 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
so if we have varying lockdowns til March... what then? What is the endgame? If the virologists say on the year anniversary sorry we have to do another year. how would you feel? Will the even staunch lockdowner waver? At one point does the economist over rule the scientist and say sorry..business and industry have to take over to pay for their science. Is there an acceptable death toll or an acceptable time line..? i think it should be discussed publically so we know where we are headed. Could we possibly, with or without a vaccine do this for years? . i work on testing sites and novelty is wearing off. Where does it end?
d |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"so if we have varying lockdowns til March... what then? What is the endgame? If the virologists say on the year anniversary sorry we have to do another year. how would you feel? Will the even staunch lockdowner waver? At one point does the economist over rule the scientist and say sorry..business and industry have to take over to pay for their science. Is there an acceptable death toll or an acceptable time line..? i think it should be discussed publically so we know where we are headed. Could we possibly, with or without a vaccine do this for years? . i work on testing sites and novelty is wearing off. Where does it end?
d"
Your right, we cannot afford to keep locking down forever more, it's just not maintainable economically.
The initial lockdown was the panic kneejerk reaction of the world because nobody knew what the hell to do.
We had to try and stem the flow of deaths and infections while we tried to figure out a plan and the desperate hope was a fast cure but that's not looking likely.
We're also hampered because not enough people are willing to enact upon the control measures needed to try and reduce the infection spread rate while keeping schools and business open and just prefer to blame the government instead of looking at our own selfish behaviour.
All I can see is a constant repeat cycle of harsh restrictions that not enough people will be willing to adhere to and short sharp lockdowns to give the NHS a bit of breathing space from time to time.
I've also given up many weekends helping on mobile testing sites and the majority who I've dealt with coming for tests have been older people worried about even leaving the house to get tested because they see the younger generations not really giving a fuck about the whole pandemic in general. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Young people have never given a fuck about anything.
That's because they are young.
That's why they willingly marched away to the trenches in their millions in 1914.
It's in the nature of the beast. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The way i see it these are the options. 1 come up with a vaccine 2 improve testing so people can get tested often and quickly, if clear pretty much carry on as normal, if infected isolate. 3 treatments improve so death and organ damage is reduced significantly. I don't think just letting the disease rip through the population. At the moment we have no idea of the long term consequences of the disease and the death toll would be horrific, far higher than 0.23% as health services would not cope. We could wait for herd immunity to kick in but that will take several years at least probably decades. Each lockdown buys time to find out more about the disease and allows vaccine, testing and treatment development to progress. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We should plan and also base our decisions on the information and evidence available at the time, which will continue to change. I'd prefer to do the right thing, largely based on preserving life and health.
The virus will be around for years but we should minimise its damage to health, the economy gets damaged by the impact on the population too.
We've had older populations struggle through the second World War, so this is nothing in comparison. Brave it out. We're missing a good leadership team unfortunately |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oggoneMan
over a year ago
Derry |
I don't know if it's right to be talking endgame yet. We're barely out of the first phase.
There is good news, there are a few viable vaccines that will (touch wood) be approved early 2021. But that will be the beginning of the end, so to speak. The next bottleneck will be manufacture of the vaccine. It won't be a free for all, essential workers and the vulnerable will be first in line. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The way i see it these are the options. 1 come up with a vaccine 2 improve testing so people can get tested often and quickly, if clear pretty much carry on as normal, if infected isolate. 3 treatments improve so death and organ damage is reduced significantly. I don't think just letting the disease rip through the population. At the moment we have no idea of the long term consequences of the disease and the death toll would be horrific, far higher than 0.23% as health services would not cope. We could wait for herd immunity to kick in but that will take several years at least probably decades. Each lockdown buys time to find out more about the disease and allows vaccine, testing and treatment development to progress."
This  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
It will end like all other pathogen epidemics before this when around 40-50% of the population have immunity.
It will then be a slow demise to irrelevance with only small local outbreaks but not having enough susceptible people to get a foothold into an epidemic a bit like we see now with measles.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know if it's right to be talking endgame yet. We're barely out of the first phase.
There is good news, there are a few viable vaccines that will (touch wood) be approved early 2021. But that will be the beginning of the end, so to speak. The next bottleneck will be manufacture of the vaccine. It won't be a free for all, essential workers and the vulnerable will be first in line. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don't know if it's right to be talking endgame yet. We're barely out of the first phase.
There is good news, there are a few viable vaccines that will (touch wood) be approved early 2021. But that will be the beginning of the end, so to speak. The next bottleneck will be manufacture of the vaccine. It won't be a free for all, essential workers and the vulnerable will be first in line. "
Agreed I just hope it's very easy to manufacture so the scramble for it hopefully will not end in chaos |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It will end like all other pathogen epidemics before this when around 40-50% of the population have immunity.
It will then be a slow demise to irrelevance with only small local outbreaks but not having enough susceptible people to get a foothold into an epidemic a bit like we see now with measles. "
Measles has been coming back the last few years. You need 93-95% immunity to achieve herd immunity for measles. That is impossible and unsafe to achieve from natural infection. Vaccination rates for measles to the MMR conspiracy theory.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Just like swine flu naturally immunity will build up relatively quickly, by the time any vaccine is put into use it will already be on the wain."
Swine flu hasn't disappeared due to herd immunity. It still part of any flu vaccine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
