To think this statement by Matt Hancock is incorrect?

[greenback]

From the BBC today: Mr Hancock said he understood that "people are yearning to know how long this will all last", but that "the answer is entirely dependent on how much people follow the rules on social distancing"

Bur I don't see that there is a direct connection between these two things.

I can see that the lockdown will dampen the spread of the virus, enabling the NHS to cope. It will also mean that the peak (of the first wave of cases) will come sooner rather than later. But that still doesn't tell us how long the lockdown will last. After we've passed the peak, the length of the lockdown is still entirely dependent on an exit strategy that hasn't yet been fully defined, and which is in turn dependent on antibody tests that haven't yet been successfully developed, or on social tracing apps that haven't yet been proven to work. China may have their new infections under control for now (assuming their numbers can be believed) but they still have tighter measures than ours in place and so are a very long way from getting back to normal.

Disclaimer: I didn't vote for this government, but generally think they're doing a good job in difficult circumstances. I think Matt Hancock comes across as genuine and honest. So I'm not making a political point - I just don't think this one statement is correct. Am I missing something?

[TestBank]

Yes, you are missing that the blame for deaths has now passed from the government to Doris and her twice daily dog walks

[RufustheLanglovingreindeer]

What test said

[JackJackIncredible]

Bloody Doris, bet she’s gone to Sainsbo’s more than once this week too!

[TheReluctantCountess]

We’re all going to turn on each other.

[Haffiana]

And only bought two cucumbers!

[user1471500037]

The truth is the quicker the virus spreads, the shorter the lockdown period. The exit strategy is based on nhs capacity.

[user1471500037]

Plus don’t believe china numbers

[user1471500037]

But I like Matt Hancock, have worked with him and he’s a decent guy

[PotholeParadise]

So long as Doris doesn't buy children's socks, we'll all be fiiine.

What's that you say? She did!

[JackJackIncredible]

I heard Doris got a creme egg! (Don’t tell anyone obviously.)

[LolaSmiles]

People using the government's slow response and slow decicion making to excuse their own refusal to follow even simple rules doesn't work.

I dislike Boris, think the government handled it badly and there should have been greater clarity on some things, but (and this is key) the only people who can stop themselves being prize idiots, wandering around busy parks and attractions, prevent themselves socialising across households, decide not to go to the shop for trivial treats because they feel like it are members of the public.

Before lockdown started we were told to keep our distance and not go places. What did large numbers of people do? Flock to parks and beaches.

People were told to avoid pubs, cafes and social places. What did a substantial minority do? Go to pubs and cafes and social places.

People are being told to shop as infrequently as possible. What's all over Mumsnet? Why I should go to the shop when I fancy some beer or a magazine.


Unfortunately some people are selfish idiots.

[ismellamouse]

Yes. I don't think the government rules make sense either. Obviously we should observe social distancing and unnecessary travel but if you live near a beach/ park why shouldn't you sit down it if you are away from everybody else? There is no medical/ scientific reasoning behind it.

Sadly though some of the Great British Public seem to be very thick and cannot be trusted to use their own judgement hence the black and white rules.

[midgebabe]

Sorry user but you are deluded if you think that the virus can spread quickly yet not overwhelm the NHS and somehow shorten lockdown.

So to not overload the nhs we need to keep about 4000 ICU for normal,patients which gives us today about 6000 for covid patients

So 6000 covid patients, typically there for 2 weeks. Meaning around 100,000 people active with the virus at any one two week period , which means to rip through the population at a sustainable rate for the NHS would take 700 weeks assuming it stagnates at 50% of population infected


Ergo lockdown needs to lead to suppression and then a controlled exit which keeps rate of infection under tight control while we research treatment and vaccines

[user1471500037]

Accept that we might need more capacity in the short term. - it’s not about preventing deaths per se but making sure that people are treated in the appropriate way. Hence they are discouraging car journeys not because of spread of covid19 but because of car accidents and pressure on icu

[user1471500037]

But vaccines are like flu- the virus changes, the vaccines change and it’s a fact of life unfortunately that people die- in a year it will be like that

[Monkeynuts18]

YANBU.

I’m not saying I don’t agree with the lockdown or that I will disobey the rules. But that particular statement by Hancock is clearly nonsense for the reasons you give. I absolutely understand that we need to slow the spread to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed, which would obviously cause needless deaths. But I can’t see any link between how people abide by the lockdown rules and the length of the lockdown.

I think it’s probably political manoeuvring. They have no exit strategy. If they have to prolong the lockdown then it will be useful to be able to blame us.

[Makeitgoaway]

Yes this a point no one seems to have a grasp of. We need "lockdown" to be just good enough to allow the NHS to cope. If we do "better" than absolutely necessary with lockdown, then this thing goes on longer than necessary.

[Sparklesocks]

My feeling is Hancock et al are trying to emphasise the public being at fault to distract from the PPE they’ve failed to provide the NHS and the general failings because of the cuts they’ve made

[Hopeisnotastrategy]

No, he’s right. Please learn about how this horrible disease spreads, it’s a bugger. We need to keep apart for now properly and stop it in its tracks.

[Worriedmum54321]

We need to get the case numbers low enough to start doing testing and contact tracing. That is what they mean. If there are too many cases it will be impossible to trace their contacts and test them.

[TestBank]

Yawn
It's gone global
There is no stopping it in its tracks

[TestBank]

I also personally think it is too late in the uk, and our lockdown too halfhearted, for contact testing to now work

[ZombieFan]

It makes perfect sense to me. The lock down is to save lives, once we reach the level where the NHS can cope then we can look at relaxing the lock down. If the NHS continues to cope we relax lock down even more.

So ending lock down is dependant on how well the NHS can cope, which is dependant on how social distancing reduces spread the spread of the virus.

[FixTheBone]

@Makeitgoaway

In which case we need a complete curfew at the moment.

The NHS is not coping. We have filled the ICUs, expanded them, filled the expansion and then started nursing patients in operating theatres, and the filled them.

This virus is already costing more lives than it needs to have done.

[Makeitgoaway]

You must be seeing different data to me FixtheBone. Most of the country is nowhere near capacity.