The UK government has explained their strategy numerous times and I think it mostly makes sense. As your own OP picture says, this strategy is based on expert advice, including behavioural scientists. Since we know most people are going to get the virus, there's no point in wasting tests on false alarms and constant retests every time someone coughs. It is much more sensible to use the limited resources where they are needed, and not over-burden the NHS through panicking when you just have a cold. Likewise, there is no point in over-reacting and shutting everything down too soon, because people in the West especially will just get bored and restless and start doing shit like
>>>/int/119675113 right at the peak and make everything worse. You just need to look at this website to see the flippant attitude millennials and zoomers have toward this "boomer-remover" virus.
Quarantine presents its own problems too. For example, shutting schools, who is going to look after the kids? It's usually the grandparents, the people most vulnerable this virus. Or will parents, including NHS staff, now have to take time off work, further increasing the burden on the NHS and services? Look at the panic already at people buying food because of the mere hint of self-quarantining; journalists and others mocking panic buyers don't seem to realise that many people do not have 2 weeks of food in their homes. Surely behavioural scientists should know about the importance of "keep calm and carry on"? Gently preparing people and increasing the restrictions seems much more sensible to me instead of going full-on sirens blaring chaos.
This is not to say they will not impose quarantines at a later date, they likely will, but they see no reason to do so right now and it leaves more options open. There is no single right strategy to this, as Mayor Khan has said a couple of weeks ago about when refusing to shut down the Tube, what would work in China would not necessarily work in the UK.
