The Covid19 thread

[DJ123]

Originally Posted by Ruffy

All very reasonable and I don't want to be a danger either. But does that mean masks forever? How do we trade that off against other reasonable functional requirements of human existence that are better without masks, e.g. general social interaction, communication and relationship building, dealing with criminal activity by identifying perpetrators?


I think this virus is now endemc globally, elimination is not an option, so herd immunity is the only realistic stable state, be that via mass jabbing or natural transmission. Sadly that also means some people will die or have lives disrupted much earlier than they might have expected pre-Covid. That's a tough sell, to say the least, because although the principle existed before it was never consciously contemplated on a widespread basis. Now it's been unavoidably forced on us, front and centre. Suddenly we're all mortal and life-limited. Reluctantly, we have to accept that not all deaths are preventable and unexpected bad things happen to many all the time. Life is a series of risk-taking events but we don't get to choose or control the triggers a lot of the time. Sad but true?

I think there are some very difficult considerations to be faced before we're stable: What is the tolerable annual level of death due to this virus? How much investment in the NHS is required to cope with a higher baseload of treatment requirements for those seriously affected? What changes are acceptable in freedoms of movements for all? How do we make sure we don't unfairly discriminate?

Personally, I don't think lockdown is the right tool for the job any more.

I don't think it means masks forever, probably until C19 is less prevalent in everyday lives - such as less restrictions, less continuous focus on only C19. Hopefully that'll be when most people have been jabbed, herd immunity is higher/proven & it's been shown society can go on 'as normal' without anything going too crazy.

There absolutely needs to be an adoption of an expected fatality number to live with this Virus, much like we do with the Flu.

The freedom of movement within the UK is pretty much open, it's now more on an international level that things need to get sorted out.

[Bibio]

you have to look at history to get your answers. Spanish flu killed around 50mil if i'm not mistaken but do we ever hear of it now.. no, not really. its going to be the same with covid. its a virus and there is absolutely nothing we can do to stop it. the only thing we can hope to achieve is slow it down so its just another flu. be thankful its not typhoid without a cure.

[Seeker]

Originally Posted by Bibio

you have to look at history to get your answers. Spanish flu killed around 50mil if i'm not mistaken but do we ever hear of it now.. no, not really.

because they don't like upsetting countries by naming it after them anymore. It is the H1N1 virus which circulates regularly seasonally, swine flu in 2009 was H1N1. Most people now have at least partial immunity.

It takes 6 months to make a flu vaccine so they have to make an educated guess as to which flu variant (the H and N number) will be dominant.

[Kenzie]

Looks like there is already mumblings of having to roll back on some of the "freedoms" such as masks and distancing.

[embee]

Lots of intriguing views and comments.

I still like to compare attitudes to Covid deaths and road deaths. Typically 5 people die on UK roads per day, and that's among the millions of everyday folk travelling out there. If the rate suddenly jumped to 50/day, who would say "Oh well, it's just something we'll have to learn to live with, we go out on the road and some people die even when they were doing nothing wrong."
I suspect not many proponents for the laissez faire approach, yet that's just what some are saying about Covid.
If there are reasonable measures which aren't really a hardship (distancing in shops, masks on transport etc) then why not do it, just like we wear seat belts and have speed limits. We still go about our daily business but take reasonable precautions.

There is also a conundrum in approach to treatment. If we say "Oh well, some folk will get Covid and die", then why bother to treat anyone who ends up in ICU? They are treated because we try to avoid people dying unnecessarily, and it's the decent thing to do. If we say it's worth trying to save someone's life in ICU, the why not say it's worth trying to avoid that person ending up in ICU in the first place? Prevention better than cure, and usually much cheaper.

I don't pretend to have answers. That doesn't mean I won't criticise what seem to be reckless or illogical steps, or more likely the inappropriate timing of actions.

Whatever we as a country (countries?) decide to do and act out, there is still the elephant in the room regarding how the rest of the planet will view us and want to interact (or not) with us. We could end up a 21st century "leper colony".

[SV650rules]

A sudden spike in road deaths would not trash the economy. There is a cost / benefit ratio for everything even health, decided every minute of every day by hospital ethics panels, and the older you get the less likely the 'benefit' will be worth the 'cost'. 75%+ of 'covid' deaths so far have been people over 80, with most of the rest people over 65. The country has been virtually locked down for over 16 months, pretty much everyone over 60 has been vaccinated, and anyone over 30 who wanted the jab could get it. We just have to move on... there have been many, many casualties from lockdown itself, two of our older neighbours who used to get out and about regularly were housebound by lockdown, unable to get out or even visitors, one aged 85 is now in a home having lost mobility due to lockdown ( and may not ever get back home ) the other one in hospital undergoing physio treatment to try to restore use of legs. Lockdown has not been a casualty free exercise, imagine the scenario in just our little street repeated throughout UK. We also need to consider the huge chunk taken out of education and jobs - I have an idea many of the people on furlough will not have a job to go back to as the high street and many small companies collapse. This is more complicated now than just protecting the vulnerable elderly, we at least need to trust the vaccines and try something rather than just endless lockdown cycles.

[DJ123]

Originally Posted by SV650rules

A sudden spike in road deaths would not trash the economy. There is a cost / benefit ratio for everything even health, decided every minute of every day by hospital ethics panels, and the older you get the less likely the 'benefit' will be worth the 'cost'. 75%+ of 'covid' deaths so far have been people over 80, with most of the rest people over 65. The country has been virtually locked down for over 16 months, pretty much everyone over 60 has been vaccinated, and anyone over 30 who wanted the jab could get it. We just have to move on... there have been many, many casualties from lockdown itself, two of our older neighbours who used to get out and about regularly were housebound by lockdown, unable to get out or even visitors, one aged 85 is now in a home having lost mobility due to lockdown ( and may not ever get back home ) the other one in hospital undergoing physio treatment to try to restore use of legs. Lockdown has not been a casualty free exercise, imagine the scenario in just our little street repeated throughout UK. We also need to consider the huge chunk taken out of education and jobs - I have an idea many of the people on furlough will not have a job to go back to as the high street and many small companies collapse. This is more complicated now than just protecting the vulnerable elderly, we at least need to trust the vaccines and try something rather than just endless lockdown cycles.

completely agree. This year should represent a step forward in the way this is managed, and by September the majority of Adults will be vaccinated. A lock down should not be needed, given what we know about the current effect the vaccine has had on breaking the link between infection/hospitalisation & death.

[redtrummy]

Its not out of the realm of possibility that we can eradicate Covid. We have managed to get rid of Sars and Polio.
This article is worth a read, but to be frank its far too complicated for me to really understand.


https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...and-go-extinct.


Its up to everyone to draw their own demarcation lines. Personally I still ere on the side of caution but I know many that just want to return to previous normality (or have).

[svenrico]

I wouldn't rule anything out.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by redtrummy

Its not out of the realm of possibility that we can eradicate Covid. We have managed to get rid of Sars and Polio.
This article is worth a read, but to be frank its far too complicated for me to really understand.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/2...and-go-extinct.

Its up to everyone to draw their own demarcation lines. Personally I still ere on the side of caution but I know many that just want to return to previous normality (or have).

Well that's an intriguing article, although it probably raises more questions than it answers: Allegedly the H1N1 that caused 1918 "Spanish" Flu pandemic is effectively extinct. It states there is a school of thought that we should be trying to accelerate mutations - that's contrary to many current mask promoters' arguments! Yes, it says SARS has disappeared, yet official name for Covid-19 is SARS-CoV-2.

Just goes to show that "follow the science" isn't as straightforward or definitive as some would like to have you believe (especially with a developing situation)! I stick to my core tenet that it's all about making trade-offs but I wonder if anyone really knows what the right balance is. Can't deny that experimentation is part of scientific process. Oo, my brain hurts

Originally Posted by svenrico

I wouldn't rule anything out.

I think there's probably substantial wisdom in that statement. Believe it or not, I'm trying to keep an open mind too.