Yesterday, SSI, the agency responsible for preparedness for infectious diseases, reported that the reproduction rate, R0, had fallen in the month of April (DK) from 0.9 to 0.7. The figure represents the average number of persons who are infected by a single infected person. If the level is below 1.0, the spread of the infection is declining. The drop has thus occurred since the first phase of the reopening began, with the return to school of children in the lowest classes and the opening of service and professional businesses. That shows that people have been conscientious about following the Health Authority’s guidelines, says Tyra Grove Krause of SSI.

Grove Krause cautions that the figure is an estimate that is more useful as an indication of the direction of the spread of the infection than a precise measure. The choice of criteria used affect the result. The SSI’s figure is based on the number of hospitalizations, not the number of persons who test positive for the coronavirus, and it assumes that it takes an average of 4.7 days for one person to infect another. The favorable results presumably influenced the Health Authority’s recommendations on lowering the recommended physical distancing from two meters to one and the reopening additional businesses and other organizations.

Is one meter enough?

On the day after the Health Authority announced the reduction of the guideline on physical distancing, spokespersons from virtually all of the political parties in Parliament were raising questions about it. Some were surprised that this key recommendation was changed suddenly and without consultation with the other parties after several of them had inquired about it earlier and received no clear answer. Some questioned whether it was safe. Most of them, like Liselotte Blixt of the Danish People’s Party, asked whether the decision was based on healthcare considerations (DK) or practical exigencies, implying that the latter might have weighed too heavily. If it wasn’t necessary to keep two meters’ distance from one another for the past three months, they asked, then why did we do it? Supermarkets have placed tape on the floor to show customers where to stand in line, and hairdressers have moved their chairs apart. Other party leaders criticized the way the decision was made (DK) without their input. 

When asked about the change, Søren Brostrøm, the head of the Health Authority, said that it was sound from a healthcare perspective and that the Authority also considered the practical ramifications because the guidelines must be sustainable. He said it consulted other countries’ policies and experience. The WHO recommends a distance of one meter, which is the policy in Norway, where there has been a very small number of infections; Germany and the Netherlands require 1.5 meters’ distance. Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen had previously said that the government deferred to the Health Authority on such decisions and that the guidelines could change.

Democracy in action

What all the spokespersons’ comments had in common was that none of them disagreed with the decision itself. Indeed, most of the parties had been arguing strongly for a further relaxation of restrictions. This discussion seems characteristic of the Danish style of political debate. The dissenters are well aware that the pandemic is under control and that Frederiksen’s and Bostrøm’s handling of the crisis has been viewed favorably by the public. The hospitals are not overwhelmed; there are no mass graves, massive job layoffs, long lines for food banks, or dangerous recommendations to drink disinfectants. Yet they feel an obligation to put in their two cents in order to show their constituencies that they still exist and are keeping an eye on developments.