To think easing lockdown on Monday is allowing a second peak to happen?

[Gawdsake2020]

Exactly that really. Still 4,000 odd infections a day, 600 deaths a day and there easing up on Monday.

problem is the media once again making things up-alot are saying it will be lifted on monday people now thinking its all over

they have to make it crystal clear on sunday what restrictions are lifted and what arent but i wont hold my breath

Coronavirus latest news: Lockdown to be formally extended by three weeks today.

www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-uk-lockdown-update-deaths-cases-tests-latest/

I really like the idea of a "voluntary lockdown" for easing, it is just more sustainable.

I ignore the media hyperboles and look at excess deaths measures, which look to be 423 per million of population in the UK. I suspect there are also excess deaths from non-covid causes which if allowed to increase, is equally tragic.

On balance, unlocking the economy so it is at least running at say, 30-60% makes sense while waiting for a vaccine to be viable at scale. Rather than running at 5% and risking irrevocable damage like mental health, destroying peoples' livelihoods etc. You can still impose more draconian rules if it looks like hospitals will be overwhelmed. You also get to infect the healthy population at a manageable rate, i know it is still not clear but there is certainly an immune response and low evidence of catching it twice, so not entirely implausible.

Coronavirus latest news: Lockdown to be formally extended by three weeks today.

There's no evidence of that anywhere in the news except the Telegraph, and the title of the article is very misleading compared to the contents.

I ignore the media hyperboles and look at excess deaths measures, which look to be 423 per million of population in the UK. I suspect there are also excess deaths from non-covid causes which if allowed to increase, is equally tragic.

There will be excess deaths due to non-COVID causes but allowing Covid cases to increase will very probably make that worse.

Honestly, when people say "lockdown must end now " what I hear is "I'm ok that 649 people died today. I'm ok with 693 people dying yesterday. I'm fine if 600 or so people die every day. Given the choice between stopping those deaths and giving me what I want - I want what I want."

Again - do people not understand how recessions and poverty works? Businesses are folding daily. New ones cannot open up in their place without savings/loans/appetite for risk to start up with, which no-one will have after all this. Graduates will come out of uni and be unable to get any job at all, not even in a coffee shop because half of those will go under. Poverty and unemployment is well known to be linked with poor health, MH issues, suicide, stress and a shorter life expectancy. So what you're really choosing between is a chance of a grandparents dying now, or your children having a hard life, being poor and unemployed for a good few years, and possibly having a shorter life.

really like the idea of a "voluntary lockdown" for easing, it is just more sustainable.

not really. Many businesses had to go with the work from home culture because schools were closed. Once they reopen, no one can justify to stay home if the boss wants you back in the office.

Social distancing in supermarkets and shops can't be justify if kids are mixed together at school. Sport venues can't be told to stay close if kids are already mixing up anyway.. and so on and so forth.

If you are a royal, or very wealthy, you can stay on lockdown at much as you please. The rest of the population will have to either quit their job or get on with it, like it or not.

BeijingBikini
why do you insist on pretending it's only old people who are victims?

@oneandtwenty because that's literally what the stats are saying. Saying "it doesn't discriminate" is completely wrong.

and the stats about long-term effects of surviving the disease? People always forget those....

Social distancing in supermarkets and shops can't be justify if kids are mixed together at school. Sport venues can't be told to stay close if kids are already mixing up anyway.. and so on and so forth

of course it can. It doesnt have to be all or nothing you know.

we need to keep R under one, imagine schools being open raise it to say 0.8, but if you then scrap social distancing in public, it might raise to say 1.5 which is too high

so you can allow some measures to be released and not others whilst keeping the R below 1

(disclaimer - not a scientist)

Depending on how many get it, the death toll among younger people would be devastating. We also have no idea what that toll, including from non covid, would be in a situation of exponential growth when even a and e will be closed.

It is odd how many medics are saying that the thing which most strikes them about this disease is how ill it makes young and fit people. Maybe in lower percentages but that adds up as case numbers grow. I also do value the lives of the old or unhealthy but that is a separate issue.

I don't think that choice is actually a big factor in govt thinking anyway.

If we didn't open up at all in the foreseeable future then we would probably be extending the economic damage beyond that which is inevitably caused by the disease itself. That's a major reason why they are already gearing up to make changes.

However, if measures are changed in a way that allows exponential growth of the virus to resume, then the results could be more damaging economically ( and to non Covid health issues). We would either see the devastating economic and health toll of exponential growth of the virus, or we would have a series of stop and start lockdowns. I do fear we might face those anyway but I hope not.

So for right now I don't think it's irresponsible to be trying to find ways to move forward with measures in place to try and hold down the infection rate. The govt are doing that though, they really do not need reminding of the economic impact. If restrictions are still in place it is probably because they think releasing them now will cause greater economic impact. But, they do need to be closely watched to see if they are competent in getting certain things in place to allow that opening up, PPE, testing etc.

BeijingBikini. Yes. The statistics themselves have always made this clear but the government and media reporting of the outlier cases seems to make people equate 'a young person can die' with 'a young person will die'. Actually the stats on the survival rates of the over 80s are pretty good too (to the extent that anything is survivable on a day to day basis as we age - obviously, death is the only certainty)

It doesnt have to be all or nothing you know.

no, but it doesn't have to start with schools, then does it.
Reading various reports, it looks like schools open are the factor raising R the most...

Also, that graph I posted was from the CDC back when they thought overall death rate was about 1% because they didn't know the true prevalence; all of the antibody/prevalence studies since then show on average a 0.2% death rate! docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zC3kW1sMu0sjnT_vP1sh4zL0tF6fIHbA6fcG5RQdqSc/edit#gid=0

So each bar in the graph is actually way lower.

I'd rather take my chances with any long-term effects of the disease than be long-term unemployed, unable to buy a house, unable to afford children and struggling to buy food.

Beijing is right

We have 66 million people in the uk. We have lost very few under 60s to this awful virus. About the same as we would have to road traffic in this time. I don’t want to catch it but I also want to be able to buy food. We need to relax lockdown slowly and sensibly which I think is what will happen.

I mean ‘pay for food’ - I don’t have any money coming in at the moment and still no gov money

Also want my teens to have a future

no, but it doesn't have to start with schools, then does it.
Reading various reports, it looks like schools open are the factor raising R the most..

it likely wont start with schools. I dont think he's going to announce all schools back open and everything normal on monday, do you?

Ive actually read reports contrary to that but there you go!

Here's the latest:

www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-uk-lockdown-update-deaths-cases-tests-latest/

sturgeon havng none of the rumours going about talking to pm later today

She's extended Scotland's lockdown for 3 weeks. I'm watching it now.

She's not being pressured into relaxing Scotland's lockdown etc.

The issue with the whole underlying conditions thing is a lot of people don't know they have underlying conditions. So they're not going to be any on any shielding or vulnerable lists because they just think they're normal and healthy.

There was an article somewhere about a girl who survived Covid but while she was in hospital she discovered she had an underlying heart condition that she had no idea about. She was healthy and living a totally normal life until she discovered she wasn't.

I think if they do 'ease lockdown' as proposed on Monday it won't make an awful lot of difference, they are handing people crumbs of what amounts to 'you can sit in a park now and if there happens to be any police around they won't bother you' because they said they'd do something. I don't think anything will change significantly this month.