The Economist - USA (2020-10-17)

12 Leaders The EconomistOctober 17th 2020

1

I

n onesenseit marksthereturnofpoliticsasusual;inanother

itisa signofloomingcrisis.OnOctober13thBritain’sopposi-

tionLabourPartysplitsharplyfromthegovernment,callingfora

“circuit-breaker”,a two-orthree-weeknationallockdowntocut

thespreadofcovid-19.AsEuropeandAmericastrugglewitha

surgeincases,othergovernmentsmayalsocomeunderpres-

suretodothesame.Itwouldbea mistake.Thebenefitsofa na-

tionallockdownnolongerjustifythecosts.Atthisstageofthe

pandemicgovernmentsshouldfocusonlocalmeasures.

Theimpulsetodosomethingisunderstandable.Newreport-

eddailycasesinBritainareata recordseven-dayaverageofover

15,000andaredoublingeverytwoweeks.Localleadersarean-

geredbyconfusingordersfromWhitehall(see

Britainsection).NowonderLabourhasseized

onBorisJohnson’sfalteringperformance.

Backersofashort, sharplockdown sayit

wouldsavelives—perhaps7,000orsoaccording

tomodellingforscientistsadvisingthegovern-

ment.Bycuttingthevirus’sspread,theNational

HealthServicewouldbesparedthesortofover-

loadthatcausedsomanydeathsinItalyearlier

intheyear.Oncetheepidemichadbeenresetata lowerlevel,the

tracingsystemmightbeabletodealmorepromptlywiththe

dailyburdenofnewcases,helpingtolowertherateofinfections.

Anationallockdownmakessenseonlyifa countryiscom-

pletelyoverwhelmedandunderprepared—asatthestartofthe

pandemic.NeitheristrueofBritaintoday.Althoughtherecord-

ednumberofcasesinBritainisoverthreetimesitspeakinApril,

thecomparisonismisleading.Forallthesystem’sfaults,the

dailyvolumeoftestsisover 20 timeswhatit wasthen.Mildcases

thatwouldhavegoneunreportedsixmonthsagoarenowpicked

up(seechart).Thishelpsexplainwhydeaths,ataround 450 last

week,arestilljust8%ofwhattheywereinApril.Thefatalityrate

willincrease,becauseit lagsbehindcasesbythreetofourweeks.

Butbettertreatmentsarealsosavinglives.Inchoosingtoact,

deathsaremoreimportantthancases.

Itisnotclearthata nationalcircuit-breakerwouldhavelast-

ingbenefits.Thediseasewouldstarttoaccelerateagainassoon

asit waslifted.Astheyeardrawson,peoplewillspendmoretime

indoors,wherethevirusspreadseasily.Theburdenofproofison

theproponentsofa circuit-breakertoshowthatthewell-docu-

mentedshortcomingsofBritain’stracingsystemcouldbefixed

bya three-weekreorganisationorbya temporarilylowercase-

load.Complianceisalsoindoubt.Althoughpollssupporttough

action,Britonsseemtomakeanexceptionforthemselves.A re-

cent paperfinds that just18% ofthose who

shouldhaveisolatedthemselvesinthesummer

stuckstrictlytotherules.Ifpeoplefloutthem,

thecircuit-breakermaybekeptforlongerthan

threeweeks,loweringcompliancestillfurther.

Itwouldalsobe economicallyruinous.In

April,attheheightofthefirstlockdown,Brit-

ain’soutputwasone-quarterlowerthanithad

been in February. Theimf argues that lock-

downsmaybeworthitiftheycreateaneconomythatcanfully

reopenforbusiness.Butnobodyissuggestingthata shortcir-

cuit-breakercouldsuppressthevirustothatextent.Andthe

trade-offwouldbeevenlessworthwhileifyoufactorinthetoll

onmentalhealth,thedelayintreatingotherillnessesandtheef-

fectsonlong-termemploymentandeducation.

Togetcovid-19undercontrolBritainshouldfocusonsustain-

ablelocalmeasures:identifyingvulnerablegroups,findingways

toprotectthem,identifyingtrade-offs,instigatinglocaltesting

andrecruitingleaderstogeneratelocalsupport.A circuit-break-

ersoundslikea scientificsolutiontoa runawayproblem.There-

alitywouldbea costlymess. 7

Going full circuit

Dailynewcovid-19cases

Britain,14-daymovingaverage, 2020

150,

100,

50,

0

OSAJJMAM

Confirmedcases

Estimatedinfectionsbased

onseropositivitymodel

Britain would be wrong to return to national lockdown, even a short, sharp one

Covid-

O

n october 9th World Rugby, the global governing body for

rugby union, announced that it would bar transgender

women—people born male, but who identify as women—from

playing in the international women’s game. The decision drew

condemnation from some quarters and praise from others; Eng-

land’s rugby authorities have already said they will carry on al-

lowing trans women to play at all other levels of the game within

England. It puts World Rugby at odds with the International

Olympic Committee (ioc), whose rules allow trans women to

compete in women’s Olympic events, and with several other

sports that have followed the ioc’s guidance. Trans women com-

petitors have enjoyed success in sports including weightlifting,

cycling and athletics. Yet World Rugby’s decision to exclude

them was the right one. Other sports should follow its lead.

The first thing they should note is how the decision was

made. The debate over transgender rights, especially online, can

be extremely bad-tempered and poisonous. World Rugby

brought scientists, ethicists, athletes and lawyers together in

person, to present calmer arguments directly to the sport’s ad-

ministrators. Those presentations were made public, in the in-

terests of transparency. And the decision relied, as far as possi-

ble, on the evidence.

They should also note what that evidence shows (see Science

section). It came in two strands. One confirmed what everyday

experience suggests. Most males are bigger, faster and stronger

than most females; some males are bigger, faster or stronger

A question of sport

Letting trans women play in women’s sports is often unfair

Transgender rights