Best ask Public Health England and Cambridge University, I merely reported their reported findings, trusting that these respected bodies are generally reliable.
But they did NOT say free by this weekend, they said MAY be free for June which is 30 days long. Obviously it's for your risk assessment whether you travel in June, I would since the risks of this pandemic are obviously being greatly exaggerated.
I really shouldn't have to explain these points, should I?
.
The following is one of the references to this model dated 15 May. There are plenty of others, including one from a Shiela Bird, . They are all very polite as Academics tend to be, but certainly not whole hearted agreement with the inferences of 24 infection ...
Prof Matt Keeling, Professor of Populations and Disease, University of Warwick, said:
“I’d like to express a note of caution regarding the figures quoted from the University of Cambridge’s MRC Biostatistics Unit. I’ll start by saying that I have the greatest respect for both the researchers and the science from this world leading unit – but as ever science is about thorough scrutiny by one’s peers.
“On the whole I would generally agree with many of the findings reported by the Unit – R is generally about 0.7-0.8 in many regions of the country, although potentially slightly higher in the devolved nations. However, I feel the R value quoted for London is extremely low – Warwick University predictions put the value closer to 0.6; this still predicts a faster decline in London than the rest of the country but not as dramatic as predicted by the MRC Biostatistics Unit, and therefore we would predict far more infections. The difference between 0.4 and 0.6 might sound like scientists arguing over small details, but these translate to very substantial differences in the rate of decline of cases (or the time for the epidemic to halve).
“So what is generating these differences? The MRC Biostatistics Unit has considered deaths due to coronavirus as their main quantity of interest – in London this is falling far more rapidly than other measures of the outbreak such as hospital admissions.
“What this study highlights is that London is experiencing a subtly different epidemic to other regions of the country, with a more rapid decline and different relationships between ICU occupancy, hospital occupancy and deaths. This is clearly something that needs to be understood in more detail, as it may be important for how different areas of the country exit from lock-down.
“I am extremely worried about the media message that ‘London could be coronavirus free in days’. At the moment there is way too much uncertainty in factors such as asymptomatic transmission or infection in the health-care worker population to make this claim. Londoners have made a brilliant effort in adhering to lock-down advice, and bringing the infection under control. If people think London is coronavirus-free that could be dangerous, and could lead to complacency, undermining all the struggles and sacrifices that everyone has made so far. A relaxation of vigilance could easily see R increasing above 1, and a second epidemic wave.”
