Hypotheses - Rate of infection is too high. A second wave is inevitable.? I don't want a bun fight. Is it possible to discuss this constructively?,

[bumblingbovine49]

[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/28/coronavirus-infection-rate-too-high-second-wave]

This article summarises how I think things will go. The article suggests that track and trace on its own will.only stop about 15% of cases because our numbers are still so high.

I wanted to ask people who are really keen for things to go back to normal as quickly as possible ( which I completely understand , I am desperate for that too), would you be happy to have the things they are saying here such as compulsory PPE.for some workers , face coverings track and trace, self isolation if ill, restrictions on travel to other areas or.abroad etc ?

Does normal for you mean none of these things. Just literally go back.to what it was like before or do you think some of these things are necessary. Which if any would you comply with ? Should any of them be compulsory?

I really don't know the answer but I am worried that our excess death rate at the end of the year is going to.be phenomenal, we already have close to 60,000 excess deaths for this time.of year. That is one on a thousand EXTRA deaths in about 4 months . That seems a lot to.me.

There are a few reasons why the second peak may not be as bad:

Non essential big gatherings are still closed. ( Places of worship, conferences,sports events)

Shops have introduced social distancing measures

Many are wfh.

Masks are getting more common place.

Those plonkers who didn't believe in social distancing will have had it and be more likely to be immune now and pose less of a danger.

Hand washing, not touching face is more common.

Some of these should be kept in place: work from home if you can especially.

Personally, I would have increased the number of keyworker children in school first. IE as more people who need to go to work to open up bits of the infrastructure that can't be done from home, those children go back into new bubbles. Shielding/ vulnerable teachers to provide on line support etc.

I am prepping for a second peak but don't know how different it will be for us than now. A vulnerable child not going out.

Does normal for you mean none of these things

That is correct, none of those things (for me) are 'normal'.

I think you want those things OP and you will get them. I am confused that you worry otherwise. 67% of people polled support govt Lockdown or would like it to be harsher.

I now have huge incentive to fiercely avoid other people to prevent being stuck with 14 day house arrest if I spoke to wrong person for too long. That is not normal. I will be stuck WFH, assuming my employer doesn't go bankrupt, for foreseeable future. Not Normal.

Also, for me, Normal will mean when all my kids again attend Uni, college, secondary and socialise lots with other people and have a dynamic social daily education experience that lasts for 6 hours or so. When they can get frequently within 50 cm of other people and nobody thinks this is a biohazard danger. If they have decent job prospects going forward and not a crushing tax burden for most of their early working life.

"Normal" cannot happen again in their lives for a few years. That is guaranteed.

Personally, I would have increased the number of keyworker children in school first. IE as more people who need to go to work to open up bits of the infrastructure that can't be done from home, those children go back into new bubbles. Shielding/ vulnerable teachers to provide on line support etc.

A lot of schools are doing this, especially in areas where the council and lea have said not to return on the 1st and wait a couple of weeks. My child's school is. Sen schools are doing this with a focus on individual pupils in most need of the structure.

I'm also of the feeling that there won't be a big second wave, maybe a few spikes here and there.

We had a few huge gatherings just before lockdown. Cheltenham, football matches with people flying in from other countries. They probably contributed to a huge amount of spreading the virus.

If we keep large gatherings banned for now, hopefully there should be no second wave.

It could have been spreading for 3 months before

Pretty much every country has followed a similar timescale with regards to locking down, peaking and then seeing a significant drop in cases and deaths, this is around 6-8 weeks from lockdown to peak deaths.

So we do have a rough timescale for infection times and when a rise should occur.

I am thinking there will be a second wave but not significantly until late autumn/ winter when we are all cooped up again.
People are still generally being pretty cautious and although they may be more mixing in smaller groups than is permitted it is generally outside.
People are wearing masks and hand washing.
Still no large public gatherings.
Schools shut until September
Public transport as far as I can see outside of London is pretty empty.
Lots are WFH and many will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
Employers have to implement measures to protect employees
Shops are careful about controlling numbers of shoppers
When restaurants and cafes do open there will be social distancing measures in place.
And the weather...we are all spending lots of time in the sun, improving our health and boosting Vitamin D

People can speculate about when second wave happens, how big it will be etc. Why not collect data by lifting restrictions in areas with low infections? High infection areas can stay in lockdown longer to reduce risk of infections while this data is gathered.

Namenic - won’t this be using the lower infected areas as guinea pigs??

Yes but if you focus test and trace and experts in these areas, it is easier to spot a small increase early. Right now if you lift restrictions globally, it is much less efficient at detection.

I dont see a second wave coming, I think we'll have bumps along the road.

Obviously I hope you're right but I'm not entirely convinced that we're ready for all of the easing measures the Government is currently planning. This is particularly the case when I hear scientists and epidemiologists warning that the easing is too premature, as well as raising concerns about the impact of opening schools at this point and when people like Chris Giles of the Financial Times are today commenting on data that demonstrates a sudden spike in London hospital admissions. These concerns and the handling of the crisis so far don't exactly fill me with confidence. :

twitter.com/IndependentSage/status/1266005165582229504

And when we have already had so many deaths and Sir Patrick Vallance estimated today that only 6.78% of people have had the virus so far, I wonder how many deaths we could end up with when 40% of us have been infected, 60%, 80%, my maths is shaky but that sounds like a momentous number of possible dead. And when I see NHS doctors holding a silent vigil outside Downing Street who still don’t have enough PPE I wonder how prepared we really are. My sense is not very much at all.

@IamHyouweegobshite

I have just come back from my local hospital, dd fractured leg. Was chatting to consultant about how busy they've been. He said all junior docs are now on medic wards, so fracture docs doing dble jobs. He said there will definitely be a second wave, his words 'sadly when it comes to pandemics, people don't learn until its too late'.

Well with respect to him, he’s an orthopaedic consultant and not an expert epidemiologist.

www.bbc.com/news/live/world-52844350

Korea has good test/trace infrastructure. It was detected early - not sure how effective it will be in UK, which is even more reason to pilot the lifting of restrictions.

As restrictions lifting announcements were made all across Europe, the main reaction from Britain has been postive - how fantastic for them, phew relief, brilliant they seem to be past the worst.
Yet when the same is announced here - panic! Lifting too soon, will be massive second wave, etc.
Everyone says we are 2 or 3 weeks behind Italy and Spain, and we went into lockdown about 2 or 3 weeks after them and are lifting lockdown about 2 or 3 weeks after them.
So why the panic?

@deydododatdodontdeydo

As restrictions lifting announcements were made all across Europe, the main reaction from Britain has been postive - how fantastic for them, phew relief, brilliant they seem to be past the worst. Yet when the same is announced here - panic! Lifting too soon, will be massive second wave, etc. Everyone says we are 2 or 3 weeks behind Italy and Spain, and we went into lockdown about 2 or 3 weeks after them and are lifting lockdown about 2 or 3 weeks after them. So why the panic?

Spain has made face masks mandatory in all indoor places, and even outdoors where 2 metres distancing can’t be maintained. For all those 6+. Primary school students are unlike to return to school before September.

Face masks in Italy are compulsory on public transport and in all stores . Schools in Italy remain closed and are not due to reopen until September.

Whatever you think of these measures, I don’t think there’s any point in comparing ourselves with these countries if our relaxation of lockdown looks very different in practice.

NHS staff were encouraged to take leave in May in anticipation that there would be additional pressure in June. You can call this a wave or a bump if you prefer.

For a variety of reasons this is likely to be a lot less severe than the first wave, not least of the higher vitamin D levels in the population. There will then be a third wave and that one may be higher but hopefully by then we have better treatments and maybe a vaccine. If everyone goes out madly now and the second wave is high enough maybe we can avoid a third.

Death rates dont rise for at least 2 weeks after infections and initially the rise is small. Watch hospital admissions instead - if they begin to take off deaths will 2 weeks later. If they dont any second wave is, as hoped, leading to less severe infections.

Spain has made face masks mandatory in all indoor places,

That's an odd thing. Here we have nurses, doctors - NHS staff - posting on the internet about how we shouldn't wear masks as they are useless and cause more harm than good

I think there's bound to be bumps or waves and I wouldn't be surprised if it's been deliberately balanced against stimulating the economy. There will always be rebounds when restrictions are eased. A small bump is manageable.

If it gets out of hand it will lead to local lockdowns.

They're designed to not allow a huge out of control wave.

What we don't know is how the winter will affect things.

I expect the month or two after Xmas to be hard.

An issue with the winter is there won't the as much outdoor stuff going on in schools etc. People won't be as motivated to meet outside and be outside. Indoors creates more transmissions.

@Oysterbabe

I think that death and infection rates will continue to fall, there will be no dramatic second wave, maybe a second bump, and with continued, modest social distancing it will burn itself out. I would be in favour of no mass gatherings, social distancing when inside shops and workplaces etc and from strangers generally but with families able to mix freely between households and schools to all return as normal.

Couldn't have put it better.

oyster

That's incredibly optimistic when (a) our R number is on the verge of 1 (b) this virus hasn't mutated to become less infectious (c) we're densely populated (d) our government doesn't have the competency to be good at t&t and the R number is too high for it to be very helpful anyway (e) a tiny proportion of the country have now had the virus so no herd immunity to speak of (f) countries without the capacity or inclination to lock down haven't seen any 'burning out' of the virtues (g) this virus is particularly unhelpful in having a long period when it's infectious but there are no symptoms in the individual (h) many people aren't incapacitated, naturally quarantined and killed by the virus (a good way for viruses to end their own life span by being too lethal for their own good).

So where are you getting your views from?

SARS burnt out as it was too deadly and less infectious.

Why would this burn out? It's burnt out in NZ but they acted more quickly.

SARS burnt out as it was too deadly and less infectious

SARS didn't really 'burn out'. It was effectively contained by highly efficient track and trace measures before it managed to become a global pandemic.

Ok so if it didn't burn out, and was controlled quickly by firm measures, so it didn't become a pandemic, how will this one?

Revealed: The handful of council areas in England and Wales where coronavirus deaths are still rising despite numbers falling nationwide and lockdown being eased

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8367397/Nearly-20-UK-council-areas-NOT-seen-coronavirus-peaks.html#article-8367397

THE 18 AREAS YET TO SEE THEIR PEAK

Ashford, Kent

TOTAL CASES: 775

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 599.5

TOTAL DEATHS: 78

Broadland, Norfolk

TOTAL CASES: 295

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 227.9

TOTAL DEATHS: 53

Carlisle, Cumbria

TOTAL CASES: 492

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 453.9

TOTAL DEATHS: 109

Doncaster, South Yorkshire

TOTAL CASES: 765

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 246.3

TOTAL DEATHS: 160

Eden, Cumbria

TOTAL CASES: 102

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 192.9

TOTAL DEATHS: 36

Fenland, Cambridgeshire

TOTAL CASES: 186

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 183.3

TOTAL DEATHS: 52

Herefordshire

TOTAL CASES: 439

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 228.5

TOTAL DEATHS: 84

Hinckley and Bosworth, Leicestershire

TOTAL CASES: 242

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 215.3

TOTAL DEATHS: 73

Kettering, Northamptonshire

TOTAL CASES: 235

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 232.1

TOTAL DEATHS: 55

North Somerset

TOTAL CASES: 427

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 199.6

TOTAL DEATHS: 94

Preston, Lancashire

TOTAL CASES: 428

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 301.8

TOTAL DEATHS: 86

Richmondshire, North Yorkshire

TOTAL CASES: 130

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 244.2

TOTAL DEATHS: 38

Rother, East Sussex

TOTAL CASES: 95

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 99.3

TOTAL DEATHS: 38

Selby, North Yorkshire

TOTAL CASES: 135

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 151.5

TOTAL DEATHS: 36

South Norfolk

TOTAL CASES: 239

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 173.2

TOTAL DEATHS: 42

Tonbridge and Malling, Kent

TOTAL CASES: 216

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 165.5

TOTAL DEATHS: 48

Wrexham, North Wales

TOTAL CASES: 540

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 396.7

TOTAL DEATHS: 252 (figure covers Betsi Cadwaladr University Health Board, which serves other towns in the area)

Wyre, Lancashire

TOTAL CASES: 345

CASES PER 100,000 PEOPLE: 310.2

TOTAL DEATHS: 72