FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > How would you ease lockdown
How would you ease lockdown
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Lots of experts on here but seriously how would you guys ease the lockdown? It’s pretty obvious we have to live with Covid for months and that we also need to start getting back to work and living a life so what ideas do you have? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Slowly for me
To anyone who answers, please keep to the question and not make it a political thread.
Thanks"
Thank you Ruby, I should have said that in my original post. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It's a very simple concept.
Those uninfected go to work.
Those infected and those in contact with imfected stay at home.
Knowing who is who requires tests. Lots of tests. We will get there and once we do we can take the next step. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Lots of experts on here but seriously how would you guys ease the lockdown? It’s pretty obvious we have to live with Covid for months and that we also need to start getting back to work and living a life so what ideas do you have?"
My personal thoughts are to wait until the daily "new infections" are in single figures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Got to be measured steps every time.
We need to identify where we need people back in work first, make the funding available to that sector to make adaptions to how work place operates and work carried out and then move forward.
Think a lot of thought needs to go to public transport and how that can be managed in a safe controlled way. After all people need to be able to travel to and from work. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's a very simple concept.
Those uninfected go to work.
Those infected and those in contact with imfected stay at home.
Knowing who is who requires tests. Lots of tests. We will get there and once we do we can take the next step."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's a very simple concept.
Those uninfected go to work.
Those infected and those in contact with imfected stay at home.
Knowing who is who requires tests. Lots of tests. We will get there and once we do we can take the next step."
With the people being asymptomatic how will this be controlled has don't show any symptoms to say they infected?? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It's not easy as they need to control the numbers on the streets and public transport etc
Maybe allow people living in non vulnerable households below a certain age threshold to start work again and then gradually release more people if it works
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ayo1000Man
over a year ago
liversedge |
This is very complex and will take time
I work with the homeless who for the minute are housed up and down the country in hotels I'd like to get their take on what happens to them once this is over ??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's a very simple concept.
Those uninfected go to work.
Those infected and those in contact with imfected stay at home.
Knowing who is who requires tests. Lots of tests. We will get there and once we do we can take the next step.
With the people being asymptomatic how will this be controlled has don't show any symptoms to say they infected?? "
Firstly asymptomatic are the exception rather than the rule.
Secondly asymptomatic people still test positive.
It is not a foolproof system that catches every infected person. Just a system that prevents the exponential spread of the virus whilst carrying out a relatively normal existence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not easy as they need to control the numbers on the streets and public transport etc
Maybe allow people living in non vulnerable households below a certain age threshold to start work again and then gradually release more people if it works
"
Like Spain id up the fine to £1000 so people actually stick to the rules! All the jobs where you don't need to meet people can carry on, limit the rest. Some of Europe has time zones for different age groups to limit numbers for exercise etc.
What I wouldn't do is let it back off the lead.... But I'm guessing the government can't keep paying benefits for ever and are getting worried... Think it's time to re evaluate the worlds wants.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's a very simple concept.
Those uninfected go to work.
Those infected and those in contact with imfected stay at home.
Knowing who is who requires tests. Lots of tests. We will get there and once we do we can take the next step.
With the people being asymptomatic how will this be controlled has don't show any symptoms to say they infected??
Firstly asymptomatic are the exception rather than the rule.
Secondly asymptomatic people still test positive.
It is not a foolproof system that catches every infected person. Just a system that prevents the exponential spread of the virus whilst carrying out a relatively normal existence. "
Various studies claim anything from 25 to 75% can be asymptomatic ranging from BJM to WHO in differant countries so testing needs considerable ramping up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *dsindyTV/TS
over a year ago
East Lancashire |
With testing, every day a test until an accurate viable antibody test is available, and then still by testing every single day.
Not a 100,000 per day, or 200,000 but millions. That's the only way people can be confident that they dont have the virus to pass on....in my opinion that is, feel free to disagree politely. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Right now I wouldn't. We brought it in when the daily death rate was significantly lower than it is now so it makes no sense to end it until the daily death rate is much lower |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"With testing, every day a test until an accurate viable antibody test is available, and then still by testing every single day.
Not a 100,000 per day, or 200,000 but millions. That's the only way people can be confident that they dont have the virus to pass on....in my opinion that is, feel free to disagree politely. "
Do think people could be tested and then stay in work place longer, solid week on solid week off, but like working on a boat or submarines! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's a very simple concept.
Those uninfected go to work.
Those infected and those in contact with imfected stay at home.
Knowing who is who requires tests. Lots of tests. We will get there and once we do we can take the next step.
With the people being asymptomatic how will this be controlled has don't show any symptoms to say they infected??
Firstly asymptomatic are the exception rather than the rule.
Secondly asymptomatic people still test positive.
It is not a foolproof system that catches every infected person. Just a system that prevents the exponential spread of the virus whilst carrying out a relatively normal existence.
Various studies claim anything from 25 to 75% can be asymptomatic ranging from BJM to WHO in differant countries so testing needs considerable ramping up "
I did some research on this one and the stat seems to vary considerably from region to region.
Thanks for that enlightenment Appreciated. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"With testing, every day a test until an accurate viable antibody test is available, and then still by testing every single day.
Not a 100,000 per day, or 200,000 but millions. That's the only way people can be confident that they dont have the virus to pass on....in my opinion that is, feel free to disagree politely.
Do think people could be tested and then stay in work place longer, solid week on solid week off, but like working on a boat or submarines! "
I have asked this question before. Does anyone know the window period between becoming infected and becoming infectious.
I read somewhere that there is a 'shedding' period when people are infectious.
Using a hypothetical example, if there was a three day window between the two one would only need to be tested every three days. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Here's a hypothetical.
Imagine you could test every single person in the UK at once. Impossible I know. But just to illustrate a point.
Then you could isolate the infected and the uninfected and in 14 days you would have eradicated the virus in the UK.
We need to get as close to that hypothetical impossibility as humanly possible. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Here's a hypothetical.
Imagine you could test every single person in the UK at once. Impossible I know. But just to illustrate a point.
Then you could isolate the infected and the uninfected and in 14 days you would have eradicated the virus in the UK.
We need to get as close to that hypothetical impossibility as humanly possible. "
The problem is the virus can stay active for days on different surfaces so after being tested they could become infected. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Here's a hypothetical.
Imagine you could test every single person in the UK at once. Impossible I know. But just to illustrate a point.
Then you could isolate the infected and the uninfected and in 14 days you would have eradicated the virus in the UK.
We need to get as close to that hypothetical impossibility as humanly possible.
The problem is the virus can stay active for days on different surfaces so after being tested they could become infected."
I did some research on that one. It can stay active on some surfaces under lab conditions for days. In the real worl that's still an unknown I think.
But yes that's where we start talking about person to person infections and surface infections.
I was very happy to see that some superstores abandoned the coin in trollies until they got a disinfectant regime in place.
I would love to see us mitigating the risk of door handle infections by propping some fire doors open with the reasoning that they propably put more lives at risk than they save. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"With testing, every day a test until an accurate viable antibody test is available, and then still by testing every single day.
Not a 100,000 per day, or 200,000 but millions. That's the only way people can be confident that they dont have the virus to pass on....in my opinion that is, feel free to disagree politely.
Do think people could be tested and then stay in work place longer, solid week on solid week off, but like working on a boat or submarines!
I have asked this question before. Does anyone know the window period between becoming infected and becoming infectious.
I read somewhere that there is a 'shedding' period when people are infectious.
Using a hypothetical example, if there was a three day window between the two one would only need to be tested every three days."
No |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
