Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London, the modeling of which was instrumental in convincing the government to initiate the first lockdown, said scientists were increasingly concerned about the lack of a clear plan and over 20,000 in the week leading up to March 13, 2020 30,000 lives could have been saved through earlier measures.
When asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today program, when the Emergency Scientific Advisory Group (Sage) of which he was a member stated that a policy of pursuing herd immunity would result in large numbers of deaths, he said that one Important meeting with the NHS on March 1, “The health impact estimates are completed, so the week after that really.”
Prof. Ferguson said he was “unfamiliar with what officials within the government were thinking,” but added, “I would say there has been increasing scientific concern about the lack of clarity this week leading up to March 13th Let’s say (a) Make decisions about what will happen in the next few days in terms of implementing social distancing. “
When asked how influential Sage was in changing the policy from herd immunity to lockdown, he said, “I think the main problem … it’s several factors, partly the modeling, which has been around for a couple of weeks, but has become more solid. Especially since we’ve seen data from the UK and unfortunately I think one of the biggest lessons we can learn in such circumstances is that we really need good surveillance in the country at a much earlier point in time than we did in March actually had last year.
“When we saw that the data built up and it matched the modeling, even worse than the modeling, we say it focused the mind.”
He then said having a lockdown a week earlier would have saved 20,000 to 30,000 lives, “and I think that’s undeniable. I mean, the epidemic doubled every three to four days for the weeks of March 13-23 If we had postponed the interventions by a week, we would have shortened it and saved many lives. “