Did UK introduce restrictions too early?

[Makeitgoaway]

Hear me out!

I don't think they planned to close schools when they did. I think the Welsh and Scotish governments forced their hand and they themselves were influenced by public opinion more than the science.

When I first heard "the plan" it sounded like there were terrible things to come but it made sense to me, as a way of controlling things as much as possible.

The public didn't like it and there was outrage that we didn't "lockdown" to protect ourselves, although "the public" also didn't behave in any sort of sensible manner to protect themselves as we saw last weekend.

So, measures were in force earlier than planned. The more restrictions there are and the earlier they are in place, the longer this thing will last. The restrictions don't protect "us", they protect the NHS. Most people will need to get it before this is over. Lockdown won't make it go away, just slow the rate of infection, meaning it takes longer to play out. While the NHS is coping, was there any need for the restrictions?

In Italy, it has taken 3 weeks for signs of social unrest to emerge. If that happens here we won't be even close to the peak at that stage. What happens then?

@Bool

Where is your evidence that it’s 0.1%?...

Look at the world curve and where we are compared to Korea.
It was too late not too early.

@bool you have a degree from oxford in biology, in which case no doubt you understand the analysis by the doctors and scientists specialising in relevant fields, no doubt, which is that this virus is extremely contagious and without short term lockdown there will be exponential growth which will decimate the population and destroy modern life as we know it. But your main concern (I think) is that our country was heading towards becoming a police state, diminishing freedoms brought in via the backdoor. So are you saying that you think that the likes of Leung, etc are lying? Or wrong?

So there is no evidence yet because nobody has done a 100% population test. However if Germany is currently at 0.9% based on a non complete testing regime and if the evidence from China was that 86% of people had this with ZERO symptoms then I am making an educated estimate that the final death rate will be between 0.05% and 0.1% depending on the underlying health of the nation. Also anecdotally I know a lot of people who have had it very badly and people they are close to very mildly or zero symptoms. So no I don’t know for sure of course. But that is my estimate. And it fits with what is happening and predicted.

@liberoncolours I don’t know where you have got that analysis from. I am in lockdown. My friends are in lockdown. My family is in lockdown. My parents are. All to slow the spread and prevent the health service from going beyond capacity. Where have I EVER said I don’t support this lockdown. Please elaborate

I'd get in touch with IC if I were you Bool - I'm sure they'd be delighted to hear from you. I mean with a BSc from Oxford, you're clearly streets ahead of the rest of them with their fancy pants PhDs and donkeys years of experience!

Btw if the death rate is very low, it'll be because of the measures taken. It won't be the natural death rate of the virus. Watch Belarus for that

And my DH has had it and suffered very badly. Went to hospital and still is poorly. So please do never say I want this thing out there and don’t support slowing it down. I am simply stating what will happen naturally.

@Bool - not a citation or source in sight, I see. Again.

@titchy sorry but oxford don’t issue BSc. It’s an MA whatever you study. But let’s see

The Oxford MA is the same as a BSc from elsewhere..... which you know.

I do hope your dh recovers soon though

Would you perhaps consider Bool in future, instead of quoting a figure of 0.1%, perhaps saying "I don't believe there is any evidence of a specific IFR, but my guess is 0.1%"? This seems to be closer to what you are now proposing and would be far less misleading.

Not at all. Of course British people coming back here could have the virus.

It’s interesting that people are willing a 1% death rate. There will not be 400,000 dead in the uk. Let’s all please calm. There are a lot of people getting this symptomless or mild symptoms.

@titchy thank you

Revised projections have the number at under 20,000 even. Why is that? They still expect that they cannot stop 60% getting it is that right?

Late losing track somewhat

@nellodee ok sorry. So my prediction is a 0.1% death rate. And 2/3 of those would die in the next 12 months from other conditions. Sorry but am trying to be positive for us all x

Sorry, Bool. Again, would you mind please citing your sources for the quantities of people getting this in either a very mild or asymptomatic form? Again, I would prefer citations, rather than your own personal opinion.

Unlike you, I am actually very open to receiving new evidence.

I don't think making figures up is a good idea, if it causes complacency and therefore increases the death rate. I think a good dose of being scared shitless is important in order to keep deaths very low. Believe it or not, I am aiming for a positive outcome as well. However, I think this can best be achieved by having a realistic view of just what we are making these sacrifices for, and just what the alternative might be.

@nellodee it is what the uk experts have been using to predict the number of people in the uk that have the virus. They are taking the number of deaths and multiplying it by 1000. That means a 0.1% death rate. They say that they are getting more and more confident if it. It was in a daily briefing a few days ago. I don’t have it written down. Then if you look at the death rates of those nations that are testing widely they are between 0.1% and 1%. So the likely real rate is between 0.05% and 0.1%.

I'm being hyperbolic there, of course. I very much hope we will not have high death rates and have every reason to be optimistic.

But I do think it is necessary for everyone to have a bit of an imagination of just what we are avoiding. I don't think that's the same as saying "This is going to happen". I think it's more saying "This must NOT happen." I'm not saying anyone should be scared by what is actually happening, but I do think it's important to know why we are doing what we are doing.

it is what the uk experts have been using to predict the number of people in the uk that have the virus. They are taking the number of deaths and multiplying it by 1000

Did you show any evidence for it that I have missed?

@Bool, and back you go to your nonsense. I've seen you make that exact post before, and it was explained to you precisely how and why you had misinterpreted the "x by 1000" figure.

And I fully agree that we need to keep people vigilant. But we need a balance between massive scare and totally economic meltdown. And that doesn’t mean I am not self isolating. I haven’t been out for days. Neither has my family. My DH who lives in another country has had it very very badly and we are apart. This is no joke.

@bool you suggested upthread that someone supporting Korea's version of lockdown/testing/providing info to health authorities - which has been hailed as the most extensive but also a superior and successful lockdowns by scientists - was virtually saying they wanted to live in a police state. Did you not? You have said more than once that herd immunity was the way forward not lockdown? I am just interested, that is all - you don't to answer.