If CV turns out to be less deadly than flu...

[TheDailyCarbuncle]

do you think you will still feel the restrictions were worth it?

Just asking out of curiosity really.

You think immunity is guaranteed OP? That's quite optimistic.

How could they test more without having enough tests?
A pandemic has an effect on the economy irrespective of the measures taken.

Re testing...they don't have the tests or capacity right now. It is taking them time to scale that up. When we are not in the eye of the storm no doubt people will look back at that and discuss what should have been done to expedite it.

The difference between seasonal flu and covid is that there aren't huge numbers already immune to covid.

The problem is that there is no immunity in the population to covid so it can sweep through populations making huge numbers of people ill at the same time. That means there isn't enough life-saving treatment available for those who would benefit from it and many, many lives are lost.

Seasonal flu travels more slowly and existing medical services are able to cope with it (well perhaps not in the case of our NHS these days) so people aren't left without the medical interventions that could save their lives.

I believe that our government has let us down by allowing the spread to reach the point where ventilation is already being rationed. We should have locked down sooner and kept it that way until large numbers of additional ventilators had been manufactured, PPE was in good supply and effective testing regimes were in place.

Yeah, the flu. Remember how every year they have to turn Birmingham NEC into a hospital and airports into morgues. It’s just like that. Completely the same.

@gamerchick if there is no immunity then the measures are literally pointless.

@TheDailyCarbuncle yes they might, but there won't be as much burden on hospitals all at the same time so their odds will increase of being able to receive treatment. And in 2035 we will have a vaccine and herd immunity. Maybe you could volunteer your scientific knowledge to the government so you can inform them what they should be doing.

The death rate isnt the important part of all of this and it isnt the problem at all. SARS/MERS/Ebola all have far higher death rates. All told it may well end up being around the 1% mark

Because its the infection rate that is the issue, that is what is causing all of this and was indisputably sets it apart from flu. There was a video that showed the flu has an infection rate of just over 1 so 1 person 10 steps down the line infects 14 people. This is around 2.5-3 so top estimate 1 person 10 steps down the line infects 59000.

And that changes everything. If 1000 people get flu only 1 dies. If a million people get this 10,000 die. If 10 million people in the UK get it (which based on what we know is entirely credible) 100,000 people will die.

All told this may well end up having a death rate of around the flu or not that much higher but its infection rate and spread will mean all of this is worth it

75% of people who get flu show no symptoms at all. It is entirely likely that we overestimate the death rate from flu as well.

If a nuclear power station has an accident aren't people told to stay in?
If there's flooding and storms, aren't people told not to go out unless instructed?

Yes, the mortality rate is low, nobody knows for sure but far lower than diagnosed flu (but remember not everyone gets medical advice for flu so cases are also underreported). Until we can antibody test we cannot know whether its affecting people as asymptomatically

@TheDailyCarbuncle wtf in 2021 or 2035 we will know more about it, there may be better treatments, there may be a vaccine. You're making so little sense it's ridiculous. The problem isn't getting it, its everyone getting it NOW. You sound like a conspiracy theorists and there lies the death of all reason and logic so I can't bear to read this nonsense anymore. I'm getting stupider by the minute.

Like I said, I was just curious. And I am genuinely relieved. Because if people felt duped, it'd create more problems. But if the belief in general is, this is the right thing, even if I or my family die of covid anyway next year, then that's great.

@gamerchick if there is no immunity then the measures are literally pointless

No, they'll slow it down enough to save lives until we have a vaccine

Yanno, this shit is common sense.

No I don't think it will have been worth it (based on the WHO mortality rate). Our useless government were far too slow to react and prepare. They didn't follow WHO advice and now have imposed a lockdown far too late and in a stupid way which means it isn't worthwhile. The government is now threatening us with more restrictions. It is too late, they had a chance to react and make a real difference and they missed it.

This is what happens in a nuclear emergency:
www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/P_1708_web.pdf

Surely it doesn't matter what the death rate it - the point is that it spreads so quickly that even if the death rate is only 0.06% or whatever, it will still kill a really high number of people because so many people will get it and it therefore is not comparable with flu.

@gamerchick do you understand how vaccines work? Spoiler, they're based on immunity

How daft.

If you want to compare the number of total cases, including asymptomatic ones, then you need to do the same for flu.

Most people who get flu will never be included in the figures, because either they are mild cases that are dealt with at home or are asymptomatic. From the tested cases for both bugs, we know the mortality rate for Covid is far higher. If it wasn't, given we are mostly past flu season, we wouldn't be needing to build emergency hospitals

@TheDailyCarbuncle

It's going to be impossible to draw any conclusions.

The mortality rate for influenza is calculated when we have a normally functioning NHS.

The mortality for Covid-19 will be calculated during a situation where we have all-but stopped the NHS' normal work, diverted every resource to treating this one illness, re-recruited 20,000 health professionals and minimised the rate of transmission with a nationwide state of something akin to martial law.

If the eventual mortality does turn out to be similar or lower, it will be because of the actions taken, not in spite of them.

Would you accept 'we can't deal with this you all have to suffer' as a response?

Op do you not know anyone who could be at risk from the real suffering from this? Getting very ill or death.

So are the deaths that will result from isolation just not a concern at all?

I'm asking, what if that doesn't happen?

Then we should be pleased we took measures to avoid it.

I’m guessing you also thought the whole Y2K thing was a giant hoax because nothing happened at midnight. 🙄

Yeah but in January 2035 there won't be every other poor person in the country also catching it so I stand more chance of getting a ventilator. Even in 3-6 months there will be more effective testing and maybe use of existing anti-viral medicine. Rather than speculating about what may or may not happen it might be worth thinking about how you might more productively use these few months. Once my work calms down I am planning to decorate the house, work on the garden and do some more art work.