Healthy people why are you so scared of catching covid 19?

[wakeupitsabeautifulmorning]

Serious question. I’m interested in why healthy people with no underlying problems are so unhappy about starting to get back to normal. I’m not talking about shielded people who need to stay shielded. But everyone else.

Because every day around 40 people are dying without no known health conditions and that's only those we know off. God knows how many are dying in their homes

As long as the transmission rate is below one, you've technically got a virus whose days are numbered. That's why the big push. Common knowledge Outward, not really a claim. This has been covered multiple times in the media. The issue is how achievable it is-you have to keep locking down to get the number below one again, at which point the numbers drop (after the lag). Keep going and the virus runs out of people (if the previous hosts are immune).

If people really aren't getting this point, I understand the fatalistic attitude much better. We need some education.

As long as the transmission rate is below one, you've technically got a virus whose days are numbered.

Exactly. And if we then use thorough contact tracing and lots of testing for the (hopefully) few cases that emerge, we should slowly eliminate the virus!

I understood the lockdown was to prevent a peak which the NHS could not cope with. I have not seen anything that suggests the lockdown will result in the virus disappearing, in that case why the push for a vaccine? Could you please link the media reports?

A big part of the reasoning behind the lockdown is to try to cause the virus to die out. If enough people can isolate, the virus won't be able to find new hosts to infect.

No.

Its to keep it to manageable levels at this stage of preceeding.

Its circulating in too many other countries without the resources to lockdown themselves.

Even if we get a vaccine, not everyone will be able to have it and it won't be possible to keep every case out.

Lockdown might be able to push things to very low levels but eradicate? Nope, not in the medium to longer term. That ship sailed.

Was there new evidence while we were sleeping that healthy people are now immune from Covid 19 so can stop worrying?

1. Healthy people & those with underlying conditions CATCH it everyday. 2. Those with underlying are more likely to die.
2. Healthy AND young have died from it too.
3. Healthy people might be super carriers & kill the weak and elderly
4. They don't know why which is why EVERYONE has to shelter.

All are true at the same time. OP hope you understand now.

outward Because it's not terribly achievable and we will be dealing with outbreaks (which will hopefully be squashed in the manner described) to a greater or lesser extent until we have a vaccine. People will keep bringing it into the country etc.

So you are talking about herd immunity?

That's why all the talk about contact tracing and it being a required condition for coming out of lockdown. It should have been phase 1 (it was but it could have been the only phase) but we're having a second crack at it after lockdown so it's going to be phase 3 if you like.

Does anyone know when and where the programme following 5 families with covid 19 was on? It sounds really interesting and I can't find it anywhere.
..Seen it mentioned on this thread a couple of times.

Sorry to interrupt your argument Ov9c please carry on!

Not remotely. Herd immunity would be the opposite, when lots and lots of people have got it and are no longer potential hosts because they have antibodies (in the alternative universe where this is a proven fact). The government realised too many people would die in the process of achieving this (wasted some precious time in doing so, hence our shameful death toll) and implemented this instead, because they didn't want to be the party who let a quarter of a million people die (you would really need to check immunity was a Thing before you went for this strategy in any possible universe, but they didn't). So the difference between herd immunity and squashing the city's by keeping the transmission rate below one of this: in herd immunity, the virus can't leap into a new host because all potential hosts have antibodies (or are dead). In the lockdown scenario, there are plenty of potential hosts for the virus but they're all more than two metres away and it can't keep infecting people at the same rate. So the rate falls. Overall, each individual case of infection stops resulting in new infections. With contact tracing, anyone who has been close to an infected person is isolated to ensure the virus can't infect more than one other person. (This will involve massive surveillance and temporary loss of freedom-there is no Normal).

virus not city

Was I arguing? :) No worries!

0v9c99f9g9d939d9f9g9h8h I would be interested to read more about this strategy, if there a useful article you be able to link. I understand about R and keeping it below 1 as the (government) NHS needs to be able to cope with a rate of transmission below 1 (hence the building of capacity in the NHS). I did not realise that this below 1 number was intended to be kept as such to make the virus ‘die out’. I would have imagined if this were the governments strategy they would stop all travel to the UK and lockdown would be absolute. Anyway, would love to read more about this!

That's interesting 0v9c There would be challenges with contact tracing I would think; the high number of tests required, locating and identifying contacts, the reliance on people following self isolation and also the fact that a lot of cases are asymptomatic?

I don't think it would halt transmission of the virus. Although I see it could be an effective way of keeping the rate of infection at lower levels whilst allowing blanket restrictions to be lifted.

I'm sorry I don't have links etc but if you're interested, medcram on YouTube is very interesting.

IMHO the difficulty is that we're trying to do something very tricky that requires great competence and we're not a very competent nation at the moment.

I was more looking for something that showed that this was the approach the government have been trying. I can’t find anything in any briefing/mainstream media that talks about this.

Because lots of healthy people with no underlying health conditions are succumbing to the virus. Less likely to die does not mean “absolutely wont die”

@Sunlighthouse I think the lack of treatment might be part of it? For example, people fear cancer which also doesn’t discriminate, but with early detection and various treatment options your chances of recovery tend to increase.

With Covid, it appears that if hits you bad, you get ventilated, and then it’s around 50/50 chances, and that’s that. There is no sense of control via lifestyle choices, preventative screening or treatment.

Because I have endometriosis.
Although it's not an autoimmune disease and wouldn't mean I have less chance of getting better if I caught Covid, I could really REALLY do without having both covid and a period (which normally render me bed bound with labour type contractions) at the same time.

I also work in a nursing home and if I was carrying it, but didn't know it obviously until symptoms show, it could wipe out 50 people potentially.

@ladypete it's not lots of people though? People without underlying health conditions make up a very small minority of deaths. And young healthy people are an even tinier proportion.

I think it would be overly sympathetic to say they've ever had a coherent strategy. But if you're locking down and then contact tracing this is the general aim. Only the standard of perfection differs. The thing that could change it if there really is a plan to let more and more of the population get it. I think they're backtracking on that as they juggle what will be most awful. The reality of the surge exposes the incompetence at the heart of the government which they probably aren't keen to repeat until they absolutely have to.

Ok so we don’t actually know if this is part of the reasoning behind lockdown.

No it definitely is, all scientific thinking that isn't herd immunity relies on this theory to some extent. There aren't any other options. But I can't point you to anything, literally anything, the government has said that they haven't contradicted elsewhere.