<<Print>>

Scientists are not usually the most confrontational bunch. But in the past few weeks the normally staid and uncontroversial world of epidemiology – a branch of medicine that involves working out how diseases spread and what can be done to control them – has erupted into all-out war.

Personal insults have been traded and deeply polarised views have led to the academic equivalent of a stand-off. Senior scientists have been accused of bullying and 'tearing down' colleagues who they disagree with, and the public spats are becoming ever more heated.

So what is it that has so divided the nation's top experts? The answer is a crucial issue that has implications for us all – the route out of lockdown.
 
On one side are those who back the Government's roadmap – the implication that we will learn to live with the virus and accept a certain number of hospitalisations and deaths, like with seasonal flu, as a trade-off for regaining our freedom.

The Covid vaccines would 'take some of the heavy load' and mean that infections did not inevitably mean hospitalisations and deaths, Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty said last week

But there's an alternative view that is becoming increasingly prominent, with a growing band of scientists advocating a strategy known as Zero Covid – near elimination of the virus from Britain. 

It is, they point out, what China, Taiwan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand have achieved. And, as proof, they point to how normal life is in those countries right now.

For months their citizens have been free to socialise, go to theatres and attend packed festivals, rock concerts and nightclubs – often without a mask in sight. And it could be like this in Britain, say those who back Zero Covid. In this scenario, society would be opened up only when new Covid cases were vanishingly low and almost every person in the country had been vaccinated.

They warn that hopes of somehow keeping a highly infectious virus circulating at a low level are misplaced and any attempt to do so is likely to end in a third, horrific wave. And this – nightmarishly – would mean no other option but another lockdown to avoid the NHS being overwhelmed.

Those on the other side of the debate argue that eradicating the virus is impossible, even with the vaccine, without many more months of total lockdown. And even then there would doubtless be pockets in society where the virus could silently hide, only to spring up again when we thought it was safe.

There is little middle ground and it's fair to say tensions are running high in the scientific community.

But the stakes are high as the UK continues to battle against one of the highest Covid death and infection rates in the world. So can either side claim to have the answer?

First, there is one view that is almost universally agreed by scientists: more infections, and sadly more deaths, are inevitable if we follow our current path.

As Martin Hibberd, Professor of Emerging Infectious Disease at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, says: 'Every scenario to open up society leads to a rise in transmission.'

The virus is still in circulation, with just under 10,000 new cases a day at present. The crucial questions, however, are not if another wave will hit, but when – and how serious will it be?