"England lockdown may extend beyond December. Boris Johnson accused of 'giving in' to scientists." THIS IS BAD BECAUSE?

Because it goes against US policy.  And the entire world knows it MUST follow what the US says (lest they bomb or invade them).

US Policy - "Keep everything open at all costs.  The virus is exaggerated, and only a few old people died (and it was from something else)."

I don't know who used the "giving in" phrase, but the Prime Minister and more to the point, the country, is caught between scientists strongly advising the restrictions continuing despite the economic problems they bring, and businesses - both owners and employees - desperate for their livelihoods.

There is also the very serious problem that the scientists and doctors are warning of, that the spreading disease could be too much for the hospitals to stand, on top of all the parallel problems of deferred treatments for other diseases.  

This is happening in many countries, not just the United(?) Kingdom; and no country can live on tick for ever, nor sustain a rampant plague for long.

To be  brutally honest there is no clear end in sight for this pandemic, and one epidemiologist interviewed on the radio yesterday said some are warning it could continue for anything up to ten years, though she seemed not to agree with that necessarily.

In any case it will not go away, any more than the bubonic plague that swept across Europe a few times over some hundreds of years has ever gone away. Though at least that is treatable fairly easily - IF caught early enough.  

X

The new lockdown, beginning this week, is supposed to last or 4 weeks exactly, but the Government has warned that it may be extended beyond Dec 2nd if transmission are still deemed to be too high. Part of the motivation is that if we curb the spread of the virus now, then we won't have to live under such severe restrictions in the Christmas season; we will then have more opportunity to socialise with and visit family members. 

But really there is no such thing as "giving in to science". Equally qualified scientists may disagree with each other at any given time and anyway all health policy is based on value judgements.

For instance, what if someone came up with a model demonstrating that a 6-week lockdown would save 5,000 lives but lead to 250,000 more long-term unemployed and thousands of failed businesses, bankrupcies and evictions, leading to more sickness and secondary deaths from poverty? More cases of spousal and domestic violence? Thousands more cases of mental health problems, increased drug addiction, alcoholism, self-harm and suicide attempts, requiring treatment and time off work as well as an additional burden on the National Health Service for months or years to come? Cuts in other public services to pay for furlough schemes and tax breaks? Once you look beneath the surface the correct thing to do is not always that straightforward.