Advanced search

Why aren’t the numbers going back up?

(300 Posts)
Mohiqo Thu 11-Jun-20 23:35:43

I went into lockdown a week before we were told to. We are the only household on our street who has rigorously stuck to all the lockdown rules. I say this to explain that I’ve been taking lockdown seriously!

But recently I’m starting to think that perhaps we can just start to live our lives normally again, like lots of other people are doing. Reason being that I don’t understand why the numbers aren’t going back up again. First it was VE Day, then the impact of Domgate, then more people slowly going back to work and the roads getting busier.

So why aren’t the diagnosed cases climbing back up again?

OP’s posts: |
PickAChew Thu 11-Jun-20 23:38:59

Because community transmission is very low. We do need to start living again.

One of the worst affected cities in the country has had no new confirmed cases for 5 days.

Bunnybigears Thu 11-Jun-20 23:39:27

Because each person who is infected is infecting less than one other person therefore the numbers of infections will obviously reduce.

GreyGardens88 Thu 11-Jun-20 23:42:35


Because community transmission is very low. We do need to start living again.

One of the worst affected cities in the country has had no new confirmed cases for 5 days.

Which city is that?

Blueskysunsout Thu 11-Jun-20 23:44:42

Because most people have a healthy immune system and fight it off, people are also more aware of socially distancing than ever before and there’s less infected people going about as if they’ve been self isolating properly it will have died off in them.

Mohiqo Thu 11-Jun-20 23:49:41

So in that case why can’t we get back to normality?

OP’s posts: |
Thinkpinkstink Thu 11-Jun-20 23:50:00

@Bunnybigears that confuses me, because surely the R rate is only lower becuase people are seeing fewer people to infect (due to lockdown)... Once people start circulating again I'd expect the R rate to increase.

OP, I feel the same, I'd fully expected a second spike to start showing by now.

There is some thought that the spike was saw in April WAS the second spike, the first one being smaller and not yet known about to be publicised (in Dec/Jan).

MrsP2015 Fri 12-Jun-20 00:03:55

My theory is, people have to become infected first.
Then they show symptoms days later, after infecting others. Cases are rising slowly but because hospitals are better prepared they can treat quicker and people aren't dying as much. I think next week cases will rise.

Hope I'm wrong.

Pinkbunny2811 Fri 12-Jun-20 00:09:10

Up to 14 day incubation period. We shall see. Also, they're not expecting another wave. Most people have had it anyway 🙄

MiddlesexGirl Fri 12-Jun-20 00:11:10

@GreyGardens88 London

PickAChew Fri 12-Jun-20 00:11:22

@GreyGardens88 Sunderland

MiddlesexGirl Fri 12-Jun-20 00:11:59

Apologies. London has had no deaths. Not sure about confirmed cases.

HalfPastThree Fri 12-Jun-20 00:17:45

80/20 rule - 20% of social distancing has 80% of the effect. You need to close down big parties in winter - you don't need to stop children playing with their friends and disinfect your shopping

Mascotte Fri 12-Jun-20 00:22:33

There's also a theory that around 80% of the population are simply not susceptible to the virus. Professor Karl Friston.

howells Fri 12-Jun-20 00:23:55

Because we’ve managed to get the number of infections down (we had a lot before lockdown, we just didn’t know it because we weren’t doing widespread testing), and we now aren’t mixing in the way we were before lockdown. Lots of people are still wfh, there are fewer people on public transport, pubs, restaurants, theatres, hairdressers are still closed, most children are still off school, and lots of people are still observing the rules about not having close contact with other households.

If we go back to pre-lockdown behaviour we’ll see a rapid rise in cases IMO.

Mascotte Fri 12-Jun-20 00:36:03

Fortunately there hasn't been a rapid rise in other countries where lockdown has been relaxed. So that's hopeful!

BeijingBikini Fri 12-Jun-20 00:41:50

Because the disease was a total scam, half of the people are asymptomatic and there's evidence it was here in Autumn, so in reality we've probably already had several waves and probably have herd immunity. Outdoor transmission also contributes fuck all to the numbers, the main spread has been within hospitals and care homes.

Also coronaviruses tend to just die out at the end of winter, like SARS did, disappeared before they even made the vaccine.

Lynda07 Fri 12-Jun-20 01:11:29

If it was a scam I don't know who stood to gain from it.

ineedaholidaynow Fri 12-Jun-20 01:23:01

So why have we had so many additional deaths in the last few months if it was a scam?

Oliversmumsarmy Fri 12-Jun-20 01:27:54

I thought that March/April was the 2nd wave

People are out and about with a nod towards social distancing
People aren’t staying in like they were before and shops are opening up on Monday aren’t they.

I think many people have had this and recovered so have some immunity

Whilst I think we should have locked down a few days earlier I don’t know what we could have done without the benefit of hindsight. This is a new virus.

Places like NZ which has closed its borders and its people haven’t developed any immunity I do wonder how they are going to survive going forward unless they are planning on keeping the borders closed for a couple of years

Lynda07 Fri 12-Jun-20 01:36:06

We've had another hundred and something deaths from Covid 19 in the last twenty four hours, so I've just read in the latest news.

The infection rate is certainly going down which is great but so it should because most people have been careful. Those who have been going out to work throughout our 'lockdown' may well have built up immunity but let's not forget those essential workers who caught the virus, some of whom died and not elderly.

I haven't been outside the house (except to put bins out) since before we were told to self isolate and wonder now, as and when I do venture out, if I will be even more vulnerable as a result. It doesn't scare me particularly but there are some affairs I would like to put in order before popping my clogs :-). I daresay I will be told to wait for a vaccine before going out but when will that be and will the vaccine be safe?

It's one of those situations where it is very difficult to get things right. Right now the government obviously want to get everyone back to work and open up places, etc, because the economy is suffering but that may not be the correct course of action. We won't know 'til we try!

Lynda07 Fri 12-Jun-20 01:39:05

Oliversmumsarmy Fri 12-Jun-20 01:27:54
I thought that March/April was the 2nd wave
I thought the second wave was predicted for later/late in the year!
Just goes to show how much conflicting information there is. In some ways that is not surprising because new things come to light every day, sometimes twice in a day.

People are going out more though, the restrictions are gradually easing.

Oliversmumsarmy Fri 12-Jun-20 01:55:31

I can see there being another wave as the weather gets worse. I am just hoping that the people who had it the previous year still have some immunity and it doesn’t hit as hard as the March /April etc figures.

BatShite Fri 12-Jun-20 01:58:55

Commuity transmission seems seriously low. Sems that pretty much unless you are in a carehome or hospital, you are fine realistically. So much so that the people testing the vaccine are having issues actually being exposed to the virus to see if the vaccine works!

psychomath Fri 12-Jun-20 02:02:00

Combination of a few reasons. Things like going to the beach are not especially likely to spread infection even if a lot of people are doing it, provided you aren't all crammed together with your face up in someone's armpit. And relative to the whole country it's only a very small number of people doing those things anyway - it just looks like a lot because it's all over the media. And the proportion of infected people is also very low.

A couple of weeks ago they estimated that 0.2% of people were currently infected. At one of the huge Black Lives Matter protests there were said to be 15,000 people attending (can't remember if that was London or Manchester). If 0.2% of the people there were infected that's just 30 people on the whole march. Even if each of those 30 people ignored all the social distancing advice and managed to infect three other people, that's still only 90 new infections caused by the massive non-socially distanced event - that wouldn't even be noticeable among the normal daily fluctuations. People ignoring social distancing might be slowing down the drop in cases, but they're not (currently) having a big enough effect to reverse the trend and make the numbers go up again.

The reason we can't drop everything and go back to normal is because there's a big difference between a one-off event and sustained social contact. If 90 people get infected on a protest march and then go back home and continue to minimise their contact with others, that's not too bad and the local outbreak will fizzle out. If those 90 people go to another mass event in the next week, or hug their friends or take crowded public transport, and they each infect three more people, that's 270 new infections. Then if those 270 people do the same, it goes up to 810 and then 2430 new cases, at which point you're looking at a noticeable increase again.

So I think the most sensible and sustainable thing to do at the moment is still to try and reduce the overall number of people you come into contact with compared to non-pandemic times, e.g. by avoiding public transport if you can and not going to the shops as often, to keep the transmission rates down across society as a whole. But equally don't panic if you need to see a friend or someone stands too close to you, because the individual risk from each interaction is still very small.

That was a massive explanation but hopefully it makes sense!

Join the discussion

Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Get started »