The science behind the Government’s lockdown strategy was called into question last night after the expert at the centre of a pivotal study quit in disgrace.
Professor Neil Ferguson – who led the team that helped to convince ministers to introduce strict rules on social distancing – breached them himself by meeting his married lover.
It emerged on Tuesday night that the epidemiologist, 51, had allowed Antonia Staats, 38, to visit him at his London home even though she lives elsewhere – with her husband and children.
Professor Neil Ferguson – who led the team that helped to convince ministers to introduce strict rules on social distancing – breached them himself by meeting his married lover
Ms Staats is believed to have visited the scientist shortly after he finished self-isolating for two weeks
The South London home of Antonia Staats, which she shares with her husband Chris and their two children. Prof Ferguson is thought to have met Ms Staat’s husband and they share an interest in data science, a friend told the Telegraph.
Neighbours at Professor Ferguson’s former marital home in Oxford (pictured above) were furious at his behaviour. He and his wife Kim, who is involved with the residents’ association, are said to be estranged
The Health Secretary described the professor’s conduct as ‘extraordinary’, adding: ‘I am speechless, and that doesn’t often happen to me.’
Asked whether the police should investigate, Matt Hancock added: ‘They will take their decisions independently from ministers… [but] I have got a clear answer to what I think.’
Flouting lockdown rules can be punished with a £60 fine, or even arrest. However, while Scotland Yard criticised Professor Ferguson’s behaviour as ‘plainly disappointing’, a spokesman said he had ‘taken responsibility’ by standing down from SAGE – the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, which is advising ministers on the pandemic.
‘We therefore do not intend to take any further action,’ the spokesman added.
It emerged yesterday that Professor Ferguson will also relinquish his role with NERVTAG – the new and emerging respiratory virus threats advisory group.
However, critics called for further action yesterday, demanding that Professor Ferguson’s lockdown model be re-evaluated.
Tom Jefferson, from the University of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, told the Mail: ‘I am not interested in what the guy was getting up to at home. My question is, how on Earth was somebody with his kind of track record wheeled in front of ministers in the first place? Why did the Government listen to this person? Who made that decision and why?
‘I firmly believe we need a review into this and there are questions Professor Ferguson and his team should play their full part in answering.’
Britain’s coronavirus lockdown was announced by Boris Johnson on March 23, following a government-commissioned report on the spread and impact of Covid-19 led by Professor Ferguson.
The Imperial College London paper said merely slowing the spread of the virus would have led to the NHS being overwhelmed – resulting in around 250,000 deaths.
Researchers at several other universities came to similar conclusions.
However, former Cabinet minister David Davis warned that Professor Ferguson’s work should not be treated as an ‘astrologist’s prediction’.
He told Sky News: ‘It’s obviously a regret that anybody has to resign under these circumstances, but… the bigger issue here is whether that Imperial model is a good model or whether it’s misleading.’
He stressed that academics using Imperial’s research predicted that Sweden’s less strict measures would lead to around 40,000 coronavirus deaths by this stage. In fact, there have been fewer than 3,000.
‘We ought to know really whether the model is accurate given the amount of damage being done to the economy,’ Mr Davis said.
‘Professor Ferguson has not been particularly forthcoming about the model, and we need now to see it in the public domain… so other scientists can test it and to know whether it’s real or whether it’s systemically overestimating the effects of some of our policies.’
Elon Musk joined those condemning the expert yesterday, branding him a ‘moron’ on Twitter. ‘Something more should be done,’ the billionaire wrote.
‘This guy caused massive strife to the world with his absurdly fake ‘science’.’
Matt Hancock insisted yesterday that ‘we don’t know for sure’ that those who recover from the virus cannot catch it again.
Former Brexit secretary David Davis has called for a shake up of the Government’s strategy during the coronavirus lockdown
Professor Ferguson had claimed in a statement that he ‘acted in the belief that I was immune’ from coronavirus after testing positive and isolating for ‘almost two weeks after developing symptoms’.
Mr Hancock insisted yesterday that ‘we don’t know for sure’ that those who recover from the virus cannot catch it again.
He told Sky News that, having had coronavirus himself, he asked Professor Chris Whitty – England’s Chief Medical Officer – if he still needed to abide by the social distancing rules.
‘The answer was very clear, which is yes, we all have to abide by social distancing.’
In the latest example of conflicting advice, Mr Hancock’s comments contradict those he made in the House of Commons in March.
He had claimed it was safe for Nadine Dorries – the first MP struck down by the virus – to sit next to him after recovering because ‘you can’t catch this twice’.
How architect of the lockdown lectured the country while flouting the rules
Professor Neil Ferguson, 51, pictured on March 25 before the Commons Science and Technology Committee – five days before allowed his married lover, Antonia Staats, to visit him at his home
MARCH 16: A week before the lockdown began Professor Neil Ferguson was arguing that a full lockdown was required to slow the number of deaths and said: ‘We are left with no option but to adopt this more draconian strategy’.
A report he authored for his employer Imperial College London warned that 500,000 people could die without mass self-isolation of households.
MARCH 17: He visited Downing Street to advise the Prime Minister on his findings including recommendations for a lockdown.
MARCH 18: Professor Ferguson tests positive for coronavirus
MARCH 23: Boris Johnson announces there will be a lockdown in a national TV address
MARCH 25: Prof Ferguson appears before the Commons Science and Technology Committee and warns that the NHS will be overwhelmed without a lockdown,
MARCH 30: His married lover Antonia Staats visited Prof Ferguson just after he had finished two weeks of self-isolation after testing positive for the virus. He also did a Radio 4 interview on the importance of the lockdown.
APRIL 4: Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today, he said: ‘We want to move to a situation where at least by the end of May we can substitute less intensive measures for the current lockdown we have now… I don’t think anyone wants to lift measures at the current time and risk the epidemic getting worse’
APRIL 8: Antonia made a second visit to Professor Ferguson 8 despite telling friends that her husband, an academic in his 30s, was showing symptoms of coronavirus.
APRIL 16: Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Professor Neil Ferguson had stressed the importance of keeping to social distancing guidelines. He said at the time: ‘If we want to reopen schools, let people get back to work, then we need to keep transmission down in another manner. It is not going to go back to normal, we will have to maintain some level of social distancing – significant levels of social distancing – probably indefinitely until we have a vaccine available.’
APRIL 25: The number of deaths from coronavirus could reach 100,000 in the UK by the end of this year if a gradual lockdown is implemented just to shield the elderly, Professor Neil Ferguson warned. He told UnHerd: ‘You would require a very high level of effective shielding for that to be a viable strategy. If you just achieve 80 per cent shielding – and 80 per cent reduction in infection risk in those groups – we still project that you would get more than 100,000 deaths this year from that kind of strategy. The most vulnerable people are also the people who most need care and most need interaction with the health system and are least able to be truly isolated.’