North Korea’s new 4,000mph hypersonic missile could dodge US defences as chilling new arms race heats up, experts warn

 NORTH Korea has taken another step in the hypersonic arms race as Kim Jong-un boasted his military fired a near 4,000mph missile.

The beggar kingdom took another step forward as it launched the weapon that can travel up to five times the speed of sound - and it's feared it could dodge US missile defence systems.

Experts believe the weapon is a new type for North Korea, likely based on the previously launched hypersonic missile known as the Hwasong-8.

The weapons test appears to have been focused on the "glide vehicle" element - the piece of the missile that detaches and flies towards the enemy.

North Korea boasted that the missile "precisely hit" its target more some 430 miles away.

And experts believe the latest test is squarely aimed at attempting to beat US missile defence systems.

The defences are deployed in South Korea, Japan and to protect US military installations in Guam.

North Korea's test comes as the US, Russia and China all compete to develop potentially game-changing hypersonic weapons.NORTH Korea has taken another step in the hypersonic arms race as Kim Jong-un boasted his military fired a near 4,000mph missile.

The beggar kingdom took another step forward as it launched the weapon that can travel up to five times the speed of sound - and it's feared it could dodge US missile defence systems.

Experts believe the weapon is a new type for North Korea, likely based on the previously launched hypersonic missile known as the Hwasong-8.

The weapons test appears to have been focused on the "glide vehicle" element - the piece of the missile that detaches and flies towards the enemy.

North Korea boasted that the missile "precisely hit" its target more some 430 miles away.

And experts believe the latest test is squarely aimed at attempting to beat US missile defence systems.

The defences are deployed in South Korea, Japan and to protect US military installations in Guam.

North Korea's test comes as the US, Russia and China all compete to develop potentially game-changing hypersonic weapons.

+16

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimated a record 3.27million people in England were infected on any given day in the week to December 31, up more than 60 per cent on the previous week

Even NHS bosses back cutting self-isolation period to FIVE days as staffing crisis sees hospitals CANCEL routine operations 

An NHS leader yesterday revealed he would support slashing Covid self-isolation to five days amid an escalating staffing crisis that has engulfed hospitals and led some to cancel routine operations. 

Matthew Taylor, head of the NHS Confederation — an organisation which represents trusts, said two more days should be shaved off the period as long as it was backed up by the science.

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme the situation was 'desperate' and any way of getting staff back to work was a 'good thing'. But he said it would be 'completely counterproductive' to have infectious staff return to wards because it would exacerbate the spread of Omicron.

Last month ministers cut the self-isolation period to seven days, providing someone tested negative using a lateral flow on days six and seven. But pressure is mounting on Boris Johnson to follow the US, which has squeezed quarantine to only five days for anyone without symptoms.

Around 1.3million Britons are currently thought to be languishing under house arrest as the NHS, rail services and bin collections all buckle under the weight of staff absences.

One in ten NHS employees are estimated to be off sick or self-isolating, and Mr Johnson yesterday revealed plans are being drawn up to call in the Army if the crisis continues to worsen.

Some 10 out of 137 hospital trusts in England have declared 'critical incidents' in recent days — or eight per cent, signalling that they may struggle to deliver vital care to patients in the coming weeks because so many medics are off isolating. Seventeen hospitals in Greater Manchester have also started shelving operations. 

For comparison, only about two per cent of transmission was recorded over the five to ten days after symptoms emerged.

Oxford University sources said the paper was shared with the Government before its results were released. It is yet to be published in a peer-reviewed journal. It is unclear how many Covid cases the teams findings were based on. 

Neither team has yet to comment on whether isolation should be shortened in response to current pressures.

But UK Health Security Agency scientists say any further reduction would be 'counterproductive', arguing it risks sending infectious people back to work and spreading the virus further. 

The body, which replaced the now-defunct Public Health England, recommended the change because modelling showed it did not increase the risk of spreading the virus.

Professor Julian Tang, a virologist from Leicester University, told MailOnline: 'I think the studies' findings are right. Most transmission occurs just before and just after symptom onset.

'Up to five to seven days post symptom onset the immune response kicks in, and starts to decrease the viral load.'

He suggested NHS workers could be allowed to return to their jobs from seven days after developing symptoms, regardless of whether they had tested positive. 

'If they are a healthcare worker and they are going to be wearing masks at work all day, [the risk of transmission] may not matter much,' Professor Tang added.

'If they are a teacher going back to school to teach in a class of mostly vaccinated and masked children, it may not matter much.'

Professor Paul Hunter, an infectious disease expert at the University of East Anglia, told MailOnline research suggests 'the large majority of Covid infections are transmitted between two days before to three days after symptom onset'. 

'That doesn't mean infection after that is impossible just very unlikely,' he said. 

'Some risk remains for longer than five days but it is so small that continuing isolation beyond five days, whether or not LFD positive, is probably not justified except when in Contact with particularly vulnerable people,' Professor Hunter added. 

Dr Alex Crozier, a researcher at University College London, told MailOnline the UK should not rely on lateral flow tests for its isolation policy, as they can 'often take much longer than 10 days to materialise and we risk over-isolating people and exacerbating staffing issues this way'.

'A lot of vaccinated people will continue to test positive beyond day five to seven via LFT, even once their symptoms have resolved and the risk of onwards transmission is really quite low,'  he said.

The vast majority of the population is double-jabbed and 'many of us even have four or five doses of immunity now', Dr Crozier said.  

'We therefore have to interpret the results of antigen tests differently and carefully in three-dosed individuals,' he said.

Dr Crozier added: 'People testing negative a few days into symptoms doesn't necessarily always mean they aren't infectious, and testing positive post day five doesn't necessarily mean they are significantly infectious.

'There is a trade-off to be had and it is all about balancing different risks.

'After testing positive, if symptoms have resolved for more than 24 to 48 hours and people have received the booster vaccine, we might be able to release them earlier than day 10, regardless of LFT status. 

'If they still have some symptoms on day five then that is a different story. For critical roles, we can now probably move to a more flexible isolation policy, based on clinical expertise and context, not relying on just LFT status and blanket rules.' 

Julian Jessop, economics fellow at the think-tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, told MailOnline that the case for easing the rules for mandatory isolation periods is 'further is strengthening by the day'.  

He said: 'Scientists are now more confident that the Omicron variant is milder, and that the risks of transmission drop off sharply within a few days. This reduces the benefits of lengthy isolation periods.

'On the other side of the equation, the surge in the number testing positive for Covid is adding to the costs of isolation, since many more people are having to stay at home.'

Mr Jessop added: 'It is hard to see how widespread staff shortages of 10 per cent or more will not have a crushing impact on output. Even just a 2 per cent reduction in activity would cost the economy about £4 billion every month.

'It might be worth taking a large but temporary hit to GDP to protect health, and this could be better for the economy too in the long run. However, long isolation periods seem to be doing more harm than good – including to the NHS itself.

'It is increasingly clear that the biggest threat to the NHS is a shortage of staff, due to the isolation rules, rather than a surge in the number of people who are seriously ill with Covid.

'The UK government should therefore not hesitate to follow the trend elsewhere in Europe, the US and South Africa, and continue to ease the isolation rules. Reducing the minimum period from 7 to 5 days would be an obvious next step.'

Calling for self-isolation periods to be reduced, Matthew Taylor, the head of the NHS Confederation which represents trusts, said two more days could be shaved off.

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme yesterday: 'On the one hand we do need to try to get staff back to work as soon as possible.

'Hospitals who have declared critical incidents, for example, are essentially reaching out to staff who are on leave, on rest days or even recently retired and asking them to come back to wards, so the situation is desperate — any way of getting staff back into hospital is a good thing.

'But on the other hand, if staff come back into hospital and are infectious, that's completely counterproductive because that is going to mean more sickness in the hospital and for staff, so this can't be led by politics or blind hope — it has to be led by the science.'