“The current policy could not be sustained,” says Coretta van Leer, medical microbiologist and virologist at the UMCG. That’s why she thinks relaxing is a good idea. “The cost is huge and from a human point of view this was not sustainable. With the new measures, we relax cautiously and keep damming the virus – as humanly as possible.”
Patricia Bruijning, epidemiologist at the UMC Utrecht, agrees. “The care can handle it. And there is some room for maneuver if the number of infections does increase. Moreover, I do not expect the number of infections to decrease further if we waited longer, partly because people then release more measures themselves.”
The beautiful weather is good according to Bruijning. “We know that the virus mainly spreads through prolonged, intensive contact in indoor areas. We now go outside more, ventilate more and are less on each other’s lips. This makes the virus less likely to spread.”
Not from Brabant on the train to Groningen
Marc Bonten, medical microbiologist and member of the OMT, is more cautious about the greater relaxation after 1 June. “I think a lot has already been relaxed by people’s behavior.” He therefore considers it very sensible that announced relaxations can be withdrawn if the decrease in hospital admissions does not continue in the coming weeks.
Hans Heesterbeek, professor of theoretical epidemiology at Utrecht University, especially points out the risk of too many new moments of contact between people. “Sitting on a terrace is different from your local hairdresser.” He thinks it is important that people keep traveling little and meet as few new people as possible. “You should not visit Groningen by train with a group of 15 people from Brabant,” said Heesterbeek.
Van Leer has any questions about opening hairdressing salons. “I think mouth masks offer better protection than asking people if they are sick. Suppose I go to the hairdresser without complaints now, but I will get sick tomorrow. Then I would probably be contagious.”
‘GGDs not yet equipped for more tests’
Everyone with complaints can be tested from 1 June, the cabinet has announced. According to Heesterbeek and van Leer, this is crucial. “We need local hotspots, such as the migrant migrant outbreak in Velp, identify quickly, “says van Leer.” Next, the GGD must conduct contact research and isolate people. Only in this way can we also ensure that the epidemic is extinguished at a local level. “
According to Heesterbeek, testing is a kind of change for the measures. “The better we test, the more we can relax. But testing also includes tracing.” For this we need a “well-oiled test machine”. It worries him that it is not there yet. “It is unclear whether underlying matters are properly arranged.” OMT member Marc Bonten shares that concern. “Our GGDs are not yet equipped for this.”
More testing should also help to quickly determine whether the number of infections is increasing, according to Heesterbeek and Bruijning. Currently, hospital admissions are the best indicator of this, but the data are two weeks behind the infections.
Criteria for reversal of measures
According to Heesterbeek, it should be clear what the criteria are for reversing easing. “When do we think things are going wrong? When do we intervene again?”
Heesterbeek points out that if there are still few hospital admissions, the R-number (the contamination factor that is now calculated with hospital admissions) also becomes less reliable as an indicator. “We have to look for a new indicator, just like in Germany.” It has been agreed there that a region will go into lockdown again if more than 50 infections per 100,000 inhabitants occur every week.
–
