Where is the anti lockdown campaign?

[dazzer6666]

My understanding is that herd immunity without vaccine requires approx 600 000 deaths in this country (unless the science has changed since last week), is that really what you are suggesting?

Not seen that particular model but there is no 'requirement' for a number of deaths - there's an estimate of how many it might involve in the models - based on what I've seen that would be at the very extreme end but they are changing all the time. The problem is even with herd immunity the vulnerability of individuals doesn't change - so until there's a vaccine the vulnerable would need to be shielded, or take more risk on the basis if we've reached herd immunity there are many fewer infected people out there spreading it. This all depends of course on whether you can catch/spread it again once you've had it once - if you can, we're knackered until there's a cure or a vaccine.

 

[RossyG]

Not seen that particular model but there is no 'requirement' for a number of deaths

This is the problem. Thanks to either poor reporting or a cynical pushing of an agenda in the media and social media, many people have it in their minds that herd immunity and culling the herd is the same thing.

Discuss the subject and they react as if you’ve said that we should just send hit squads into care homes. And once that notion is lodged in their heads it’s very hard to dislodge it.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

This is the problem. Thanks to either poor reporting or a cynical pushing of an agenda in the media and social media, many people have it in their minds that herd immunity and culling the herd is the same thing.

Discuss the subject and they react as if you’ve said that we should just send hit squads into care homes. And once that notion is lodged in their heads it’s very hard to dislodge it.

Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that to achieve herd immunity (without vaccination) you need 65-80% of the population to have been infected and that is a lot of dead people including one would imagine a lot of people in care homes.

 

[RossyG]

Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that to achieve herd immunity (without vaccination) you need 65-80% of the population to have been infected and that is a lot of dead people including one would imagine a lot of people in care homes.

In this specific case, it depends how you manage it. If you isolate the vulnerable and have, say the under 60s acting normally, then you might get that c.65% in a couple of months. You’ll get some deaths, but that’s unavoidable. What you won’t get is eye wateringly large death tolls.

We haven’t got a vaccine and there’s no guarantee we’ll get one. Our choices could well be lockdown for years or managing the disease. Which, in effect, means only the latter.

 

[A1X]

This is the problem. Thanks to either poor reporting or a cynical pushing of an agenda in the media and social media, many people have it in their minds that herd immunity and culling the herd is the same thing.

I think the man primarily to blame for this is a Mr D. Cummings, if you're looking to apportion blame. People tend not to react well to statements such as "if some pensioners die, too bad", especially when they make the link between "some pensioners" and "my parents / grandparents".

 

[dazzer6666]

Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that to achieve herd immunity (without vaccination) you need 65-80% of the population to have been infected and that is a lot of dead people including one would imagine a lot of people in care homes.

Not if you generate the herd immunity whilst shielding the more vulnerable

 

[Swansman]

Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that to achieve herd immunity (without vaccination) you need 65-80% of the population to have been infected and that is a lot of dead people including one would imagine a lot of people in care homes.

If it turns out that say 5% have had the virus so far with 15-20k dead, it would mean a horrible number of dead people in order to reach this immunity. If it turns out that 50-60% have had it so far, it would be more attainable. Desperately need those antibody tests (or similar).

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I think the man primarily to blame for this is a Mr D. Cummings, if you're looking to apportion blame. People tend not to react well to statements such as "if some pensioners die, too bad", especially when they make the link between "some pensioners" and "my parents / grandparents".

Only if you believe some unsubstantiated media report (strongly denied) that suits a preconceived agenda. That supposed 'statement' has been described as “a highly defamatory fabrication” in a real verifiable on the record statement.

 

[BLOCK F]

If, as reported in today's Sunday Times, a minister said 70 year olds will have to remain in lockdown until a vaccine is found, there may well be a 'pensioners' uprising, zimmer frames and sharpened walking sticks to the fore.
Me included! They don't like it up 'em, Captain Mainwaring!

 

[The Clamp]

If, as reported in today's Sunday Times, a minister said 70 year olds will have to remain in lockdown until a vaccine is found, there may well be a 'pensioners' uprising, zimmer frames and sharpened walking sticks to the fore.
Me included! They don't like it up 'em, Captain Mainwaring!

I imagine the boomers will be the first to break lock down anyway, they were the last to start listening to sense so no reason they wouldn’t continue to act selfishly when they get bored. And if the Me generation see others out and about, they won’t see any reason they should stay in.
And if it overwhelms the NHS and kills nurses, well that’s just hard cheese, isn’t it :-(

 

[Theatre of Trees]

It’s selfish now, yes, but for how much longer? I’d say 3-4 weeks and then we need to start relaxing it.

This is all dependent on what the figures are in 3 or 4 weeks time. Whilst many of us would like a relaxation the public are just going to have to work on the assumption that it takes as long as it takes.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

I imagine the boomers will be the first to break lock down anyway, they were the last to start listening to sense so no reason they wouldn’t continue to act selfishly when they get bored. And if the Me generation see others out and about, they won’t see any reason they should stay in.
And if it overwhelms the NHS and kills nurses, well that’s just hard cheese, isn’t it :-(

Some really don’t care and apart from the Nurse part I don’t blame them

Would you want to spend the last years you have in isolation and potentially alone?

 

[The Clamp]

It’s not going to be years. But yes, I agree that it would be unpleasant to be forced to stay indoors. Like everyone has been doing.

 

[BLOCK F]

I imagine the boomers will be the first to break lock down anyway, they were the last to start listening to sense so no reason they wouldn’t continue to act selfishly when they get bored. And if the Me generation see others out and about, they won’t see any reason they should stay in.
And if it overwhelms the NHS and kills nurses, well that’s just hard cheese, isn’t it :-(

Very harsh and rather sanctimonious, Clamp.
Do you honestly believe it is feasible to keep everyone over 70 in lockdown, until possibly the autumn of 2021, as was mentioned?
I would say no.
On a personal note, don't castigate , what you call boomers, I am 72 next birthday and haven't been beyond the garden gate since a week before lockdown began.

 

[The Clamp]

Very harsh and rather sanctimonious, Clamp.
Do you honestly believe it is feasible to keep everyone over 70 in lockdown, until possibly the autumn of 2021, as was mentioned?
I would say no.
On a personal note, don't castigate , what you call boomers, I am 72 next birthday and haven't been beyond the garden gate since a week before lockdown began.

Nobody will be required to stay in Lock down until then.

It is quite feasible that your age group will be required to stay indoors for a few more weeks than the rest of the population.
I quite reasonably predict that a lot of that age group, Baby Boomers as they are often referred to, will refuse to stay in, even just for a few weeks. In fact I can imagine many of them being incandescent with fury at the mere suggestion of it.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Not seen that particular model but there is no 'requirement' for a number of deaths - there's an estimate of how many it might involve in the models - based on what I've seen that would be at the very extreme end but they are changing all the time. The problem is even with herd immunity the vulnerability of individuals doesn't change - so until there's a vaccine the vulnerable would need to be shielded, or take more risk on the basis if we've reached herd immunity there are many fewer infected people out there spreading it. This all depends of course on whether you can catch/spread it again once you've had it once - if you can, we're knackered until there's a cure or a vaccine.

Spot on. Herd immunity seems to be a bit of a hopeful myth ATM. There is little or no evidence to suggest that the people recovering from this are now immune. It's no good demanding X or Y as a strategy when the crucial questions about COVID19 remain unanswered. We are managing the influx of C19 patients to stop overwhelming the health service with the lockdown, which is the best place we can be in ATM. Until we know more about how the virus is behaving/mutating etc, we simply don't know enough to just lift the lid, so we shouldn't.

I can see the 'green pass' approach using phone apps being considered as we go into the next 3 weeks. It seem to be working for S.Korea?

 

[Bob'n'weave]

I imagine the boomers will be the first to break lock down anyway, they were the last to start listening to sense so no reason they wouldn’t continue to act selfishly when they get bored. And if the Me generation see others out and about, they won’t see any reason they should stay in.
And if it overwhelms the NHS and kills nurses, well that’s just hard cheese, isn’t it :-(

Got some pretty shaky base lines there Clamp. No evidence to suggest that 'Boomers' will do this, that or the other, or collectively think this, that or the other. Absolute tosh based on absolute tosh. You must be gutted that the 'Boomer Remover' has been thwarted by those damn Tories and their damn life saving lockdown. I almost expect you to come up with a 'final solution' to help us expunge the murdering scum that are 'boomers'. What a tool.

 

[A1X]

It is quite feasible that your age group will be required to stay indoors for a few more weeks than the rest of the population.
I quite reasonably predict that a lot of that age group, Baby Boomers as they are often referred to, will refuse to stay in, even just for a few weeks. In fact I can imagine many of them being incandescent with fury at the mere suggestion of it.

Let's also not forget this makes up a core voting group for the current government. They will want to piss that demographic off as little as possible, especially now they aren't having to deal with a bunch of inept clowns on the other side.

 

[Swansman]

Spot on. Herd immunity seems to be a bit of a hopeful myth ATM. There is little or no evidence to suggest that the people recovering from this are now immune.

Going to Google translate a Swedish article on this subject, from yesterday:

With a few exceptions, all viral diseases lead to a greater or lesser degree of immunity. Jan Albert , professor of infection prevention at the Karolinska Institute, thinks it is reasonable to assume that this also applies to covid-19.

- It would be extremely strange if you would not become immune for a while after going through this disease. But nobody knows how long that period is, he says.

On Friday night, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a warning that there is no evidence that anyone who has been infected by the corona virus becomes immune. Jan Albert is critical of the play.

- I think it's strange. The lack of evidence for something does not mean that the opposite is true.

He is supported by state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell.

- I have looked at the statement and think it is a grave interpretation. It's vague. Of course, we do not know for sure, but most experts are convinced that you get some immunity, Tegnell tells TV4.

However, antibodies do not provide complete protection against new disease attacks.

- The virus can enter the body again, but the spread is so limited that you do not get sick, says Jan Albert.

Can anyone who is immune pass the virus on to others?

- Probably you are contagious to a very low degree, if any.

Just like the regular seasonal flu, the corona virus is likely to return in various forms in the future.

- Partly it is that the immune system is falling away, but it is also that the virus is changing.

- The corona virus will not disappear from the earth's surface.

Like many other countries, Sweden will conduct antibody tests to investigate the proportion of the population that has had covid-19. If many people have been ill, it is believed to provide protection even for healthy individuals.

- Flock immunity is not a strategy, but it is a consequence of the spread of the virus. The alternative is a total lockdown as some of the other countries introduced, but I think it will be difficult to maintain the shutdowns until we have a vaccine.

I dont know if the words on immunity are the result of our odd way forward or if most experts in other countries as well do believe you get some type of immunity, but regardless I think "hopeful myth" is a bit exaggerated.

 

[Bob'n'weave]

Going to Google translate a Swedish article on this subject, from yesterday:

With a few exceptions, all viral diseases lead to a greater or lesser degree of immunity. Jan Albert , professor of infection prevention at the Karolinska Institute, thinks it is reasonable to assume that this also applies to covid-19.

- It would be extremely strange if you would not become immune for a while after going through this disease. But nobody knows how long that period is, he says.

On Friday night, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a warning that there is no evidence that anyone who has been infected by the corona virus becomes immune. Jan Albert is critical of the play.

- I think it's strange. The lack of evidence for something does not mean that the opposite is true.

He is supported by state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell.

- I have looked at the statement and think it is a grave interpretation. It's vague. Of course, we do not know for sure, but most experts are convinced that you get some immunity, Tegnell tells TV4.

However, antibodies do not provide complete protection against new disease attacks.

- The virus can enter the body again, but the spread is so limited that you do not get sick, says Jan Albert.

Can anyone who is immune pass the virus on to others?

- Probably you are contagious to a very low degree, if any.

Just like the regular seasonal flu, the corona virus is likely to return in various forms in the future.

- Partly it is that the immune system is falling away, but it is also that the virus is changing.

- The corona virus will not disappear from the earth's surface.

Like many other countries, Sweden will conduct antibody tests to investigate the proportion of the population that has had covid-19. If many people have been ill, it is believed to provide protection even for healthy individuals.

- Flock immunity is not a strategy, but it is a consequence of the spread of the virus. The alternative is a total lockdown as some of the other countries introduced, but I think it will be difficult to maintain the shutdowns until we have a vaccine.

I dont know if the words on immunity are the result of our odd way forward or if most experts in other countries as well do believe you get some type of immunity, but regardless I think "hopeful myth" is a bit exaggerated.

Ok myth may have been a bit strong, but 'it's reasonable to assume', or "most likely to", or even "probably" is not evidence based fact related to C19, they are hopeful guesses based on what a flu virus does, and C19 is not a flu virus. I'll settle for 'hopeful guesswork' instead.