Air bridges with European countries given "green light"

[Skimpot flyer]

So how long are we expected to wait for it to be eradicated (which it won't be)? After one or two years we're still not going anywhere do we wait another one or two years and so on? We just need to get on with life and that includes travelling abroad. Government on about reintroducing quarantines to previous green light countries is really just daft when the virus is not running amok throughout said country. A few thousand new cases is not worth worrying about.

Well said indeed.
An excerpt from an article by Lord Sumption makes a point far more eloquently than any words I could offer...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/...-withering-critique-Governments-lockdown.html

‘What sort of life do we think we are protecting? There is more to life than the avoidance of death. Life is a drink with friends. Life is a crowded football match or a live concert. Life is a family celebration with children and grandchildren. Life is companionship, an arm around one's back, laughter or tears shared at less than two metres. These things are not just optional extras. They are life itself. They are fundamental to our humanity, to our existence as social beings. Of course death is permanent, whereas joy may be temporarily suspended. But the force of that point depends on how temporary it really is’

 

[Ianno87]

So how long are we expected to wait for it to be eradicated (which it won't be)? After one or two years we're still not going anywhere do we wait another one or two years and so on? We just need to get on with life and that includes travelling abroad. Government on about reintroducing quarantines to previous green light countries is really just daft when the virus is not running amok throughout said country. A few thousand new cases is not worth worrying about.

And, for the time being, keeping international travel limited within groups countries with a similar (low) rate of infection is a more than pragmatic approach.

 

[Richard Scott]

And, for the time being, keeping international travel limited within groups countries with a similar (low) rate of infection is a more than pragmatic approach.

The question still remains, how long for? None of the measures implemented since this whole thing started has had any sort of time scale or a point at which the numbers are considered low enough discussed to remove them. This cannot carry on.

 

[Planesandtrain]

The question still remains, how long for? None of the measures implemented since this whole thing started has had any sort of time scale or a point at which the numbers are considered low enough discussed to remove them. This cannot carry on.

The trouble is the restrictions can be removed and infections stay low with track and trace system. However, one oversight and an unlucky set of circumstances and bang a whole region has seen community transmission, two weeks later healthcare is overwhelmed and lockdown. I think quite highly of the system that Germany is adopting, compulsory testing for all those coming back from areas with high rates of coronavirus. Bavaria is going a step further and making free tests available for anyone visiting at airports, border crossings stations etc and there are signs of this being rolled out across the whole country. If we are to keep the way of life we have now (which I won't say is perfect but is a lot better than lockdown) then we have to become more proactive rather than reactive in our response rather than slapping down blanket 14-day quarantines.

 

[Yew]

‘What sort of life do we think we are protecting? There is more to life than the avoidance of death. Life is a drink with friends. Life is a crowded football match or a live concert. Life is a family celebration with children and grandchildren. Life is companionship, an arm around one's back, laughter or tears shared at less than two metres. These things are not just optional extras. They are life itself. They are fundamental to our humanity, to our existence as social beings. Of course death is permanent, whereas joy may be temporarily suspended. But the force of that point depends on how temporary it really is’

This reminds me of the old headline from the Vietnam war "We destroyed the village to save it".

 

[bramling]

I've spent 4 months feeling like I'm failing my kids due to having to balance them and work at the same time. All the time

An educational foreign experience is the least I owe them. Not near a beach or any all you can eat English breakfasts.

But yes, people say "Diddums" and take a cheap shot instead...

I can see two sides to this one. It was people taking foreign holidays in January, February and March which seems to have brought a lot of Coronavirus infections to Britain in the first place. With a dose of hindsight, it’s incredible schools in my town were still going ahead with ski trips to Italy as late as March.

Having comprehensively trashed the economy, spent billions of pounds that we don’t have, and 45,000 deaths later, on the basis of a suppression strategy, do we *really* want to risk going back to square one just because a few people are desperate to go on holiday?

I do sympathise with the situation, however when put like above it does seem rather perverse.

 

[43066]

I can see two sides to this one. It was people taking foreign holidays in January, February and March which seems to have brought a lot of Coronavirus infections to Britain in the first place. With a dose of hindsight, it’s incredible schools in my town we’re still going ahead with ski trips to Italy as late as March.

Extraordinary that the borders were left open, even during the initial stages of lockdown. I’m not confident that the a “suppression strategy” was being followed. I suspect there was (and is) no strategy other than slavishly following public opinion.

Having comprehensively trashed the economy, spent billions of pounds that we don’t have, and 45,000 deaths later, on the basis of a suppression strategy, do we *really* want to risk going back to square one just because a few people are desperate to go on holiday?

I do sympathise with the situation, however when put like above it does seem rather perverse.

Now that we being are simultaneously advised by our government to “go and and make the most of what you’ve been missing”, yet also to “stay home as much as possible”, and also to wear masks etc. it’s clear that the messaging no longer makes any rational sense, and is completely devoid of meaning.

There’s a good case for saying we should simply strive to go back to normal, as quickly as possible, and pretend the whole thing never happened?!

That wouldn’t be any less dishonest than the current, confused approach, which is the worst of all worlds. The silver lining is that we can properly crash out with no deal in December and the economic fallout (if any) can be blamed on Covid. In fact maybe that was Boris’ plan all along.
If so, he’s got a few years to up his game, and regain his political kudos.

At least that’s my glass half full analysis. Maybe every cloud has a silver lining .

 

[bramling]

Extraordinary that the borders were left open, even during the initial stages of lockdown. I’m not confident that the a “suppression strategy” was being followed. I suspect there was (and is) no strategy other than slavishly following public opinion.




Now that we being are simultaneously advised by our government to “go and and make the most of what you’ve been missing”, yet also to “stay home as much as possible”, and also to wear masks etc. it’s clear that the messaging no longer makes any rational sense, and is completely devoid of meaning.

There’s a good case for saying we should simply strive to go back to normal, as quickly as possible, and pretend the whole thing never happened?!

That wouldn’t be any less dishonest than the current, confused approach, which is the worst of all worlds. The silver lining is that we can properly crash out with no deal in December and the economic fallout (if any) can be blamed on Covid. In fact maybe that was Boris’ plan all along.
If so, he’s got a few years to up his game, and regain his political kudos.

Every cloud has a silver lining .

Yes fully agreed. As you say the messages have now got completely blurred. We’ve paid billions in return for suppression, and our track and trace clearly isn’t robust enough to cope with large numbers of imported infections. On that basis it seems the recent Spain decision actually perhaps is a rare example of the government doing something pro-active in all this. Let’s face it Boris was only encouraging foreign holidays because he thought it would be popular and keep people sweet.

Love her or loathe her at least it’s clear Sturgeon seems to be pursuing an elimination strategy. Goodness knows what we’re aiming for. Elimination simply isn’t compatible with foreign holidays when there’s so much Covid round the world at this moment.

 

[43066]

Love her or loathe her at least it’s clear Sturgeon seems to be pursuing an elimination strategy. Goodness knows what we’re aiming for. Elimination simply isn’t compatible with foreign holidays when there’s so much Covid round the world at this moment.

I can’t really fault Sturgeon. She is a smart and canny operator. I don’t agree with her politics, but she’s all over Boris like a rash, and she’s running rings around him.

That’s because he and his government are doing an utterly shocking job at the moment. I’m sure you agree, and you and I both voted for them. We are not the only people who are saying this.

There’s a hell lot of work for them to do to turn this around.

 

[bramling]

I can’t really fault Sturgeon. She is a smart and canny operator. I don’t agree with her politics, but she’s all over Boris like a rash, and she’s running rings around him.

That’s because he and his government are doing an utterly shocking job at the moment. I’m sure you agree, and you and I both voted for them. We are not the only people who are saying this.

There’s a hell lot of work for them to do to turn this around.

It’s a shambles for sure, and I think there’s now a reasonably likelihood that this will indirectly lead to Scottish independence. Blair is partly to blame for that however, by laying building blocks, and for leaving a loophole in the devolution arrangements. In Boris’s very slight defence it’s easier for Sturgeon when she’s not liable for the bill that goes with the economic repercussions, however even ignoring policy decisions Sturgeon’s communications alone have been so much better.

But we digress, here we have yet another example of lurching from one thing to another. It should have been obvious for the last few weeks that alarm bells are ringing in parts of the world, and that sooner or later this was going to have implications. Still, just think soon we’ll all be getting £10 off a meal!

 

[Ianno87]

I can see two sides to this one. It was people taking foreign holidays in January, February and March which seems to have brought a lot of Coronavirus infections to Britain in the first place. With a dose of hindsight, it’s incredible schools in my town were still going ahead with ski trips to Italy as late as March.

Having comprehensively trashed the economy, spent billions of pounds that we don’t have, and 45,000 deaths later, on the basis of a suppression strategy, do we *really* want to risk going back to square one just because a few people are desperate to go on holiday?

I do sympathise with the situation, however when put like above it does seem rather perverse.

To me, being able to travel to a set of countries where the rate of infection is the same or better than the UK, and where similar rules and distancing are in place, does not seem to be risking sending things back to square one any more than heading to a packed Bournemouth beach does.

The situation back in Jan-Mar was simply out of control.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes fully agreed. As you say the messages have now got completely blurred. We’ve paid billions in return for suppression, and our track and trace clearly isn’t robust enough to cope with large numbers of imported infections. On that basis it seems the recent Spain decision actually perhaps is a rare example of the government doing something pro-active in all this. Let’s face it Boris was only encouraging foreign holidays because he thought it would be popular and keep people sweet.

It might be a quick decision, that doesn't mean its the right one. Other countries are taking a more pragmatic approach, looking at individual areas, and even in the case of Leicester single cities to mandate quarantine when travelling from them. Which in this case is probably the right decision, Spain is a huge country and in many of it's mainland & island destinations have infection rates much lower than in the two affected regions. Boris just went for a hammer approach, and has now probably for the first time in this pandemic caused real anger. This might prove to be the seed that turns anger into cynicism towards their approach, and in time reduced compliance for this and other measures.

​

Love her or loathe her at least it’s clear Sturgeon seems to be pursuing an elimination strategy. Goodness knows what we’re aiming for. Elimination simply isn’t compatible with foreign holidays when there’s so much Covid round the world at this moment.

There is one terrible flaw with her strategy, its completely impossible. Talk of viral elimination is, or at least should be the reserve of politicians. Most epidemiologists would never talk in those terms, because simply put viruses care not one jot about political targets. Even when areas report zero cases, this should not be assumed to be zero virus. In fact as New Zealand has shown, the virus will just wait for it's chance or mutate enough to pass undetected through us.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

It might be a quick decision, that doesn't mean its the right one. Other countries are taking a more pragmatic approach, looking at individual areas, and even in the case of Leicester single cities to mandate quarantine when travelling from them. Which in this case is probably the right decision, Spain is a huge country and in many of it's mainland & island destinations have infection rates much lower than in the two affected regions. Boris just went for a hammer approach, and has now probably for the first time in this pandemic caused real anger. This might prove to be the seed that turns anger into cynicism towards their approach, and in time reduced compliance for this and other measures.

Agreed. Allegedly the reason that a blanket approach was taken was that there is no way of knowing which part of the country someone has been in the previous 14 days. But that doesn't add up on multiple counts - firstly, well over 90% of people going to and from Spain will be tourists that stay in one (safe) place only.

Furthermore, you could just as easily travel to France or any other quarantine-exempt country first, and then return to the UK. Unless the authorities are taking UK exit passport data from the airlines and then putting 2 and 2 together (seems far too complex for the government to manage to start doing it overnight), there's no way you would know that someone has been to Spain at all.

Initially I thought that the Spanish quarantine was all a bit of a non-issue, but when you realise how much it's taking up the headlines, and how many people are actually affected, becomes quite quickly clear that people are going to become resentful of the government. They've stopping members of the public going on well-deserved holidays that in the vast majority of cases are going to be spent doing low-risk activities like lounging on the beach or swimming in the pool.

Frankly, I think very few people would go to the effort of deliberately evading any region or city-specific quarantine. As the mask mandate has shown, even if you introduce something that the majority aren't really in favour of and wouldn't do voluntarily, if you make it (or pretend it to be) the law, then the vast majority of the sheeple will comply. Even where there are ways of exempting yourself without needing evidence.

In reality, I suspect that all they really wanted to do was to stop the "lads on tour to Magaluf" kind of holidays, which are where the risk arises (note the precipitous drop in the average age of Spanish infectees). But they couldn't bring it over themselves to openly discriminate against young people, who have already been massively disadvantaged throughout the whole pandemic for very little personal benefit.

Just the same as they couldn't bring themselves to truly lockdown individual estates or suburbs with flare-ups in places like Leicester, Luton and Blackburn, to avoid any appearance of discrimination against what are predominantly the extended (often poorer and/or minority-ethnic) households behind the outbreaks. Instead they'd rather go for collateral damage by locking down the likes of Darwen even though it's only 1 or 2 wards of Blackburn that actually have a problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Frankly, I think very few people would go to the effort of deliberately evading any region or city-specific quarantine. As the mask mandate has shown, even if you introduce something that the majority aren't really in favour of and wouldn't do voluntarily, if you make it (or pretend it to be) the law, then the vast majority of the sheeple will comply.

Or, put differently, most people are law-abiding. If you ask them to do something they don't like, they won't do it. But if you make it the law, they mostly will. I don't think calling law-abiding people "sheeple" is fair; it's simply the default in the vast majority of cases.

 

[Bantamzen]

Agreed. Allegedly the reason that a blanket approach was taken was that there is no way of knowing which part of the country someone has been in the previous 14 days. But that doesn't add up on multiple counts - firstly, well over 90% of people going to and from Spain will be tourists that stay in one (safe) place only.

Furthermore, you could just as easily travel to France or any other quarantine-exempt country first, and then return to the UK. Unless the authorities are taking UK exit passport data from the airlines and then putting 2 and 2 together (seems far too complex for the government to manage to start doing it overnight), there's no way you would know that someone has been to Spain at all.

Initially I thought that the Spanish quarantine was all a bit of a non-issue, but when you realise how much it's taking up the headlines, and how many people are actually affected, becomes quite quickly clear that people are going to become resentful of the government. They've stopping members of the public going on well-deserved holidays that in the vast majority of cases are going to be spent doing low-risk activities like lounging on the beach or swimming in the pool.

Frankly, I think very few people would go to the effort of deliberately evading any region or city-specific quarantine. As the mask mandate has shown, even if you introduce something that the majority aren't really in favour of and wouldn't do voluntarily, if you make it (or pretend it to be) the law, then the vast majority of the sheeple will comply. Even where there are ways of exempting yourself without needing evidence.

In reality, I suspect that all they really wanted to do was to stop the "lads on tour to Magaluf" kind of holidays, which are where the risk arises (note the precipitous drop in the average age of Spanish infectees). But they couldn't bring it over themselves to openly discriminate against young people, who have already been massively disadvantaged throughout the whole pandemic for very little personal benefit.

Just the same as they couldn't bring themselves to truly lockdown individual estates or suburbs with flare-ups in places like Leicester, Luton and Blackburn, to avoid any appearance of discrimination against what are predominantly the extended (often poorer and/or minority-ethnic) households behind the outbreaks. Instead they'd rather go for collateral damage by locking down the likes of Darwen even though it's only 1 or 2 wards of Blackburn that actually have a problem.

It may seem to be an odd reason for a sudden, and noticeable change in media coverage, but given that Brits have by and large quietly complied with all measures thus far its not entirely surprising. The relaxation of the quarantine was seen as a sign that we could at least gather back some sense of normality, travelling abroad is deeply enshrined in our culture no matter what some people think. So when people started to head out on their jollies, nobody expected a sudden reverse, partly because the government have pretty much avoiding ever making such quick decisions, and partly because someone sitting on a island off the coast of Africa is suddenly told they have to quarantine because of a spike in case literally on another continent. Even people in closer resorts will be looking many hundreds of miles to the north of Spain and asking why? Its all the more frustrating because we have recently given exactly the same kind of decision making for local measures to local councils.

In terms of the "lads tours", Spain is largely mitigating for these themselves. Many bars and clubs are still very much closed over there, and local Police agencies are being far more strict in control than we are here. Indeed on the Balearic Islands the local authorities are actually pushing hard not only to enforce these measures, but actually working to move the islands from the club scene type holidays, to more family & cultural ones. So if this is what Boris is hoping for, he's way behind the times (not surprising BTW!).

 

[Skimpot flyer]

The situation back in Jan-Mar was simply out of control.

It wasn’t any better in mid-April, either. My partner and I returned from Australia, had no temperature checks and no requirement to quarantine. Now, three months later, infections and deaths here are massively lower, and suddenly it’s considered important to quarantine? Shambolic handling of the whole situation by Boris & co

 

[AdamWW]

It may seem to be an odd reason for a sudden, and noticeable change in media coverage, but given that Brits have by and large quietly complied with all measures thus far its not entirely surprising. The relaxation of the quarantine was seen as a sign that we could at least gather back some sense of normality, travelling abroad is deeply enshrined in our culture no matter what some people think. So when people started to head out on their jollies, nobody expected a sudden reverse, partly because the government have pretty much avoiding ever making such quick decisions, and partly because someone sitting on a island off the coast of Africa is suddenly told they have to quarantine because of a spike in case literally on another continent. Even people in closer resorts will be looking many hundreds of miles to the north of Spain and asking why? Its all the more frustrating because we have recently given exactly the same kind of decision making for local measures to local councils.

It does seem very odd to include the Canaries which are politically not geographically part of Spain.

Going back to SARS, I recall travel insurance companies banning all travel to Canada because there were a few cases in Toronto. The US was fine though.

So you were at great risk in Vancouver, but not in New York.

I could be wrong but I suspect an infection in Toronto is much more likely to make its way to New York than the west coast of Canada.

Yes you have to draw the line somewhere, but in both cases I'm not sure it was drawn in the correct place.

 

[AdamWW]

It wasn’t any better in mid-April, either. My partner and I returned from Australia, had no temperature checks and no requirement to quarantine. Now, three months later, infections and deaths here are massively lower, and suddenly it’s considered important to quarantine? Shambolic handling of the whole situation by Boris & co

But that's the whole point, isn't it?

With widespread community transmission, a few cases from abroad are neither here nor there.

Once you have infection levels down, imported infection is a much bigger threat.

 

[Bantamzen]

It does seem very odd to include the Canaries which are politically not geographically part of Spain.

Going back to SARS, I recall travel insurance companies banning all travel to Canada because there were a few cases in Toronto. The US was fine though.

So you were at great risk in Vancouver, but not in New York.

I could be wrong but I suspect an infection in Toronto is much more likely to make its way to New York than the west coast of Canada.

Yes you have to draw the line somewhere, but in both cases I'm not sure it was drawn in the correct place.

I definitely think with large countries like Spain, you need to dive a bit deeper into the data, where cases are occurring before hitting the collapse button. Interestingly regarding insurance, I'm reading that Emirates are to offer specialist insurance to it's passengers to cover covid disruption, quarantine, and even funeral costs. So this may start to add a little more pressure to the insurance industry to look to start to cover it more as travel increases.

 

[AdamWW]

I definitely think with large countries like Spain, you need to dive a bit deeper into the data, where cases are occurring before hitting the collapse button. Interestingly regarding insurance, I'm reading that Emirates are to offer specialist insurance to it's passengers to cover covid disruption, quarantine, and even funeral costs. So this may start to add a little more pressure to the insurance industry to look to start to cover it more as travel increases.

I think we're going to have to give people cover for Covid cancellation if they are to travel again in any numbers.

Clearly that's going to require either an increase in premiums or a government scheme from either end (more likely that the government of a tourist destination should want to encourage incoming travel than the UK government would want to use taxpayer's money to encourage us to go abroad I'd have thought...)

 

[Bantamzen]

I think we're going to have to give people cover for Covid cancellation if they are to travel again in any numbers.

Clearly that's going to require either an increase in premiums or a government scheme from either end (more likely that the government of a tourist destination should want to encourage incoming travel than the UK government would want to use taxpayer's money to encourage us to go abroad I'd have thought...)

And I think it will come, because the first companies to get in on the act might just gain a serious foothold. Yes it will need higher premiums, and maybe intervention from tourist destinations, but if you can get adequate cover for the medical funding black hole that is the US, you should be able to cover this.

 

[AdamWW]

And I think it will come, because the first companies to get in on the act might just gain a serious foothold. Yes it will need higher premiums, and maybe intervention from tourist destinations, but if you can get adequate cover for the medical funding black hole that is the US, you should be able to cover this.

I think you're right, thought the US is low-risk/potentially huge cost whereas Covid cancellation is (at present) fairly high-risk/contained costs.

Of course the thing to watch out for is policies that look as if they are providing cover but actually have so many exclusions that they are worthless.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

But that's the whole point, isn't it?

With widespread community transmission, a few cases from abroad are neither here nor there.

Once you have infection levels down, imported infection is a much bigger threat.

The point I was making was that if, perhaps, we’d tested and quarantined international arrivals from February, we might not have had so many cases imported and thus less transmission in the community.
Most of Australia’s cases can be traced directly back to travellers importing coronavirus on their return from overseas. (Aside from air passengers, another major source was from cruise passengers being allowed to disembark and disperse to their homes across Australia, again without testing or any quarantine)

 

[AdamWW]

The point I was making was that if, perhaps, we’d tested and quarantined international arrivals from February, we might not have had so many cases imported and thus less transmission in the community.
Most of Australia’s cases can be traced directly back to travellers importing coronavirus on their return from overseas. (Aside from air passengers, another major source was from cruise passengers being allowed to disembark and disperse to their homes across Australia, again without testing or any quarantine)

Yes absolutely in February an effective way of testing incoming passengers (not just temperature screening) or quarantining would probably have made a huge difference - if nothing else quarantining would have supressed travel somewhat. You seemed to be talking about April when infection rates were already much higher, though.

I think what in hindsight would have made a huge difference would have been recommending against inessential travel to any areas of Italy much sooner. But I'm not sure it would have been easy to do. Even now, people are arguing over whether Spain merits a whole-country quarantine rule or just for affected parts of the country...

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

The point I was making was that if, perhaps, we’d tested and quarantined international arrivals from February, we might not have had so many cases imported and thus less transmission in the community.
Most of Australia’s cases can be traced directly back to travellers importing coronavirus on their return from overseas. (Aside from air passengers, another major source was from cruise passengers being allowed to disembark and disperse to their homes across Australia, again without testing or any quarantine)

A strict quarantine for passengers from countries with cases, introduced back in January would have pilloried the travel industry but saved almost everything else. We could probably have paid the travel industry all their losses about 500 times over with the money that indecision has now cost us. No point crying over spilt milk now though.

 

[AdamWW]

A strict quarantine for passengers from countries with cases, introduced back in January would have pilloried the travel industry but saved almost everything else. We could probably have paid the travel industry all their losses about 500 times over with the money that indecision has now cost us. No point crying over spilt milk now though.

Absolutely.

Or if the goverment had just covered everybody's costs (plus a bit more for the inconvenience?) if they cancelled their holidays.
There must have been people who would have liked to cancel their ski-ing holidays but faced with losing all their money if they did, went ahead anyway.

At the time I'm sure that would be been seen as an apalling waste of tax money, but in retrospect....

I think in the future we're going to see travel restrictions coming in much more quickly - and then we can all argue whether they worked to prevent another pandemic or were an over-reaction....

 

[Reliablebeam]

There was a report in the Telegraph that claims a big factor in the Spanish quarantine was the number of people coming back from there infected, although the quoted numbers were still a small fraction of our 6-800 ish cases per day. In my social and work circle, which does have a variety of political opinions, this seems to have pushed people into considerable anger and resentment, with many people saying, correctly in my view, you are at more risk in many parts of England than you are in much of Europe. Some conspiracy theorists wonder whether this might be a Brexit negotiating tactic??? I'd also suspect the only reason we can't have a 'regional' approach to this is because the UK border IT systems probably can't handle it...

On another note, I wonder whether a 'holiday' in general is worth the hassle this year. It's a matter of time before 'staycationers' bring a nasty outbreak of The 'Rona to one of our national parks or seaside towns, all of whom are ill equipped to deal with it if it starts spreading through their elderly demographic..

 

[Tetchytyke]

The answer I suspect is until you are really need to travel for personal reasons

Then you'd suspect wrong. I'd happily keep the border closed if the alternative is what is happening in Australia, or Catalonia, or Leicester.

It can't last forever but that doesn't mean we should say "bugger it" and move too quickly either.

The answer really does depend on the rest of the world.

 

[Tetchytyke]

There is one terrible flaw with her strategy, its completely impossible.

This keeps getting repeated, but it's not really true, is it. If you impose lockdown then the virus transfer domestically will slow to a standstill. If you prevent foreign travel you stop importing the virus from elsewhere. It will fizzle out domestically. It did in New Zealand.

The problem with acting too quickly is you end up yo-yoing between lockdown and not-lockdown, which is not good for anyone.

 

[Bantamzen]

This keeps getting repeated, but it's not really true, is it. If you impose lockdown then the virus transfer domestically will slow to a standstill. If you prevent foreign travel you stop importing the virus from elsewhere. It will fizzle out domestically. It did in New Zealand.

The problem with acting too quickly is you end up yo-yoing between lockdown and not-lockdown, which is not good for anyone.

I don't know how many times this needs repeating, but in the history of virology only 2 viruses have ever been eradicated, smallpox & rinderpest.