What if everyone in the world isolated for the same three weeks....

[Rissole]

.....or whatever time period was deemed appropriate. Wouldn't that rid us of Covid once and for all as it would die out?

All we would have to do is get enough food in for the time period and stay in. A collective whole world self isolation. Job done!

@NuffSaidSam

A billion people in three weeks? That can't be right.

You might be hungry but you're unlikely to starve to death in three weeks unless you had absolutely nothing and even then I think you could survive three weeks.

(I'm not suggesting that we should let people nearly starve btw)

You live in a place with no running water.

The electricity stopped working so even if you have running water, the procedures to filter & chlorinate it have stopped working correctly. No one has a clue if your water is full of E.Coli & cryptosporidium since all the testing has stopped.

Now does it make sense why you won't last 3 weeks?

And some people couldn't last more than 5-8 days without calories. Small children for instance, or elderly fragile.

@OhPeeQueue

Maybe not leave homes, but not leave their local towns? I think that would work.

How would that work? Does Covid see the border of a town and suddenly stop and go "nope!"?

@PickAChew

Imagine doing that and something like storm Arwen landing in the middle of it.

And as it's a global lockdown it would be likely that somewhere was experiencing a storm/flood/wildfire etc at the time.

No electricity so no point in having most health professionals at the hospital. Let 'em go home.

*You live in a place with no running water.

The electricity stopped working so even if you have running water, the procedures to filter & chlorinate it have stopped working correctly. No one has a clue if your water is full of E.Coli & cryptosporidium since all the testing has stopped.

Now does it make sense why you won't last 3 weeks?

And some people couldn't last more than 5-8 days without calories. Small children for instance, or elderly fragile.*

I think the water people and other essential services would have to isolate at work. Plus everyone is issued with a supply of bottled water.

I understand some/most people would die if literally starved for three weeks, but realistically surely basic rations could be handed out? You don't need a full, normal shop to get through three weeks. A billion people with literally nothing is quite a lot.

It wouldn’t work, regardless of child care, essential workers etc but that three weeks simply wouldn’t be long enough to kill off a worldwide virus.

There will be cases where incubation will exceed three weeks.

Say a household of four went into this isolation, ABCD.

A has Covid on day one, A infects B will Covid on day eight. B infects C with Covid on day fifteen, C infects D on day 20. The household are all a symptomatic.

The 21 day lifts and D carries on their merry way coming into contact and reinfecting those around them.

After three weeks of NO external exposure the public’s immune systems are on the floor and Covid once again spreads like wild fire.

@NuffSaidSam
No idea if 1 billion is plausible but 821m people in the world are hungry according to unicef and 150m children are stunted. These people don’t have enough food at the best of times. If they started a three week lockdown starving it could well kill them or leave them so weak they were unable to work to sustain themselves afterwards. Plus the affect of no wages for three weeks in developing countries would kill a lot more. Even pausing routine preventative healthcare like vaccinations and administration of anti parasitics for three weeks could kill millions if repeated across the whole world.

We wouldn't have water, electricity, refuse collection, internet, police force, emergency medical services, fire services.... sounds great

1 billion might be too low.

People without safe drinking water live in countries where the govt is unaccountable. Those governments certainly couldn't organise mass food & water deliveries to last 3 weeks; the elite would trouser the money in Swiss bank accounts & feck off to leave masses to their fate. The masses live in shanties too small to hold 3 weeks worth of supplies.

There may not be enough small sterilised water containers in the world to hold 3 weeks of drinking water supplies for everyone. The logistical operation to get the supplies to everyone -- would take years of planning assuming corruption didn't consume most the budget.

Sounds like the concept to the next Purge film.

[quote Chessie678]@NuffSaidSam
No idea if 1 billion is plausible but 821m people in the world are hungry according to unicef and 150m children are stunted. These people don’t have enough food at the best of times. If they started a three week lockdown starving it could well kill them or leave them so weak they were unable to work to sustain themselves afterwards. Plus the affect of no wages for three weeks in developing countries would kill a lot more. Even pausing routine preventative healthcare like vaccinations and administration of anti parasitics for three weeks could kill millions if repeated across the whole world.[/quote]
It would have to involve wealthy countries supporting others through it. But obviously some of those people are in areas where aid just can't get through (and that's the reason why we all know it would never actually work because that kind of agreement is impossible, at least until we all live under one global dictatorship anyway).

It’s totally impossible, what if your house floods, the power goes out, a tree comes down on your house, where will all the electricians and plumbers stay, the tree surgeons, the emergency services, think of all the things you could possibly need in an emergency, how could all those people isolate.

Then think of all the peoooe who would refuse. The folks who think Covid is a conspiracy, that bill gates is trying to micro chip them, the people who would go out and loot, vandalise, it’s simply impossible. The drug addicts needing their fix, the alchoholics needing theirs.

1 billion possibly is too low yeah.

Also, people who don't have sufficient access to clean water for the 3 weeks aren't going to just stay in and accept that, steadfastly watching their under 5s die off. They're going to get out there and try to get clean water from someone else.

I understand some/most people would die if literally starved for three weeks, but realistically surely basic rations could be handed out? You don't need a full, normal shop to get through three weeks. A billion people with literally nothing is quite a lot

There is more to life than food. No utilities would mean no one could cook or store lots of food.
And no utilities would mean people would die because they could not run C-PAP machines or nebulisers at home. Or they would not be allowed to get the medication that they can only get daily or weekly. Or the meds that needed to be in the fridge would be dangerous to use.
Feeling suicidal? Well, the Samaritans you would usually call were forced to stay at home.

There is more to life than food. No utilities would mean no one could cook or store lots of food.
And no utilities would mean people would die because they could not run C-PAP machines or nebulisers at home. Or they would not be allowed to get the medication that they can only get daily or weekly. Or the meds that needed to be in the fridge would be dangerous to use.
Feeling suicidal? Well, the Samaritans you would usually call were forced to stay at home.

I think the key workers would have to isolate at work to keep the utilities running as well as possible. I don't know how realistic that is though.

Medications would have to be given out in three week supplies.

The Samaritans can work from home surely, they're only on the phone.

People would die, but would it be more or less than have/will die from Covid? That's the calculation I suppose.

I said this repeatedly to my extended family o/s.

But I have people in my family who feel they shouldn't have to stop living how they want to, and that its a crime how Aussie & NZ have ''locked'' up their citizens etc, so I figure if I can't get my family to agree, how on earth would all of the World's Govts agree to the same concept?

Shitloads more. See water discussions.

@Bluntness100

It’s totally impossible, what if your house floods, the power goes out, a tree comes down on your house, where will all the electricians and plumbers stay, the tree surgeons, the emergency services, think of all the things you could possibly need in an emergency, how could all those people isolate.

Then think of all the peoooe who would refuse. The folks who think Covid is a conspiracy, that bill gates is trying to micro chip them, the people who would go out and loot, vandalise, it’s simply impossible. The drug addicts needing their fix, the alchoholics needing theirs.

The tree-house people would just have to make the best of it. No-one is coming out. It's a global lockdown.

But yes, of course it's absolutely impossible. It's nothing more than an interesting hypothetical.

I don’t think it’s that interesting though, because it’s so preposterous (and I’m not particularly talking about the U.K. here, but globally) it’s not actually worth thinking through properly.

@ThePoisonousMushroom

I don’t think it’s that interesting though, because it’s so preposterous (and I’m not particularly talking about the U.K. here, but globally) it’s not actually worth thinking through properly.

Sure! All the threads here are optional. If it doesn't interest you, don't read/post. I think it's interesting hence my several posts on this thread. I don't mind preposterous when it comes to hypotheticals.

I don’t think it’s that interesting though

I agree. It's just silly and not even slightly thought through.

No, you misunderstand. I was interested by the OP, as I’m genuinely shocked that someone could actually think this was a reasonable suggestion. It suggests a complete and utter lack of knowledge about how the world works.
I personally don’t think it’s an interesting hypothetical situation, because to be interesting (to me) it has to be based on some sort of reality, which this isn’t. Its more like a fantasy.

@ThePoisonousMushroom

No, you misunderstand. I was interested by the OP, as I’m genuinely shocked that someone could actually think this was a reasonable suggestion. It suggests a complete and utter lack of knowledge about how the world works. I personally don’t think it’s an interesting hypothetical situation, because to be interesting (to me) it has to be based on some sort of reality, which this isn’t. Its more like a fantasy.

Sure, so don't read/post. It's all optional. I like a fantasy one myself, but it's not for everyone.

I don't think the OP really believes it could happen btw. I think it was always a hypothetical.

@Kendodd

While we're doing this can we supply everyone with nit killer and rid the world of head lice as well.

Or everyone could be ordered to shave their head on one given day. Would be easier to organise than the isolation suggestion. World without nits - sounds good to me.

Won't someone think of the hairdressers.