Lockdown Lifted Tomorrow...

[Wowthisisreal]

What would you do?

I think the commentary from UK Gov thus far has been fascinating. 4 weeks ago we were encouraged not to go to restaurants etc and to wash our hands more and we were aiming for herd immunity and we were following the best scientific advice and then BAM! If we leave the house more than once a day or we stop in a field and have a sandwich then we're doomed and we're dooming everyone else. Not only that but people are taking it upon themselves (and some police forces are encouraging you) to report anyone who does not comply - with the implication that they are putting others at risk.

How can the gov come back from this unless there is a vaccine? Surely the rhetoric of "stay home. Save lives" is so prevalent that we won't be able to go back to normal? Are we so compliant as a nation that Boris could turn around and say "Ok guys the NHS can cope now - you can go out now" we will just all do it?!

So that's it really... what will it take for you to be ok with going 'back to normal'?

I don't think the plan is for everyone to catch it. I think the plan is to keep the economy moving as much as we can without overloading the NHS until this is over. And I think that because of the NHS capacity, the thing that will decide this all being over will be a vaccine rather than herd immunity.

There are other scenarios. Once we have reliable antibody testing, we can work out much better the exact percentage of infected people who will need intensive care. My figures were based on this being around 5%. If it's more like 1%, or even lower, that would be a game changer. We really need that information and we don't have it right now.

All those extra hospitals being built are not for this wave they must be for the second wave later this year surely?

That pretty much tells me that the government do want us to get it and are (in theory) happy with some collateral damage.

I dont think theres any choice, but to accept there will be deaths or 'collateral damage'.

Even if the was an ICU bed and ventilator and medical staff for every person in the country to have one if they need, when they need it, people would still die.

It's the nature of it.

In my opinion, the aim is to not trash the NHS to the point people are dying that would have survived. Whilst allowing lots of people to actually get the virus. And also try not to trash the economy, too much.

But I dont think the aim is to massively reduce the death rate. They need people to get it. Some of those people will die, even with great medical care. The tanked economy will lead to deaths too.

It's so shit and awful. No good ways out of this.

@Toomanytigers, there are lots of countries where a lockdown is just not at all feasible. Ecuador is currently suffering absolutely horrendously in all this. As the virus hits more and more countries that are unable to make choices, then there is no hope of wiping out the virus everywhere.

Almost wiping it out in a single country and then imposing really strict quarantines on people coming in and out of the country is possible, and this seems to be what places like China are doing (or claiming to do) now.

I have to wait for a vaccine because I am very high risk. If I get a severe or even moderate infection I will not survive. That’s certain.

I'd stay at home away from everyone but DH would then go back to work increasing our risk. I've already been ventilated twice before and know how vulnerable I am. My three DC, (one adult) are also in high risk categories and I know I can't protect them if it is lifted.

I think people will start to see social distancing as the norm for the forseeable future....and sadly that when deaths are 'only' a couple of hundred a day that it is ok... ok as it not getting worse...

It does need to work through the population to create herd immunity so the person that shops 3 times a day will indeed help spread it but at a slower rate than if we all go out at once.

Some lives will be saved since if the NHS isn't snowed under they can help the ones that can be saved... probably best to catch it when there are free beds,...

@TooManyTigers - absolutely. If every country had locked their borders the minute word came out of Wuhan and if China is being truthful about eliminating the virus where it started, that would have been the end of it.

However, that didn’t happen and all it would take to start it up again is one carrier.

@PilatesPeach You are right. The nightingale hospitals (particularly those outside London) are not for now, they are for after the lockdown is relaxed - when there will be massive numbers of new infections again. The nightingale hospital in Bristol hasn't even opened formally yet.
Unfortunately the government prioritise money over lives, so they have put us in lockdown until the nightingale hospitals could provide enough beds (though not necessarily ventilators) and then they will relax lockdown to some extent.
Keeping the borders closed like another island (NZ) was the main preventative action that could have stopped the UK being the worst affected in Europe, but since they still haven't done that for economic reasons (short-sighted reasons, since no-one wants to go skiing in Italy at the moment anyway), well - the government are just making sure we don't all get it at once.

This is the issue New Zealand are having to confront. They may (and only may) be able to stop the virus in its tracks with a few thousand infected and less than 100 deaths but they then have an entire country of people with zero immunity. They are talking about keeping the borders closed until a vaccine is found (no decision yet).

It's not just New Zealand though. China are in the same situation, Norway are pretty close too. Plenty of other countries have turned the curve with much lower numbers of infections and deaths than us and are prepared to keep their borders closed to preserve that. Why are we so keen to try and infect everyone when most of the rest of the world is attempting a much safer strategy that just might work until there's effective treatments and/or a vaccine? Especially when, as nellodee says, the maths involved with achieving herd immunity really doesn't work!

Wouldn’t the approach New Zealand have taken mean that if the virus has no where to go it will just die off? If we had a complete shut down and nobody caught would the virus just die without a host? Probably stupid but genuine question

Yep. It won't eradicate it, because you can't do that worldwide, but it'll end it in New Zealand at least. Which is how many historic epidemics have ended - there have been very few that disappeared because entire populations either died or achieved natural immunity. Again - I don't know why we're so much more keen on the "let's infect everyone!" approach instead!

I don't think it matters if people accept the rapid about-face. They'll go to work because their employers expect it of them. And then, while they're doing that, likely will start to go out socially again, because what's the point of locking yourself away if you're just going to catch it from work?

I would be very reluctant to get back to normal after lockdown is relaxed personally. The virus will be just as dangerous as before for all ages. Children will die from going back to school because although death rates in children are lower, they are not zero. Families will get infected and relatives will die. Unfortunately, it is likely the schools opening will come fairly early on in terms of relaxation of lockdown because there seems to be some kind of fixation on this area, even though all children of keyworkers are currently being looked after. Children do survive 6-7 weeks without school in the summer, and up to 3 months in the US summer holidays. Btw, mental health services for children were never important to the current government (waiting list for moderate need for CBT in my trust is 7-8 months for children and if you look like you might be suicidal they just offer Prozac to children), so the government would be bare-faced liars to give mental health of children as a reason.

Lick every lamp post between here and downtown.

I'm lickin' every lampost on the corner of the street,
Until a certain little virus comes by...

Ireland has a similar approach to New Zealand and in my view they're going to bitterly regret it. The virus is so widespread in other parts of the world that imagining you can close your borders for long enough to prevent it from getting in is pure fantasy. There is no indication that it's even going to be possible to create an effective vaccine.

Covid is out there. All we can do is deal with it without creating more problems. Lockdown was necessary because the Tories 1) decimated the NHS and 2) failed completely to even begin to protect the UK from a pandemic, which had long been predicted. The lockdown isn't a sad necessity, it's a complete fuck up and extending it for a second longer than is absolutely necessary in order to minimise the effect of the government's failures would be utter madness.

The problem with letting everyone get it at once though is that those who would stand a good chance a recovery without the need for a ventilator but in need if hospitalisation, simply wouldn’t get a spare bed in a hospital. So yes, those who’d get it and die for sure would die and that’s that. But those who get it and would be able to survive it with medical attention without long term damage would also die. And that’s that.
What sort of human being would willingly follow such a plan?
You’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t. I wouldn’t want to be the government of any country right now.
But I do think a lot of people will be more cautious in the way they will interact with strangers and friends for a while after all this is over.

TheDailyCarbuncle “ Covid is out there. All we can do is deal with it without creating more problems. Lockdown was necessary because the Tories 1) decimated the NHS and 2) failed completely to even begin to protect the UK from a pandemic, which had long been predicted. The lockdown isn't a sad necessity, it's a complete fuck up and extending it for a second longer than is absolutely necessary in order to minimise the effect of the government's failures would be utter madness.”

We need a “like” button to hit several times, excellent post.

ha. So true OP.

Very true @thedailycarbuncle the longer this lockdown continues the more dangerous the long term repercussions are. And yet everyone seems happy with September?!

People are happy with September because the governments of the world have done such a good job of scaring them shitless about the virus that they can't see that lockdown itself has the potential to be far far more deadly than the virus could ever be. If it was laid out clearly what the potential effect of lockdown could be, in terms of children dying due to abuse, neglect and poverty, people dying because their non-covid illness went undetected/untreated as they were afraid to go to hospital, people with mental illness deteriorating and dying due to the effects of lockdown, job losses, damage to the economy, damage to the public sector, the potential for crime, conflict and even war, people would be demanding the soonest end to lockdown possible.

Locking up the entire population is a measure that should only be taken if it is literally the only possible course of action. It is not something to do because it might be the right thing. It is beyond extreme and will have very very serious consequences. The fact that people are not only accepting it but calling for it to be extended makes me wonder just how bad the level of general education is among the population. How can anyone think that literally stopping everything that makes the world function could ever be a positive thing?

“ The fact that people are not only accepting it but calling for it to be extended makes me wonder just how bad the level of general education is among the population. How can anyone think that literally stopping everything that makes the world function could ever be a positive thing?”

Not sure if it’s education or common sense.

@thedailycarbuncle I've found my people. This is EXACTLY what I have been wondering. How is no one questioning the impact to our economy? This is specifically WHY the gov isn't telling us to stop buying non essential items online etc... they need us to shop!

And MNers who cry murder because you've ordered something of Amazon or added some wine to your Tesco shop are such a huge part of the problem yet they think they are 'saving lives'.

Sorry, to be clear, is it lack of education or lack of common sense stopping them seeing that.

One thing I wonder is whether the lockdown will have a long term effect on the government's authority. For example, pre-covid the government was very rigid about children never missing a day of school. Then they themselves said stay at home, then they closed the schools and said the missed time doesn't matter. They cancelled the exams the teens had worked so hard for, as if none of that mattered. Equally the government has banged on about working, not depending on benefits etc for so long. Now they've barred people from working and tanked businesses. How can the government ever enforce these things again? How can people invest the effort it takes to make a life for themselves if they know the government can come along and just take it all away as if it means nothing?

The repercussions of destroying people's lives and their faith in their own ability to survive and progress will be massive.

I don't think I would go back to work.

It transpires that I can do all of my job effectively whilst not being office-based, so I would put in for flexible working. If there was any push back, I'd string it out as long as possible with HR whilst looking for another job.

It's hard to predict anything with certainty at this point, but I do think I would be able to find another job that allowed home working - to get those conditions I might need to take a massive pay cut and drop in job title, but my priorities have massively shifted throughout this crisis.

Being alive and being able to make basic bills is pretty much all I ask for now. If I had to cut back on all the nice things, but I got to work from home, I think that's the option I would take.

I would have had a completely different opinion six months ago.

I think @returnofthecat's post illustrates really well what I mean. A significant proportion of the population is likely to 'drop out' of what we would consider to be a standard working life entirely. It's an interesting outcome in the sense that it challenges the basis of capitalism but as the world isn't set up for it, it's likely to cause huge problems.