Coronavirus Super Thread ( merged )

[Francis Albert]

5 minutes ago, jambo89 said:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/epidemiologist-britain-herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-19

 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.nationalgeographic.co.uk/science-and-technology/2020/03/uk-backed-herd-immunity-beat-covid-19-well-ultimately-need-it/amp
 

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-millions-of-britons-will-need-to-contract-covid-19-for-herd-immunity-11956793
 

Re-read what you just posted.
 

Nobody believed there was a herd immunity strategy. 
 

That’s simply not true.

 

Just because the UK changed from this strategy, it doesn’t mean that this wasn’t the initial plan 3 weeks ago.

 

"Communities will become immune to it and that's going to be an important part of controlling this longer term“

 

Is a direct quote btw

I think the sentence you quote is unarguable. Until a vaccine is developed and tested and widely available, herd immunity or (to use a less to some offensive term) community immunity has to be an important part indeed probably the main hope of control. It may already be a significant factor in slowing or reversing the rate of spread. That of course is not to say we should just sit back, do nothing and wait for it. That has never been the policy.

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

So the government and the senior medical advisors sat down at the start of this and said ‘look we’ve got this virus, there is no cure so let’s just do nothing, take the hit on deaths, the lucky and the strong will survive and the unlucky and the weak will die and we’ll be fine at the end of it because everyone will have had it and can’t get it again’  

 

I think the last government that implemented a similar strategy was tried at Nuremberg.

 

Dominic Cummings was widely quoted by reputable media saying that.

 

To be fair he then strongly pushed for lockdown.

 

The turning point was this report.

 

 

[Spellczech]

38 minutes ago, Victorian said:

73yo in N.Ireland was pressured into signing a DNR.    Before she was diagnosed with Covid.     

 

Another tranche for the inquiry.

That is reasonable in the current situation. Unofficial policy in Scotland is currently 75. Will be 65 soon as more ventilators get taken up. This is all about the availability of ventilators...I've said on other posts, the testing hoo-haa is all just a smokescreen to hide the more immediate problems of PPE and ventilators...

[redjambo]

Just this past Saturday:

Herd immunity should be considered to end lockdown, PM’s adviser says

https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/04/herd-immunity-considered-end-lockdown-pms-adviser-says-12507209/

[jambo89]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

I think the sentence you quote is unarguable. Until a vaccine is developed and tested and widely available, herd immunity or (to use a less to some offensive term) community immunity has to be an important part indeed probably the main hope of control. It may already be a significant factor in slowing or reversing the rate of spread. That of course is not to say we should just sit back, do nothing and wait for it. That has never been the policy.

Of course herd immunity is the only answer. But how we implement that is the debate here.
 

Heard immunity via vaccine or via controlled community transmission.

 

The latter has been denied as never been the strategy of the government by one poster which is simply not true.

[Mikey1874]

1 minute ago, jambo89 said:

Of course herd immunity is the only answer. But how we implement that is the debate here.
 

Heard immunity via vaccine or via controlled community transmission.

 

The latter has been denied as never been the strategy of the government by one poster which is simply not true.

 

We could perhaps ease lockdown if we have strict testing and tracing like in South Korea.

 

But seems we're not geared up for testing. 

[Victorian]

Just now, Spellczech said:

That is reasonable in the current situation. Unofficial policy in Scotland is currently 75. Will be 65 soon as more ventilators get taken up. This is all about the availability of ventilators...I've said on other posts, the testing hoo-haa is all just a smokescreen to hide the more immediate problems of PPE and ventilators...

 

That may well be but it represents a clear postcode lottery element.    There's an obvious reason why London has been over-resourced because of the scale of the population and the trajectory of the graphs there.    But the routine message is that the resources put into London could very well be more than ample.    It's not easy to be able to be instantly reactive to redistribute resources.    Nobody would expect that.    But it will be no consolation to people if their relatives are subject to particular clinical decisions if it can be seen that those same decisions did not have to be taken elsewhere.     

[Cade]

Herd Immunity (otherwise known as let it run free and the strong will survive) has always been the UK Government's strategy.

And it still is.

 

If you are seriously trying to stop the spread of an infectious disease, you do immediate lockdowns in areas where infected people are found, run contact tracing on everywhere they've been and everyone they've come into contact with and then run mass tests inside the lockdown areas.

We have done none of that.

This can only mean either criminal negligence or a deliberate plan to let the virus spread out through the population.

It is now far too late to do any of those measures, as it's spread too far.

We're attempting Herd Immunity and all that the national lockdown is doing is slowing the entire process down in a vain attempt to ease pressure on the emergency services.

 

We still don't have any reliable test to use, never mind hitting some nebulous tests-per-day target set by clueless ministers.

Ventilators are still slow in appearing.

Ministers are even now talking about "exit strategy" even though we're still on the upward curve and the PM is at death's door.

 

As with everything else over the last few years, the only plan has been "wait and see what happens, it'll be fine, we're Great Britain".

[Spellczech]

3 minutes ago, jambo89 said:

Of course herd immunity is the only answer. But how we implement that is the debate here.
 

Heard immunity via vaccine or via controlled community transmission.

 

The latter has been denied as never been the strategy of the government by one poster which is simply not true.

Then we may be screwed - as nobody knows if herd immunity is possible for this virus.

[highlandjambo3]

14 hours ago, Victorian said:

New York state talking about the contingency of temporary mass graves.    

There are lots of grim contingency plans they try to keep out of the public eye to try and stem the fear factor, this being one of them.  Crematoriums close to hospitals being prepared to ramp up cremations being another.........as grim as it is the officials do try to keep a lid on this.....to date I don’t recall much info from the media on this with the exception of attendees at funerals being curbed but, that may change.  
 

[jambo89]

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

We could perhaps ease lockdown if we have strict testing and tracing like in South Korea.

 

But seems we're not geared up for testing. 

This may well be the answer and wait for a vaccine.
 

Or have periods of easing the lockdown, and tightening the lockdown until 60% of the population (60% was the number used by Vallance in the article I posted from 3 weeks ago) to enable a controlled community transmission. 

 

I don’t know what’s the best course of action.

[Mikey1874]

13 hours ago, bobsharp said:

 

On the face of it it does seem so, but if the police allowed this innocent well meaning family to continue with a ball do you believe that the three neds who come and do the same will say alright officer we will stop right now, or will they say, why not us you let them. Un fortunately and it happens a lot at times you think you are doing the right thing just letting nice family people do something that seems harmless and then some dick comes along and is only out to prove a point and all your good intentions are gone.

 

Aberdeen FC players spoken to by Police yesterday training in park.

 

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by Mikey1874

[Nobreath]

2 hours ago, fabienleclerq said:

 

I feel like we've imposed a half arsed lockdown compared to other countries, we watched Italy and instead of acting quickly and shutting down ASAP we appeared to think we had plenty time.

 

We obviously dragged our feet getting PPE and ventilators or organising testing.

 

We have no idea how many people have or have had it or which parts of the country are worst hit as we have just told people with symptoms to hide away without testing. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree entirely. 

[Victorian]

It might be that bad.    Not herd immunity... rather acceptance of full exposure.   Hoping for immunity.    Realising we might need to accept it will be endemic and capable of infecting again.   Waiting for a vaccine.    Hoping for a breakthrough treatment.

[Spellczech]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

 

That may well be but it represents a clear postcode lottery element.    There's an obvious reason why London has been over-resourced because of the scale of the population and the trajectory of the graphs there.    But the routine message is that the resources put into London could very well be more than ample.    It's not easy to be able to be instantly reactive to redistribute resources.    Nobody would expect that.    But it will be no consolation to people if their relatives are subject to particular clinical decisions if it can be seen that those same decisions did not have to be taken elsewhere.     

Basically if you are over 70 and get it to the extent that you are hospitalised then you don't have a good chance. I have 2 elderly parents and my approach is to avoid them getting it at all, as I know that if they do they are probably goners, particularly my father who is 81 and on statins...We've told them this.

 

Should they be a little more upfront about the likelihood that older people who get hospitalised will not be resuscitated? You don't want people to fear hospitals...

[redjambo]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

We could perhaps ease lockdown if we have strict testing and tracing like in South Korea.

 

But seems we're not geared up for testing. 

 

Indeed. Germany's vastly superior testing rate has been cited by many as one of the main reasons that their death to infection ratio is much smaller than ours. It was always going to be a mix of "test, test, test", contact tracing and the limiting of social interactions that was going to provide the best approach to the pandemic, as very few countries such as South Korea realised and were actually up to implementing, with sufficient technical ability and political will to do so.

[Francis Albert]

A major study by University College London reported in today's Guardian concludes that closure of schools is unlikely to be a significant benefit in relation to controlling the spread of Coronavirus.

It seems to me that indeed it may have a long term negative impact because children and  young people will not be gaining immunity by catching it, and in the vast majority of cases having mild or no symptoms, so when lockdown ends will instead be be a large pool of people who will be open to it and capable of passing it on.

I don't know. It seems to me that there is so little known that a lot of the confident and heated assertions of what is right or wrong and what will and will not in the long run prove to be correct or helpful are unjustified. It is a pity a little humility didn't spread with Coronavirus.

Anyway we must all obey the rules of the current strategy because it is at present the only one we have.

Edited April 7, 2020 by Francis Albert

[jambo89]

4 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

Then we may be screwed - as nobody knows if herd immunity is possible for this virus.

In which case, Covid-19 will become very much like the seasonal flu I would imagine but only in the aspect that it will never be eradicated and yearly deaths come to be a part of everyday life.

[Mikey1874]

Just now, Victorian said:

It might be that bad.    Not herd immunity... rather acceptance of full exposure.   Hoping for immunity.    Realising we might need to accept it will be endemic and capable of infecting again.   Waiting for a vaccine.    Hoping for a breakthrough treatment.

 

Imperial College have also revised their predictions / modelling of deaths.

 

 

[Ehllhayapeh]

Things are starting to get interesting in mexico now. 

 

Weve been told that phase 3 hits in 2 to 3 weeks so peak is 4 to 6 weeks away.

 

There are now petitions for the removal of the president with El Universal (basically the times of Mexico) calling him the worst president in history.

 

A state governor is threatening to ask for him to be charged for crimes against humanity for negligence in the epidemic.

 

The peso has devalued 30%. 

 

Forbes expects the health and economic fallout of covid to be nothing short of catastrophic.

 

There has been a latin american spring prior to covid in Ecuador Bolivia Peru Chile and other places fed up with government corruption.

 

Mexico hasnt had one. As the death toll rises i feel that a period of post covid violence and protest here is looking more likely by the day.

 

[Victorian]

Just now, Spellczech said:

Basically if you are over 70 and get it to the extent that you are hospitalised then you don't have a good chance. I have 2 elderly parents and my approach is to avoid them getting it at all, as I know that if they do they are probably goners, particularly my father who is 81 and on statins...We've told them this.

 

Should they be a little more upfront about the likelihood that older people who get hospitalised will not be resuscitated? You don't want people to fear hospitals...

 

True.

 

At the same time there have been some people encouraging family conversations regarding what they want.    Elderly people to decide what they want and what they don't want.

 

The knowledge regarding hospitalisation is very troubling.    People now realise what they're in for.    They know they wont get to see their family.    Really frightening for people.

[redjambo]

In good news, the daily increase in deaths worldwide has dropped below 10% for the first time in 3 weeks:

 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-toll/

 

 

 

[Victorian]

Pob self isolating.   Family member has symptoms.    

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Imperial College have also revised their predictions / modelling of deaths.

 

 

That's really misleading from people who don't understand what they're reading. Ferguson himself, the man behind the figures, tweeted after the release to clarify that 20k is the expected figure if we isolate, but the disease is actually more transferable than first thought and 500k would be revised upwards if isolation wasn't observed.

 

This is no "omg we were out by half a million" situation, this is new figures based on everyone staying in while the 500k figure was based on life carrying on as normal.

[Unknown user]

 

 

[AlimOzturk]

That's my holiday finally been cancelled by jet 2. They say they are going to contact me to discuss options and say they will recommencing flights as of June 17th. Surely that's hopeful at best?

[davemclaren]

17 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

A major study by University College London reported in today's Guardian concludes that closure of schools is unlikely to be a significant benefit in relation to controlling the spread of Coronavirus.

It seems to me that indeed it may have a long term negative impact because children and  young people will not be gaining immunity by catching it, and in the vast majority of cases having mild or no symptoms, so when lockdown ends will instead be be a large pool of people who will be open to it and capable of passing it on.

I don't know. It seems to me that there is so little known that a lot of the confident and heated assertions of what is right or wrong and what will and will not in the long run prove to be correct or helpful are unjustified. It is a pity a little humility didn't spread with Coronavirus.

Anyway we must all obey the rules of the current strategy because it is at present the only one we have.

The virus has only been around for four months so it’s to be expected that some if the actions taken will turn out to be wrong, in hindsight. 

[davemclaren]

3 minutes ago, AlimOzturk said:

That's my holiday finally been cancelled by jet 2. They say they are going to contact me to discuss options and say they will recommencing flights as of June 17th. Surely that's hopeful at best?

Very hopeful I think. 

[Ray Gin]

18 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Imperial College have also revised their predictions / modelling of deaths.

 

 

 

Still an absolute travesty. A Tynecastle full of people dead.  

 

The revised, significantly lower number is due to the lockdown measures. The article makes it seem like they got it wrong in the first place and there was no need for the lockdown. Load of shite.

 

[Victorian]

We're already heading for 20,000+ even if lockdown-lite remains for another 6-8 weeks.    If they're trying to manipulate the science to justify an easing within 3-4 weeks then it will be horrendous.

[Bindy Badgy]

22 minutes ago, Ehllhayapeh said:

Things are starting to get interesting in mexico now. 

 

Weve been told that phase 3 hits in 2 to 3 weeks so peak is 4 to 6 weeks away.

 

There are now petitions for the removal of the president with El Universal (basically the times of Mexico) calling him the worst president in history.

 

A state governor is threatening to ask for him to be charged for crimes against humanity for negligence in the epidemic.

 

The peso has devalued 30%. 

 

Forbes expects the health and economic fallout of covid to be nothing short of catastrophic.

 

There has been a latin american spring prior to covid in Ecuador Bolivia Peru Chile and other places fed up with government corruption.

 

Mexico hasnt had one. As the death toll rises i feel that a period of post covid violence and protest here is looking more likely by the day.

 

 

Guns N Roses headlined a festival there last month, which won't have helped matters. The event should have been cancelled. God only knows what made GNR and the organisers think it was OK to go ahead.

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Still an absolute travesty. A Tynecastle full of people dead.  

 

The revised, significantly lower number is due to the lockdown measures. The article makes it seem like they got it wrong in the first place and there was no need for the lockdown. Load of shite.

 

I hope the number will be as low as that but have my doubts. The dramatic change in the forecast does not fill  me with confidence the new one will be particularly accurate.

A travesty? it is just over twice the number who die each year from seasonal flu. If we get away with that for a new virus of which little is known and with no vaccine available I think we (as a nation not of course those directly affected) will be lucky.

As for the "due to lockdown measures" I have no idea how you could make that assumption at this stage. It sounds a little unscientific to draw the cause and effect conclusion without a lot more evidence than can be available at this stage.

 

[DETTY29]

10 minutes ago, AlimOzturk said:

That's my holiday finally been cancelled by jet 2. They say they are going to contact me to discuss options and say they will recommencing flights as of June 17th. Surely that's hopeful at best?

I was stupid and took an option in September from April with Jet2, and I still had to pay the difference, about £50.

 

It was with a big group and some of the guys after initially indicating still going for September are changing their minds.

 

I was also meant to be in Dublin at the weekend past (via Ryanair) and they were also clear that I'd need to pay the difference if I took a reschedued flight.  I took the cancellation and refund.  But guess what, there was a lady on Radio Scotland last week who had a flight with Ryanair cancelled and offered rescheduled flights which were significantly cheaper if booking afresh, but no refund of difference offered.

 

How desparate are you to get away once we are allowed to travel again?

 

Overall expert feeling is that there may be some deals initially but prices will rise due to airlines etc needing to claw back money plus the impact of excess of demand versus supply.

[Francis Albert]

17 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

The virus has only been around for four months so it’s to be expected that some if the actions taken will turn out to be wrong, in hindsight. 

Absolutely. Doesn't stop some on here calling for criminal prosecutions though.

[Tommy Brown]

19 minutes ago, redjambo said:

In good news, the daily increase in deaths worldwide has dropped below 10% for the first time in 3 weeks:

 

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-toll/

 

 

 

With all due respect Red. Not having a pop.

 

Worldwide figures are too distorted by poor data throughout.

China debatable.

UK, unreliable.

Is there not differing strains about also?

Prefer to look at major European, USA. And get a feeling from there.

Italy is definitely got on a better trajectory, but Spain, France and USA on a horrible similar.

 

I honestly believe we will follow, but data is suspect to prove it. ie deaths not always being attributed to covid-19, we still report low critical, imo too low to believe. Germany also.

 

Tin hat on.

 

[Ray Gin]

7 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

 

As for the "due to lockdown measures" I have no idea how you could make that assumption at this stage. It sounds a little unscientific to draw the cause and effect conclusion without a lot more evidence than can be available at this stage.

 

 

I make that assumption because that's what the original model forecast. 20,000 deaths if the measures work and the far higher figure if we just sat back and did **** all.

 

[DETTY29]

36 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

True.

 

At the same time there have been some people encouraging family conversations regarding what they want.    Elderly people to decide what they want and what they don't want.

 

The knowledge regarding hospitalisation is very troubling.    People now realise what they're in for.    They know they wont get to see their family.    Really frightening for people.

It's also policy that care home residents are not to be sent to hospital either.  According to someone on Radio Scotland last night anyway

[Francis Albert]

2 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

Very much this. There were a variety of scenarios and one is where the govt did **** all produced the 500k figure. The scenarios which showed increasing interventions decreases that number, amongst a variety of other variables.

 

The number of 20k was a scenario that becomes more likely on the basis the government introduced measures, in part based of his modelling info.

 

The 20k figure scenario has been about for an age and Whitty and Vallance (before lockdown was fully introduced) have both talked about this being the aim/target. Mainly due to the fact the government decided to go down the ‘lockdown’ route. Though being honest and doing some fag pack calculations I struggle to see how we keep this below 20k right now, albeit I don’t have all the info and facts etc.

 

I think people don’t understand how modelling works or its purpose. 

 

People are too ready to dismiss information they don’t understand, This thread has demonstrated that perfectly, as they don’t like it.

 

 

OK I misread the recent post (or it misled me) as suggesting it was an updated forecast.

 

But it is the output from a model. Not "the science" or "the facts" or really even "information". A lot of very senior experts have challenged Ferguson's assumptions, inputs and modelling, and the Government's apparent over-reliance on this model. But scientifically it is far too soon to draw any cause and effect conclusions about the impact of the lock down.

 

[DETTY29]

2 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

Herd immunity was 100% the plan till about 3 weeks ago. 

 

And it took them at least a week to change after the scientific report that modelled 250,000 deaths. 

 

Now maybe herd immunity is part of the solution. 

And I think it was the nation itself that in part, changed the governments minds in addition to the strain on the NHS.

 

Folk started to realise 'hang on a minute, you are asking for my x,y, z, (me) to be sacrificied over a short period of time'

 

Of course, down the line the downstream impacts may be worse.  I've heard a 6% reduction in GDP will lead to more consequnces and lives further down the line.

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by DETTY29

[Ehllhayapeh]

19 minutes ago, Stokesy said:

 

Guns N Roses headlined a festival there last month, which won't have helped matters. The event should have been cancelled. God only knows what made GNR and the organisers think it was OK to go ahead.

Yep. 40000 plus at that event.

Mental to allow it to go ahead. But money talks. Mexico City is still not locked down much. Youre being encouraged to stay home but in a city of 24 million even essential workers are a huge number of commuters daily.

 

It wont end well here.

[DETTY29]

Michael Gove self isolating now due to a member of the family showing symptoms.

 

Is it the time to decalre a full national emergency?  Top x x x number of people in government, civil service, health decision makers taken away from their families and after an initial period of self isolation but in some form of war bunker.

 

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by DETTY29

[redjambo]

16 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

With all due respect Red. Not having a pop.

 

Worldwide figures are too distorted by poor data throughout.

China debatable.

UK, unreliable.

Is there not differing strains about also?

Prefer to look at major European, USA. And get a feeling from there.

Italy is definitely got on a better trajectory, but Spain, France and USA on a horrible similar.

 

I honestly believe we will follow, but data is suspect to prove it. ie deaths not always being attributed to covid-19, we still report low critical, imo too low to believe. Germany also.

 

Tin hat on.

 

 

No need for a tin hat - you make a fair point Tommy.

 

The Chinese figures have no impact on the daily deaths now. In fact many presenters of stats don't include the original Chinese epidemic in their graphs etc., almost considering it to be a separate outbreak. The UK figures are not as unreliable as all that, particularly as regarding deaths, the methodology of producing them just hasn't been entirely consistent to date (deaths in hospitals vs deaths at home etc.) but you would actually expect that to result in an increased figure now that the latter are being more systematically included.

 

More generally, stats for the infection rate are pretty much useless, imo, due to the lack of testing worldwide, but the stats for deaths will be more accurate and are the real guide as to whether or not we're beating this.

 

It is thought that there are two strains, but that's not unusual in any virus and shouldn't affect the stats. From the New Scientist: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2236544-coronavirus-are-there-two-strains-and-is-one-more-deadly/

 

"The differences between the two identified strains are tiny. In fact, they can’t really be considered to be separate “strains”, says Jones. And many of the genetic differences won’t affect the production of proteins, and so won’t change the way the virus works, or the symptoms it causes, he says. One is not more deadly than the other.

“In all practical terms, the virus is as it was when it originally emerged,” says Jones. “There’s no evidence it is getting any worse.” The sentiment is echoed by the World Health Organization. The study by Tang and colleagues only suggests there is some genetic diversity of the virus – it doesn’t mean it is changing, a representative told New Scientist."

 

Overall, though, I get where you are coming from. However, with the exception of some countries where the stats are very debatable, if the methodology in the countries where we can trust the data (which is most of them) remains fairly constant, then the figure for total deaths may be dodgy, but the stats for the rate of increase or decrease in the daily/weekly numbers of deaths (which is what I quoted) can be indicative.

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by redjambo

[Taffin]

The part I'm not getting is what is the endgame of limiting it to 20k deaths if we remain in lockdown?

 

We could eradicate hundreds of thousands of deaths a year if we all stayed inside forever but we don't do that as it's not sustainable. By all means follow lockdown to slow the spread and reduce pressure on the NHS but where do we go from there? If a vaccine is over a year away we can't stay in lockdown for a year so there has to come a point in time where it ends. 

Edited April 7, 2020 by Taffin

[Ehllhayapeh]

34 minutes ago, Stokesy said:

 

Guns N Roses headlined a festival there last month, which won't have helped matters. The event should have been cancelled. God only knows what made GNR and the organisers think it was OK to go ahead.

And there was 8 million women marching against femicide in the city early on in the crisis.

 

I cant say that was a good idea either!

[Unknown user]

3 minutes ago, weehammy said:

All of the above, including the ‘stone cold fact’ represent your opinions.

Your lack of a well reasoned and convincing rebuttal is noted. 

[Victorian]

7 minutes ago, Taffin said:

The part I'm not getting is what is the endgame of limiting it to 20k deaths if we remain in lockdown?

 

We could eradicate hundreds of thousands of deaths a year if we all stayed inside forever but we don't do that as it's not sustainable. By all means follow lockdown to slow the spread and reduce pressure on the NHS but where do we go from there? If a vaccine is over a year away we can't stay in lockdown for a year so there has to come a point in time where it ends. 

 

It can only be a gamble to end lockdown once the peak has passed.   It's unavoidable that the whole country will need to take it's chances.    The gamble will be on resilient immunity to buy some time to plan.    If there's no resilient immunity then we'll probably end up in another lockdown later on.    No resilient immunity probably means 6 figure deaths over the next year.    If you don't accept people need to be exposed then you need to treat every single case and break every single chain of infection and literally close the borders.    Accepting ongoing infections becomes much more manageable if a good treatment comes along.

[Beni]

6 minutes ago, Taffin said:

The part I'm not getting is what is the endgame of limiting it to 20k deaths if we remain in lockdown?

 

We could eradicate hundreds of thousands of deaths a year if we all stayed inside forever but we don't do that as it's not sustainable. By all means follow lockdown to slow the spread and reduce pressure on the NHS but where do we go from there? If a vaccine is over a year away we can't stay in lockdown for a year so there has to come a point in time where it ends. 

 This was asked at the UK press conference yesterday, but they wouldn't answer. They don't really want to be talking about extending or relaxing lockdown at this stage.

It was also asked at the American pres conference and Dr Fauci said getting back to 'normal' would be difficult until a vaccine is available.

 

https://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/2020/04/watch-dr-fauci-says-pre-coronavirus-america-may-never-return-at-least-not-until-theres-a-vaccine/amp/

[Boris]

4 hours ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

Why does the daily mail always start it's headline with 'now'?

 

Makes them feel contemporary?

[Taffin]

11 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

It can only be a gamble to end lockdown once the peak has passed.   It's unavoidable that the whole country will need to take it's chances.    The gamble will be on resilient immunity to buy some time to plan.    If there's no resilient immunity then we'll probably end up in another lockdown later on.    No resilient immunity probably means 6 figure deaths over the next year.    If you don't accept people need to be exposed then you need to treat every single case and break every single chain of infection and literally close the borders.    Accepting ongoing infections becomes much more manageable if a good treatment comes along.

 

Fingers crossed we can make this happen. It's really unnerving not knowing how/when we reach a point where we can move to a new phase beyond lockdown. 

 

From a personal perspective, since being furloughed I'm really starting to struggle with it all. Whilst I was still working it kept me sane.

[redjambo]

6 minutes ago, Lord BJ said:

 

I’ll be honest this is the bit I struggle with. Despite claims to the contrary. The lockdown isn’t about killing of Coronavirus it’s about enabling the NHS to cope. If the NHS could cope now we would let  this thing rip through the country as fast as possible.

 

Herd Immunity will happen naturally to a degree during lockdown. Maybe If they reduce the lockdown in stages it will increase that aspect. I also pretty sure their is a strong view that infectious rate  of this does reduce in the warmer weather, so maybe with these factors it will continue to go through the country at a reduced rate at which we can deal with it. 

 

No idea in reality

 

I still think antibody test is how we get out of this but we can’t see how we stay on lockdown until that’s available I wouldn’t have though.

 

Bloody hell, I hope not. Elderly folk and those with underlying health conditions are on a hiding to nothing, whether or not the NHS is able to "cope" with their numbers or not. The NHS having sufficient facilities, staff and equipment, including respirators, is not going to prevent a large percentage of those folk dying if they catch the coronavirus.

 

I can only assume that you are neither elderly nor have underlying health issues.

Edited April 7, 2020 by redjambo