Again it appears we are not looking at what the UK did to see why they have had such a bad outcome with the Covid virus.It really doesn't lend support to the idea that lockdowns are the most important part of the public health response.They actually went into lockdown on March 15th over a week before Australia.
So what did they do differently?They didn't close their borders and were very variable in using quarantine.They continued to let visitors in from the EU and had no quarantine for those people.
In the beginning of their problems there were quite a few people returning from Italy after a skiing trip with symptoms.They were told they "might" be advised to self isolate.Several schools had such trips and had some with symptoms-mainly the staff that accompanied the children.
So only now have they said they will close the borders and introduce a 14 day compulsory quarantine.The horse has bolted so far it can not be seen anymore.
Although when announcing the lockdown it was part of the plan to do extra contact tracing and testing that really took a long time to ramp up.By mid march they were only doing 5000 tests a day.It looked better earlier on but only because initially they recorded each person tested as having 2 tests-nasal and saliva.Germany when the UK was doing 5000 tests per day were doing 70000 per day and much better contact tracing.
So again not that much evidence that the lockdown per se is very important in our response to Covid 19.
With the UK it would be quicker to make a list of what they did right, rather than what they did wrong.
Boris Johnson announced lockdown measures on 23 March, and so pretty much the same day Australia started lockdown measures. But in the UK they have just had a series of bungles and gaping holes. With their continued poor execution of pretty much everything to do with with combating Covid 19 I would not place much store in saying that lockdown do not work just because the UK has been a basket case. If your roof has many holes, patching one hole will not keep the rain out.
Instead I would look at the countries that have done well. Being successful has been achieved by good execution of a number of control measures, and most significantly by speed to act well. Those countries that were slower to act, had to adopt more severe control measures to flatten the curve.
The other factor is that it takes time to develop tools in both quality and scale, and this has not been equal for all countries. South Korea was able to deploy mass testing quicker than for example than Australia. Way behind Australia was say the USA, and way behind them all was the UK.
Lockdowns are a tool that can be deployed quickly and easily when there is a will do do so. lockdowns are thus a tool that can be used to allow a country to get their other tools in place, and also to provide time to address health facilities like ICU beds and PPE. Lockdowns are not just a one size fits all, and are different from country to to country. A lockdown is a requirement for people to stay where they are, to prevent mixing. Border controls are a part of what a lockdown should be for most countries as for most countries the people you most need to not mix with are the people who have Covid 19 outside of your country, and moreso when another country has higher levels.