of recommendations on other domain.

I do not want to ignore the tactical missteps as I think they are sufficiently legio to explain many of our problems, even if we disregard the apparent lack of strategy.

As for strategy, I have to heed my own advice and not oversimplify. Overall, some kind of cost benefit analysis is inescapable and even desirable. The shape of restrictions, in most work that I’m aware of, roughly follows the underlying dynamics of the disease.

So stronger suppression when numbers increase. I suspect that they started too late, eased too much and too early. From casual observation, there was very little social distancing over the summer months.

Low hanging fruit would have been to actually implement the rules that were imposed. Police seem to have been reluctant to do this, imposing penalties only for extreme violations. More should have been done to create precedents. This worked in Greece.

I also think more generous support should have been given to aid self-isolation. Statutory sick pay etc. In deciding on sums, it seems that health benefits complete ignored.

Last, in cost benefit calculations, should also consider likely scenarios with waning immunity, which greatly increase benefits of suppression. This would give more accurate picture of tradeoffs.