The Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Boris Johnson.
Tobias Jose | Photo Alliance Getty Images
LONDON – British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Monday described the lifting of all remaining Covid restrictions in England as “minutes of honor” as he lays out the government’s long-term plan to live with the virus, causing concern among health professionals and opposition lawmakers.
The move will lead to a legal requirement of self-isolation for up to 10 days after a positive test result decreases a month earlier than planned. The government is also expected to cut access to free tests on Covid.
It only comes in a day Queen Elizabeth of Great Britain gave a positive result on Covid. According to Buckingham Palace, the 95-year-old monarch is experiencing mild symptoms. It is believed that the Queen made three injections of the coronavirus vaccine, but only the first was officially recognized.
Doctors have expressed concern about the government’s plan to “live with Covid”, and the opposition Labor Party has questioned the decision to phase out free sideways tests.
Speaking before the announcement, Johnson said the change in rules would be “a moment of pride after one of the most difficult periods in our country’s history”.
“The pandemic is not over, but thanks to the incredible spread of the vaccine, we are now one step closer to returning to normal and finally giving people back their freedom by continuing to protect themselves and others,” Johnson said.
The prime minister will meet with his cabinet on Monday morning before updating lawmakers in the House of Commons. The press conference is expected to take place later in the day.
Significant uncertainty
Downing Street says it is in a “strong position” to consider lifting the remaining legal restrictions in England following its vaccination program. He added that the pandemic “is not over” and the government will continue to take a cautious approach to learning to live with the virus.
In England, more than 81% of adults received the recommended dose of the vaccine, while the incidence continued to decline after a record high level caused by the high-transmissibility omicron variant.
The government’s emergency research advisory group said there was considerable uncertainty about the pandemic’s path in the UK
An open letter to about 300 scientists and physicians published on Sunday questioned the scientific basis of the government’s decision to end free testing, surveillance and legal isolation of Covid cases.
The signatories of the letter asked for clarity from the government’s scientific advisers regarding the advice underlying these decisions.
“Boris Johnson is declaring victory before the war is over, in an attempt to divert attention from police knocking on his door,” Labor spokesman Wes Street said on Twitter on Saturday.
Last week, Downing Street confirmed that Johnson had sent a written answer to police questions about parties held over the past two years. Johnson has so far resisted repeated calls to resign across the political spectrum, despite public anger over a long and growing list of alleged blocking violations.
An all-or-nothing approach?
WHO public health experts and epidemiologists have called on politicians to oppose an all-or-nothing approach to public health restrictions.
“We recognize this desire to open up, this desire to return to normal life. But if this desire to return to normal life in this sense will sustain this pandemic much longer than necessary, then we really need to think about it,” said Dr. last week. Mike Ryan, Executive Director of the WHO Health Emergency Program.
“If we get another option, and we have already given up all measures, it will be very difficult to put something back in place,” he added.
Maria Van Kerchowe, WHO technical director for Covid-19, said on Thursday that some countries are in a better position to repeal Covid measures because they have high levels of vaccination coverage and high levels of immunity. “But in many countries it is unrealistic to cancel everything at once.”
She added: “We just need countries not to do this ‘all or nothing’ approach because it’s confusing and I don’t blame anyone for being confused.”