Do nothing approach to tackle coronavirus epidemic could have led to almost 500,000 deaths

Almost 500,000 people could have died from coronavirus if the UK had adopted a ‘do-nothing’ approach associated with earlier ‘herd immunity’ plans, a study has suggested.

As the virus began to take a stranglehold on the UK last month, the Government mooted the concept of beating back the disease by allowing 80 per cent of the country to become infected.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his chief experts, England’s chief medical officer Professor Chris Whitty and chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, then dramatically changed tactics, introducing a nationwide lockdown.

And a new study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has illustrated the potentially disastrous effect of a ‘do-nothing’ strategy.

The researchers estimated there would have been at least 24million cases, meaning that 85 per cent of the population would have been infected, with as many as 470,000 deaths.

In the nightmare scenario, the number of intensive care beds needed could have been as many as 360,000 – 80 times higher than UK capacity, which the experts said is 4,562 beds.

Almost 500,000 people could have died from coronavirus if the UK had adopted a ‘do-nothing’ approach associated with earlier ‘herd immunity’ plans, a study has suggested

Herd immunity is when enough people become resistant to a disease – through vaccination or previous exposure – that it can no longer significantly spread among the rest of the population.

The concept first entered the UK’s phraseology when the government’s chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance mentioned it in a broadcast interview.

Sir Patrick told the BBC on March 13: ‘Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission.’

But two days later, Health Secretary Matt Hancock clarified that herd immunity was not a government policy.

Nearly two weeks ago, Mr Johnson then introduced a nationwide lockdown, forcing all non-essential businesses to close, shutting schools and ordering people to stay at home.

The latest study examined the impact of different measures – including those such as social distancing and school closures, as well as a full lockdown – on the projected coronavirus death toll.

As the virus began to take a stranglehold on the UK last month, Government scientist Sir Patrick Vallance (pictured) mooted the concept of beating back the disease by allowing 80 per cent of the country to become infected

As the virus began to take a stranglehold on the UK last month, Government scientist Sir Patrick Vallance (pictured) mooted the concept of beating back the disease by allowing 80 per cent of the country to become infected

The authors warned that ‘extreme measures’ are likely to be needed to ‘bring the epidemic under control and to prevent very large numbers of deaths and an excess of demand on hospital beds, especially in ICUs’.

In a scenario where officials did nothing to tackle the epidemic, there would have been a projected 370,000 deaths, with an upwards estimate of 470,000.

The experts said this figure did not account for the numbers of people who would have died from other ailments because overwhelmed hospitals would not have been able to treat them.

In a scenario where ‘intensive interventions’ – including social distancing, school closures and shielding of the elderly – were introduced in combination but a lockdown was still avoided, there still could have been up to 270,000 deaths, the experts said.

Britain’s ICU capacity could have been breached by five-fold or more for several weeks despite the measures.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his chief experts, England's chief medical officer Professor Chris Whitty and chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, then dramatically changed tactics, introducing a nationwide lockdown

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his chief experts, England’s chief medical officer Professor Chris Whitty and chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance, then dramatically changed tactics, introducing a nationwide lockdown 

The team also looked at scenarios where a lockdown was introduced at different stages of the epidemic.

If a lockdown had been introduced when 1,000 beds were occupied, up to 170,000 people could have died, while if one was introduced after 2,000 beds were in use, there could have been up to 200,000 deaths.

And if a lockdown was left until after the point where Britain’s ICU capacity was breached – with 5,000 beds occupied – there could have been as many as 240,000 deaths.

The study authors also cautioned that the current lockdown measures being imposed on the UK may need to be in place ‘for a large proportion of the current year’ if the demand for medical services is not to go beyond Britain’s availability.

The team warned: ‘The characteristics of [the new coronavirus] mean that extreme measures are likely [to be] required to bring the epidemic under control and to prevent very large numbers of deaths and an excess of demand on hospital beds, especially in ICUs.

‘In a scenario where ‘lockdown’-type interventions were put in place to reduce transmission, these interventions would need to be in place for a large proportion of the coming year in order to prevent healthcare demand exceeding availability.’

The study comes despite a senior Downing Street scientific adviser warning yesterday that Britain’s coronavirus lockdown has pinned Britain ‘into a corner’ with no obvious exit strategy.

Professor Graham Medley, the government’s chief pandemic modeller, said the only viable path through the health emergency would be to let people become infected so they are no longer vulnerable.

A new study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has illustrated the potentially disastrous effect of a 'do-nothing' strategy. Pictured: Police on horseback speak to people in Greenwich Park in London on Sunday

A new study by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has illustrated the potentially disastrous effect of a ‘do-nothing’ strategy. Pictured: Police on horseback speak to people in Greenwich Park in London on Sunday

He warned the current restrictions would not steer the country out of the pandemic – only prevent a short-term spread – but would bring the economy to its knees.

Mounting unemployment, domestic violence and burgeoning mental health issues could be widespread if the normal functioning of society remains paralysed, Prof Medley forecast.

Describing a trade-off between harming the lives of the young versus safeguarding the wellbeing of the elderly, the scientist said the Prime Minister had a ‘big decision’ to make on April 13 when the lockdown will be reviewed.

Yet noises from Number 10 suggests the current curbs to everyday life will not be lifted, with Health Secretary Matt Hancock yesterday urging the public to ‘keep their discipline’.

He begged Britons to stay indoors ahead of a warm weekend as the UK announced 684 more Covid-19 fatalities, hiking the death toll to 3,605 – surpassing that reported by China – and more than 38,000 cases.

Professor Neil Ferguson, who is also advising the government, said that he hopes the current restrictions could be eased by the end of May, but it would certainly not be ‘a return to normal life’.

The researchers estimated there would have been at least 24million cases, meaning that 85 per cent of the population would have been infected, with as many as 470,000 deaths. Pictured: Deserted Oxford Street last month after Boris Johnson introduced a nationwide lockdown

The researchers estimated there would have been at least 24million cases, meaning that 85 per cent of the population would have been infected, with as many as 470,000 deaths. Pictured: Deserted Oxford Street last month after Boris Johnson introduced a nationwide lockdown

This morning, he told the BBC’s Today programme: ‘I don’t think anyone wants to lift measures at the current time and risk the epidemic getting worse.

‘But if we see a rapid decline in cases, then of course the government will consider if they can relax those measures and modify certain measures in a way which is safe and still ensures the epidemic goes down.’

In March, Health Secretary Matt Hancock clarified that herd immunity was not a Government policy.

‘Herd immunity is not a part of it. That is a scientific concept, not a goal or a strategy,’ he wrote in a newspaper article.

But Prof Medley warned that the controversial method may be the only solution as under his modelling, simply allowing people suddenly back to work or school would cause a resurgence in cases of the virus.

He said an antibody test, which shows whether a person has had the virus and could therefore be immune, could help, but that one had never before been used in the management of such an outbreak.

A professor of infectious disease modelling at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, he told the Times: ‘This disease is so nasty that we had to suppress it completely.

‘Then we’ve kind of painted ourselves into a corner, because then the question will be what do we do now?’

Read more at DailyMail.co.uk