Government advisor suggests the U.K. considers 'herd immunity' route again

[Moomin8]

www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/coronavirus-adviser-pm-wants-herd-21811857

If this happens I'm going to start thinking this is a psy op.

Pity they didn’t stick with it. It’s lives vs lives.

Although I definitely understand the implications of it, part of me does support it

But what on Earth is the point of quarantine for 3 weeks then business as usual?

Much of the damage will have been done to peoples businesses. Some people have said they won't be able to reopen now.

Lives vs lives? Or livelihoods vs lives?

See ....

Softening you up ...

Big waste of time this lockdown. Too little. Too late. Won't work. Will stop soon.

Get ready for the next u turn as they start spinning the self isolate the most vulnerable line.

Lives vs lives

Because the lives lost due to other problems will be high too.

I know it’s awful. I’ve got a friend whose chemo has been cancelled and a friend whose dialysis is being reduced thereby straining heart as well as kidneys. So, yes, lives vs lives.

Herd immunity works in vaccinations not with corona virus

It’s bonkers.

“But what on Earth is the point of quarantine for 3 weeks then business as usual?“

I don’t think they’ll do that. I’d be surprised if lockdown is lifted before end of June. Apart from anything else, they have to stick with the course they chose or they be blamed for that.

I still feel it was public opinion that led to lockdown.

It was always the strategy. They just masked it for a few weeks so we would be grateful to come out of our homes.

flaming don’t give me false hope!

Herd immunity can only work as a strategy if you can keep the rate of hospilisations low enough that other medical treatments will not be affected

Which basically means you need a lot fewer people going into hospital with the virus than we currently have , and when you get to that low number, you need to be able to keep it low.

How?

They are not going to bring an end to the lockdown on the say so of one advisor.

But this does highlight the fact that they do need to start giving serious consideration to how long they are willing to let the lockdown go on for and what their strategy will be afterwards.

If people just carried on as normal they wouldn't manage to do it for long. Businesses would still close, supply lines would grind to a halt with the speed of transmission and everyone being ill at once, the financial disasters would still hit, and in the meantime massive deaths would stack up and hospitals would look like a scene out of an apocalyptic film.

There is no nice, easy, let's just sling the boring bits of the population under the bus and the rest of us can go back to normality, solution.

What'll happen is what every other country is doing as the peak passes - gradually release lockdown in sections, monitor, be prepared for new peaks and that this is going to be utterly shit until a vaccine is in place. Divisive and practically unrealistic stuff like this does not help anyone. And if the government hadn't dabbled with this theory in the first place until they realised the mess they were in, we probably wouldn't have the necessity now for lockdown of the severity and duration it's going to take.

They'll come up with some bullshit app where you decide you might have already had it so you can come out of self isolation. Along with, we can but hope, some actual testing kits. And some advice on handwashing and turning round three times before leaving the house. Then it's your own fault if you catch it after all that

The problem surely is that if the virus picks up pace the hospitals will be swamped more than they currently are and disruption will still be awful.

Like I said, if they do another U turn. That will just about convince me that they have lied about it all in some way.

Pity they didn’t stick with it. It’s lives vs lives.

I don't see how. The case fatality rate in Italy is over 10% because their health service can't cope. With very effective treatment, social distancing and case tracking Germany and South Korea got that to under 1%.

If we let this disease run the vast majority will be untreated. The estimated death toll of 500,000 seems conservative to me.

I'm not minimising the consequences of this lockdown but I can't see any scenario in which 'herd immunity' doesn't kill many, many more.

It was a clever plan when we thought the virus was less virulent; it would be stupid to try now without a big development like a successful antiviral.

Lockdown could have been less strict though

Eg close places where people gather, social distance etc

But not necessarily ban all social contact outside the household

Even if they gave a permit to see a designated person, that would help.

We can’t know how many people have had it so we don’t know how much business would have been interrupted

I think the Chancellor’s scheme, while hugely well intentioned, has closed businesses entirely when they might have otherwise tried to carry on.

No one can know any of this stuff, but if we’re already denying chemotherapy...

Re case tracking

Is it that we don’t have the data or the government weren’t willing to access and use it?

People flying in from Italy being told to self quarantine was insane, we could have used hotels at airports to enforce quarantine.

No one can know any of this stuff, but if we’re already denying chemotherapy...

If the lockdown was less effective it would be worse than that.

Spain and Italy have stopped the increase with stricter lockdowns than us. They haven't really seen a downward trend yet.

I'm very hopeful our lockdown will work but when it does that will probably mean IRO 1000 people dying each day and tens of thousands needing ICU care. It will stay that way for many weeks or more.

We are in a less affected region and our hospital is desperate for oxygen and PPE.

Is it that we don’t have the data or the government weren’t willing to access and use it?

They didn't really try it in the way that (for example) South Korea did. They rapidly isolated anyone at all who'd had contact or anyone coming from China. We just recommended it to those who had been in touch with a confirmed case.

Now it's far too late- too many to track.

My understanding is we are in lockdown to flatten the curve in the coming week or two.

Because we have distanced for 3 weeks new Infections will be minimised and the NHS can recover.
I'm sure the lockdown will be extended.
Eventually when people who are less vulnerable can start working again, there will be many who have had the virus and are immune.

Some won't be and the cases will start to rise again, but because people are the fitter members of society mixing with immune people, the rise in cases will not be so steep.

The vulnerable will still be shielded or in lockdown.

The nhs would cope as the curve isn't so steep and the vulnerable are less likely to be infected as they are now.

After 3 months most people will have immunity and the vulnerable, who can come out now, will be protected by this herd immunity.

That's just my thinking to

I think the govt is still following the herd immunity path. Every step, every measure has come at least a week too late, and only when public opinion has forced the issue. Even now, it's the police, not the govt who are setting parameters for what constitutes 'essential' exercise. Nothing to stop the govt stipulating max. 1 h of exercise within 500 metres of your house to eliminate all the nonsence we're seeing this weekend.

But the govt wants to increase infection (within the limits of the NHS capacity - I'm not saying they dont also want to minimise deaths) to increase immunity. They want to come out of this pandemic with full herd immunity - a super-race of immune workers who won't be affected by the fluctuations and re-ignited infections that will blight other countries for years to come.

No one can know any of this stuff, but if we’re already denying chemotherapy

The decision not to give chemotherapy is about a balance of risks. Having chemo automatically makes you more at risk from Covid-19 - both in terms of likelihood of infection because of exposure to healthcare workers, and in terms of severity of disease. So it’s not just about prioritising the acutely ill.

are they putting in us in lock down long enough to open the new hospitals and order ventilators? Then it’s open for business and survival of the fittest? Oh god

“ The decision not to give chemotherapy is about a balance of risks”

I know. But you can imagine how people feel.

I know. But you can imagine how people feel

Oh god yes. It’s horrendous. I think what I’m saying is that lockdown or no lockdown people who need chemo are at risk, so not having it may be safer than having it, for a short while. Which is appalling.