Article suggesting lockdowns until vaccine found

[Playmistyforme66]

It was in the guardian

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/08/lockdowns-cant-end-until-covid-19-vaccine-found-study-says

Article seems to suggest lockdown type conditions and social distancing to be ongoing until a vaccine is found.

I don't think I can bear it, was hoping things would be normal by this weekend or next.

[LazyYogi]

I honestly don't think the economy or society really could survive. I think social distancing may well last but a sustained lock down is not viable. At worst, this one will be extended for s month or two then we will lockdown again for flu season to minimise bed use. Vulnerable/shielded may well be asked to isolate throughout but as it won't be enforceable it will be less effective.

[Playmistyforme66]

@LazyYogi I agree with you but I do worry that practically anyone could be at increased risk and that many people could die or become seriously ill when they don't expect to.

But endless lockdown is so grim, but is it more grim that 1000s more deaths?

[Reginabambina]

Realistically some form of herd immunity (whether acquired through vaccination or illness) is necessary to prevent further outbreaks once countries have brought their current outbreaks under control. In the absence of that immunity governments will need to choose between three scenarios. 1. indefinite lockdown to avoid future outbreaks (ending when there is either a vaccine or sufficient immunity in other countries to minimise the risk of importing the virus). 2.long term social distancing (perhaps combined with contact tracing) in order to minimise further outbreaks (until subsequent outbreaks result in herd immunity or a vaccine is found). 3.lifting all restrictions at the risk of further significant outbreaks (hopefully with better preparations for dealing with future outbreaks). I would imagine that most would choose some variant of option 2.

[Reginabambina]

Also do bare in mind that the longer terms effects of lockdown will also result in death (some people have already died as a result of suicide or murders, as the economy fails the effects on both mental and physical health will only get worse). People will die regardless.

[Lalala205]

Well realistically it can't last forever in any respect. The people that have been advised to shield for up to 12wks will presumably be asked to continue to. When things revert to normal standards it'll no doubt be funneled to try and minimise potential spread and increase on health services.

[Playmistyforme66]

@Lalala205 I agree but the even if the world goes back to normal and the vulnerable shield themselves many will rely on the non shielding to care for them, or they will live with a person who is going out to work each day who will most likely bring the virus home to them at some point.

Both options are dire really. I just really hope they find a vaccine soon.

[Lalala205]

Plus as a keyworker I potentially surmise that lockdown can't last indefinately as the number of us who are still working and exposed will either develop an immunity via infection. Or become unable to work via infection and having to isolate to the point when people currently to self isolate will then be asked to resume working based on voluntary/hierarchy of health issue risks.

[LazyYogi]

Yes, the "normal, healthy" population may still require intensive treatment and may die but the numbers would be lower than in the shielding population. The healthy individuals requiring extra care would be outliers.

Supposedly anyway. I am keen to know the number who have died from the virus with no underlying health conditions.

[Monty27]

If people on all levels hadn't been so ridiculously naive we wouldn't have gotten to where we're at. Sadly the more stupid and selfish people are the longer it will last.
Don't plan a house party any time soon 💔

[lubeybooby]

That was always the plan I thought? 'Waves' of suppression measures eg lockdowns, and waves of things being a little more relaxed, lasting until everyone is vaccinated, not just a vaccine found and completed testing etc.

[CodenameVillanelle]

Things won't go back to normal this month or next but the idea that this will continue until we have a vaccine is ridiculous. Other countries are lifting lockdown because the numbers are falling. The country will be bankrupt if lockdown goes on for many months and at some point not too far away the decision will be made that the economy needs to get moving again, even though more people will continue to die.
A vaccine is still up to a year away. We will not be locked down until we have one.

[Shitsgettingcrazy]

This version of lockdown, can not last until a vaccine.

A version can. I imagine I wont be working from the office for at least a year.

We still have staff in the field who are doing things essential to life. We are also working on the nightingale across the country. But most are furloughed. The HSE has advised we concern about how long we are closed. All our work is around H&S. Most not needed immediately, but will need doing in the coming months. The HSE advised to look at the rate of infection, not deaths and they will advise on any steps we want to take.

We need to juggle it carefully. I would imagine most field staff will be back to work in 6-8 weeks working in new conditions, taking social distancing into account etc. Most of our office staff will remain home based, meetings done over zoom or microsoft teams for while, anything up to year.

Once world on the ground starts, office start will slowly come off furlough.

I imagine lockdown will slowly loosen as well. I am imagine resturant cinemas etc to open last, but with new rules about capacity. Before being allowed to open properly

It's all about slowing not stopping the spread. Not a chance will business be forced to close for 18 months.

As pp said, there will be countless deaths from the damage to business and economy.

[Meredithgrey1]

It's not even a lockdown until a vaccine is found presumably, it's until a vaccine is found, mass produced and enough of the population is vaccinated. Which will take additional time.
The lockdown can't go on until then in its current form. My GP isn't seeing anyone, even if they don't have symptoms, routine appointments (childhood vaccination, smear tests etc) aren't happening, hospitals are cancelling appointments, dentists are saying they don't have anywhere to send urgent patients. That cannot continue for over a year.
Are the protections put in place for renters going to last a year? Is the government going to pay furloughed workers, back business loans, support charities for that long? Presumably not.

[Scottishgirl85]

Lockdown will not last more than an additional few weeks imo. It's not sustainable and non-COVID deaths will start to rise. Already people with suspected cancer, for example, are not being investigated, treatments delayed etc. The economy, mental health, vulnerable families etc would not cope. I believe there will be waves of measures and perhaps additional lockdown periods later in year. There is only so long we can lockdown before the negative impact outweighs the benefit.

[feelingverylazytoday]

We won't know how to proceed until we can do large scale tests for antibodies so we have some idea how far along we are to herd immunity. Even random sampling will give us some idea. Random sampling from Italy indicates that 38% of the population have already been exposed to the virus and developed antibodies.
That kind of percentage, combined with other measures such as continued shielding of the vulnerable, might be enough to lift some restrictions.

[Marieo]

I think there will be to some extent, but not like it is now- although I think it will be like this again for the next peak. We will see, I am sort of becoming used to it now, which I'm not sure is good or sad!

[FirTree31]

The economy won't take it, as as pp said, this will cause deaths itself, indirect as well as direct through illnesses caused by excessive stress. I think herd immunity is still ongoing, but quietly.

[Cornishclio]

Things are not going back to normal this weekend OP so resign yourself to that. If anything if we don't flatten the infection rate and some people flout the social distancing over Easter the lockdown may be made tighter by no exercise allowance etc.

I do think that within the next three months though or as soon as the virus shows a consistent downwards trend they will have to release some of the restrictions for the sake of the economy even if a vaccine not available. Kids at some point will need to go back to school as it seems ridiculous that they stay off until September. I have read somewhere that they may allow younger adults to return to work in their 20s or 30s so long as they live independently of their parents. The logic being that the younger you are the easier you cope with the virus but that is not always the case. There will be shielding of some people until a vaccine or cure is developed and rolled out. Mass scale testing and social tracking to identify virus hotspots may also happen.

[Bluntness100]

I think there is a huge amount of confusion over the term lock down and restrictions and this article shows the writer is also confused.

Lock down is what we are in now, and have been for the last two and a half weeks. This will lift, likely early may,

Restrictions will clearly be in place longer, social distancing, borders not fully open etc,

I don’t think it’s news that we would have some form of restrictions in place for some considerable time. Possibly till the summer.

All this article has done is used the wrong language. If it had said some restrictions will be in place till this is managed you’d probably not have blinked. Instead it used lock down, misleadingly and erroneously so, because that’s not what the writer is saying.

[StrangerDaysAhoy]

I wonder what will happen with universities. They have always been hot beds of transmission of diseases. Some are already planning to be running exams in exam halls in August and September this year, and I think this is misguided.

They're recruiting for September 2020 - hundreds of thousands of students, who will move en masse, including from overseas, and live in shared flats and houses. Some of the private halls flats have 12-14 occupants, all from different countries, very few of whom will know their antibody status.

I do wonder if the Cabinet know what the universities minister is up to with the Vice-Chancellors; and if Matt Hancock is ok with that. On the other hand Rishi Sunak probably doesn't want to rock the vast, creaking student loans book boat.

Money or people?

[WearyandBleary]

Good point about universities: young people not the best at social distancing either. Because it’s so scary to think about just letting it run riot through thousands of you people.

No one has a plan really, do they? I don’t know how the government can make a decision. It is really the economy vs lives.

[KatherineJaneway]

was hoping things would be normal by this weekend or next.

Absolutely no chance of that. They lift the lockdown millions go back to work, eat out, gym, hairdresser, sports etc and the number of cases go through the roof and the NHS can't cope.

[MummyPop00]

Lockdown can’t happen for the medium term. As Trump said, the cure cannot be worse than the problem.

They need to let the fit & healthy under 70’s out to roam free sooner rather than later - maybe when the NHS ICU expansion is completed - & then let the thing spread as the overwhelming majority of this group will survive after being exposed to it. This also gets the majority of the economy going again.

Also the vulnerable & over 70’s won’t have to be locked away for longer than is good for their mental health waiting for a (possible, by no means definite) vaccine or effective drug therapy, as the younger healthier ones will have provided herd immunity.

[BaileysforBreakfast]

I work in a university. There are no plans for the foreseeable future to have exams or to re-open the university estate. Messages from our VC indicate that universities are working together on this, so it's unlikely some will open and some won't. There's been talk of rescheduling the start of the academic year until January, although this would be undesirable, or of starting in Sept/Oct with online teaching only (also undesirable, especially for first year undergrads). There's talks of caps on intake numbers as most universities are likely to under-recruit.
The idea that students will move 'en masse' into student accommodation in September is an unlikely scenario unless there is a vaccine or something that makes 'normal life' possible again..
There is no indication whatsoever that universities will put money before people. In fact, I would say universities have worked in an exemplary way in this respect by closing down institutions quickly in order to minimise risk.
It's been a nightmare in terms of having to redesign everything, as this is usually one of the busiest times of year with assessment, exam boards, student progression etc., and they are working hard to ensure students aren't unduly affected by this, introducing a 'no detriment' policy while still ensuring rigorous academic standards are maintained.
Why anyone would think universities would act irresponsibly is beyond me. What would they gain?

[Northernsoullover]

I'm about to go into my final year at university. My plan (if we start up in November) is to attend lectures with mask (to stop me touching my face), take a packed lunch and eat outside come rain or shine. However, I am a mature student so can just walk/cycle in and not worry about living in close confinement with a large number of others.