WHO expect pandemic to be over in 2 years

[mummabear1967]

www.itv.com/news/2020-08-21/world-health-organization-chief-hopes-coronavirus-pandemic-will-be-over-in-two-years

Even if this pandemic does run into 2022, we won’t be stuck with restrictions until then, right? We will be back to normality to some extent? Not sure I could deal with another two years of this crap.

Telling people to “walk round the graveyards of France” is actually ridiculous

But it does put things into perspective. That was the point

@Flaxmeadow

Telling people to “walk round the graveyards of France” is actually ridiculous

But it does put things into perspective. That was the point

People seriously need to get a grip. And so many still won't follow the rules as they are because it's too hard or they cant be bothered.

This whole situation has really hit home the selfish nature of a lot of humans.

@Flaxmeadow

Telling people to “walk round the graveyards of France” is actually ridiculous

But it does put things into perspective. That was the point

No it doesn't its an attempt to guilt trip and a stupid comparison at best.

@RoseAndRose

Well, which wouid you rather do?

Social distancing or uncontrolled virus?

Uncontrolled virus. Social distancing won't work long term. It's polar opposite of human nature to social isolate. This virus doesn't kill the overwhelming majority, it's asymptomatic in a large percentage/doesn't even make them ill so this idea that significant numbers of people will be desperately ill at once and collapse the economy doesn't stack up.

People will be singing a different tune come November when the furlough scheme ends, the mortgage holidays are up and the creditors still want their money and interest and the redundancies begin.

And that is not even touching on no-deal Brexit (newsflash: Parliament's on holiday till Sept. and they have until mid-October to hash out a trade agreement, the odds of that happening are slim) and prices spike and supply chains develop nasty cracks seemingly overnight.

So selfish, to want to see family and friends and not from fucking 2m away utterly ridiculous, to go to work and earn a living, etc.

Shaming and guilt tripping works on people as effectively as it works on cats.

Not going to a festival one year= not the end of the world.
If your job depends on festivals and live events you might think differently.
And there will be so many people with associated jobs that people won't have even considered- the government wont be able to subsidise all of them, for 2 years

@InDeoEstMeaFiducia You can still see your family and friends, surely keeping a 2m distance is not the end of the world given the circumstances?

It is selfish to put your desire to get back to normal ahead of public health in the midst of a pandemic. The 'uncontrolled virus' approach would lead to absolute chaos, far far worse than the current restrictions.

A lot of people here seem utterly unable to accept the fact that we are in the midst of a dangerous pandemic, and no amount of minimising it or wishing it away will change that.

@TrustTheGeneGenie exactly. I really haven’t broken social distancing at all, actually, other than once I hugged my friend who was living alone. I’m not “being selfish” or “can’t be bothered to follow the rules”.

There’s literally always something “worse”, doesn’t mean you have to whack it out to rub it in the faces of people who have found this tough.

[quote Sakura7]**@InDeoEstMeaFiducia You can still see your family and friends, surely keeping a 2m distance is not the end of the world given the circumstances?

It is selfish to put your desire to get back to normal ahead of public health in the midst of a pandemic. The 'uncontrolled virus' approach would lead to absolute chaos, far far worse than the current restrictions.

A lot of people here seem utterly unable to accept the fact that we are in the midst of a dangerous pandemic, and no amount of minimising it or wishing it away will change that.[/quote]
It won't lead to absolute chaos because it doesn't even make the vast majority of people who catch it ill, in fact, large amounts of them are asymptomatic.

There is nothing 'selfish' about living a normal, social life. Trying to restrict human nature has never, is never and will never work.

Some people can catastrophise as much as they want, they'll find themselves in the minority as increasing numbers of people wake up to the fact that this virus isn't a certain death sentence, very far from it.

The circumstances is that the overwhelming likelihood is that this will not kill and probably won't even render the person as ill as many other viruses and may even become endemic.

Life, social, 'normal' life will always go on, sooner rather than later, because that's how human society is.

It doesn't fit with some peoples' paradigms, but it does with most.

At the point before lockdown we had around 100000 infections a day - maybe more if as is believed the death rate is less than 1%. It was at that point doubling every few days. So without lockdown it would have been at least 200000 infections a day, a few days after that 400000 infections a day, and so on. The problem is and always has been that exponential growth. Festivals would have closed anyway. Who the hell wants to run an event that risks thousands of people getting sick and some of them hospitalised or dying. Unpalatable as all the SD crap is and all the consequences of it a disease that spreads exponentially if unchecked just can’t be allowed to run wild.

I’ve never been that worried about CV myself I know that even tho I am higher risk I will probably still be OK (although there’s no guarantee) but there being an illness raging through the population that stands to infect loads of people if they attempt to even go anywhere is not feasible

Oh and I’ve been made redundant, my husband works in hospitality so not worked for months and now it’s fragile, my kids have been lacking a decent education from March - August, my dad has had cancer treatment stopped, and I’ve ended up on anti depressants and beta blockers, so it’s not like the measures haven’t had an effect on me and my family either.

@onedayinthefuture

Two years for the whole world I would imagine. Wealthier countries will get through this a lot sooner and the dooms-monger Mumsnetters will have to find something else to wet their pants and get hysterical over. Covid won't matter if they themselves feel safe, the poor people in the poorer nations, won't even have a second thought.

100% spot on!

Wait till after Brexit. I can almost see the threads now. 'My neighbour's third cousin's four times removed hamster's been selling some illegally imported parsnips for £1 each!' 'OMG, report! So selfish, my hairdresser's sister-in-law's teacher's guinea pig died from being unable to afford parsnips. People are dying here. We're in the middle of a dangerous economic crisis and a worldwide recession here.' 'They need to walk around the bogs of Bannockburn and see what rodents in the past had to give up! So irresponsible.'

Some people won't be happy unless they can watch the world burn.

It won't lead to absolute chaos because it doesn't even make the vast majority of people who catch it ill,

Which misses the point of lockdown. It is to protect the services, so they still function. Without lockdown, we would still have had millions of sick people who would have needed those services

in fact, large amounts of them are asymptomatic

Which is one of the dangerous things about this virus. That and the fact that people can spread it before they get symptoms.

Even if 50% of people getting it are asymptomatic then by the time it’s grown to 1.6 million infections a day then that’s still a lot of people actually getting ill. Even if it’s “only” 0.5% of the sick people who die then that’s till 8000 people - a day! I think it’s really difficult to grasp the numbers and how quickly cases were doubling.

As someone said above. Exponential growth is the issue. We may know more about the virus but there is no way they can let it run without some restrictions.

its not catastrophising. I have been pretty pragmatic all the way through this. I just think a few restrictions now, that tbh, for most people are not a huge hardship, will enable the virus to move through at a controllable rate.

And yes many people won’t die. However there is enough evidence to suggest that the long term effects of CV a bit grim

It’s just about being sensible. I’m not a doom monger but I am also not ready to throw caution to the wind. Wearing a mask and restricting some activities is doing the bare minimum tbh. It’s hardly the end of the world. There is a middle ground in all of this.

I don't trust the WHO one bit, they really mishandled the whole thing at the beginning.

And yes many people won’t die. However there is enough evidence to suggest that the long term effects of CV a bit grim

For some people. You know, like a lot of viruses

Sorry, 4000 people a day in my example above. And that’s only until the infection rate doubles yet again a couple of days later and the death numbers rise again

If it didn’t grow exponentially then I doubt we’d have had any of these measures at all. At most we’d have probably had the “wash your hands” and some half arsed advice to the clinically vulnerable to avoid crowded places

@Namechangr9000

Not going to a festival one year= not the end of the world. If your job depends on festivals and live events you might think differently. And there will be so many people with associated jobs that people won't have even considered- the government wont be able to subsidise all of them, for 2 years

It's obviously not ideal but many will need to find alternative employment for a year or two or sign up for universal credit.

There will need to be some subsidy so things like festivals and live music venues can continue to trade until things can return to something approaching normality.

@InDeoEstMeaFiducia I'm not catastrophising, I lost a parent to this virus and we couldn't even give him a proper funeral. Maybe if you had some clue of the intense suffering this virus has caused to tens of thousands of families, you wouldn't have such a casual attitude.

Under 15s are more likely to be struck and killed by lightning.

I can't let a statistic like this pass by unchallenged.

58 people were killed by lightning in the UK over the 30 year period 1987-2016, of these, 7 were under the age of 20.

radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/file/9ba72fba-4d12-4c6f-94e1-f11dea9b7351/1/fulltext.pdf

There have been 6 deaths of children under the age of 15 in the UK from Covid over what we will round up to a 6 month period. Scaled to the 30 years of lightning statistics, this would mean an equivalent of 360 deaths over the same period. This alone would make their chances of dying from Covid 51 times greater than being struck by lightning.

However, this is across the entire population, rather than just those who have contracted the virus. Latest estimates show that only 6% of people have had Covid. If we factor this in, then the chance of an under 15 year old dying from Covid given that they actually catch it, is 857 times larger than their chance of being struck and killed by lightning.

Still very unlikely, but under 15s are more likely to be struck and killed by lightning is absolute and total bollocks.

Note: the figures above are based on under 15s contracting Covid at the same rate as the rest of the population. Since this is unlikely to be the case, the multiple of risk would actually be much higher.

@Nellodee I appreciate that post, so many throwaway remarks are being made

@TrustTheGeneGenie and your point is what?

I was trying to say that while lots of people won’t die, there are lots of people having nasty long term effects. Because this is a new virus no one knows what these will be. No need to be sarcastic.

All I’m saying is that there is a middle ground between throwing caution to the wind and utter catastrophising.