So what's the plan if we don't get a vaccine?

[zafferana]

All this 'Covid-safe' planning for reopening businesses, schools, etc presupposes that this is temporary and that we'll have a vaccine before long and can then go back to life as normal.

I bloody hope that's the case, but what happens if we never get one, as some scientists say is likely? When will we just accept the risk and get on with life again? And how many of us would say 'Right now', if asked that question. I think I would.

The vaccines don’t work for everyone and are only against the predicted strain. Sometimes they get it wrong and there is no effective vaccine

Even without vaccine there will hopefully be treatments to lessen the effects and aid recovery. They are trialling Beta interferon as a treatment, the good thing about this is that it's already in use for M.S patients so they know it is safe. This speeds up the testing process.

[quote mrshoho]@Racoonworld What other infectious illnesses are you thinking of that people will also need extra protection for?[/quote]
For people with severely compromised immune systems, which is a big proportion of that 3%, almost everything? You shouldn't see someone going through chemo or go into a care home if you have a common cold. I'm not suggesting at all that covid-19 is no more dangerous than that, but there were lots of people who had to be very, very careful around even minor diseases long before this (and no one seemed to care all that much about them).

@onedayinthefuture

Seeing that organised pool party event in Wuhan, that could be a promising sign things will get better. My GP said he is hopeful the virus is becoming weaker but they absolutely cannot take any chances until this winter is over.....

I actually thought that was a fake propaganda photo- how can so many people be crammed together without masks!

@Hardbackwriter that’s exactly what I mean, you said it better than me. If society is going to care about long term protection for the extremely vulnerable to COVID then the people vulnerable to other illnesses will also need long term protection, which they don’t get at the moment. Or everyone just gets on with it like the vulnerable always have done for everything else.

@BikeTyson

Someone very recently got it for a 2nd time. Presenting different symptoms. Massive spanner in the works for the vaccine plan.

If you mean the man in Hong Kong, he was hospitalised the first time and asymptomatic the second. Sounds encouraging to me, his immune system responded differently the second time around.

All positive cases were put in hospital in Hong Kong in order to contain the virus - it wasn't that he was very I'll first time round.

This second time he was picked up during a routine airport test where they tested everyone which is how they picked up his asymptomatic case.

Either way - too early to tell how easily people become reinfected and whether they are contagious. Generally asyptomatic cases are only picked up when widescreen screening is done as you won't know to get tested if you have no symptoms.

[quote Racoonworld]@Hardbackwriter that’s exactly what I mean, you said it better than me. If society is going to care about long term protection for the extremely vulnerable to COVID then the people vulnerable to other illnesses will also need long term protection, which they don’t get at the moment. Or everyone just gets on with it like the vulnerable always have done for everything else.[/quote]
But those vulnerable people ie compromised immune systems and chemo patients are part of the vulnerable group we are protecting from Covid.

the way I understand it is there is unlikely to be a vaccine that just kills it off completely. At least not for a long time.

There might realistically be a vaccine that is relatively effective to give a big chunk of the population a certain amount of immunity for, say, 6 months. So there could end up being some kind of rolling immunisation process and that combined with an effective test and trace programme could in theory keep us all going.

Also, hopefully, doctors will get better at realising what helps treat the symptoms. Luckily, treatments that have been found to be effective so far are already know to be safe existing treatments for other things, so that bypasses large scale clinical trials etc.

@zafferana

There will be a vaccine.

You don't know that and even if there is it could be years away. After all, there's still no vaccine for SARS and that appeared in 2002.

Yes @OddBoots I've read various bits recently that are saying that young people, in particular, who are the ones getting it most frequently now, are slowly but surely contributing to herd immunity. TBH, I think that's our best bet - let the young and healthy get it in order to provide a healthy buffer around the vulnerable. It's the ones who don't know they're vulnerable that are at most risk, not those that do.

They stopped researching a vaccine for SARS as it died out

@Janaih

Someone very recently got it for a 2nd time. Presenting different symptoms. Massive spanner in the works for the vaccine plan.

I heard the test was incorrect the first time

Oh really? That's good then if so. Carry on!

Why are people so sure there will be a vaccine

Because of this www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/science/coronavirus-vaccine-tracker.html

I just don't think it's feasible that over 165 candidates will fail.

Different groups are more susceptible to different things though, for example diabetics seem to be more vulnerable to Covid, severe asthma more vulnerable to flu and pneumonia but less so (surprisingly) to Covid. There are many other illnesses too.

What protections are you thinking the vulnerable to Covid should have?

@mrshoho

Different groups are more susceptible to different things though, for example diabetics seem to be more vulnerable to Covid, severe asthma more vulnerable to flu and pneumonia but less so (surprisingly) to Covid. There are many other illnesses too.

What protections are you thinking the vulnerable to Covid should have?

I think there will be a vaccine. But if not, we would have to get used to the risk of it, in whatever way that effected us. Historically we didn't really understand who viruses were spread, so although quarantines did work we didn't have much else in our toolkit. Now we have a lot more preventatives we know do work. Proper surgical masks, hand washing, social distancing, etc. And we understand viruses better. So instead of plaque masks and pockets full of posies, and 40 day 40 night ship quarantines because the days seemed like the right number, we actually know which masks work and what the right practice is, we know how many days we need to self isolate. We are better equipped for their not being a virus, but it also means the most vulnerable are more aware of their vulnerability. So the same things as in history, only with better scientific understanding.

There are people all over the world who are faced with this on a daily basis because of politics and poverty, and they keep on living their lives too. Despite Ebola, despite polio, despite Tuberculosis, despite HIV/AIDS, despite Zika virus, despite malaria etc. We as a species just keep on going. We are so pervasive because we are so good at adapting to conditions however adverse. But there will be more casualties, as there are always are, I just hope not too many more and we can prevent as many as possible. It's never going to work perfectly (and could have been much better!) but lockdown has hopefully prevented things from becoming completely unmanageable for our service and saved some lives

Actually that the man had the virus and then had an asymptomatic version on second exposure could be a very good sigh for a vaccine. Because if the initial symptomatic exposure could be done in a controlled way (low dose in a live vaccine) then it might well protect the person from having symptoms if exposed again. It may also mean immunity is lost quickly and therefore a vaccine would have to be repeated, eg. boosters every so often. It could mean a lot of positive things

There will be a vaccine because money.
Whether it will be as effective as we imagine is contingent on multiple variables; strains of COVID mutating from year to year the way standard flu does, for example, or if indeed the first approved and widely used vaccine is properly effective given it will have been rushed through.

I think the larger and frankly more worrying issue is that we seem to have taken collective leave of our senses and are unable to evaluate risk or understand statistics. Like the OP says, if all restrictions eased tomorrow, I’d take my chances out in the world. I do have good friends who are shielding, and they are still in a form of lockdown for the foreseeable future.

But we have to be pragmatic and to some extent utilitarian. There will be no economy left to raise taxes to pay for health services if things continue as they are. And then where will we be?

@Woofbloodywoof
I think the larger and frankly more worrying issue is that we seem to have taken collective leave of our senses and are unable to evaluate risk or understand statistics. Like the OP says, if all restrictions eased tomorrow, I’d take my chances out in the world. I do have good friends who are shielding, and they are still in a form of lockdown for the foreseeable future.

Are you saying you want all restrictions lifted to get on with life right now? Do you mean all restrictions as in ending social distancing, no masks etc etc? International travel?

I would imagine that the virus will be like the flu virus with lots of different strains, look at how different people have had different experiences during this outbreak & one single vaccine won't cover every strain. If the virus continues evolving then the vaccine will have to do the same & until it does then it won't be wiped out, until the researchers can find a way of predicting how the changes can be forecasted & how larger numbers of the population react to the vaccine, it is only being tested on healthy people now, not anyone with preexisting conditions.

@mrshoho
No, I was referring to the OP talking about a hypothetical removal of restrictions tomorrow.

That being said, I wouldn’t be that uncomfortable if that was the reality, but it would be premature and foolish because having slammed on the lockdown brakes too late we can’t now suddenly open back up with gay abandon and hope to keep on top of the situation. Had we strong leadership, it might be easier for the more nervous amongst the population to have faith in a more relaxed government approach. Currently, it seems that Nicola Sturgeon has been appointed - by Westminster, bizarrely - as de facto UK Prime Minister.

Strange times.

[quote mrshoho]@Woofbloodywoof
I think the larger and frankly more worrying issue is that we seem to have taken collective leave of our senses and are unable to evaluate risk or understand statistics. Like the OP says, if all restrictions eased tomorrow, I’d take my chances out in the world. I do have good friends who are shielding, and they are still in a form of lockdown for the foreseeable future.

Are you saying you want all restrictions lifted to get on with life right now? Do you mean all restrictions as in ending social distancing, no masks etc etc? International travel?[/quote]
I would love that. It would be nice to have the good things in my life returned to me and to be allowed to live not just exist. We can't live like this for ever and we shouldn't be expected to.

@iVampire

That does not apply for the exceptionally clinically vulnerable though, does it?

About 10% of those in that group atrvthisebluvingveith blood cancer (remember that’s the commonest group of childhood cancers).

If we are hospitalalised, 36% of us die (source: The Lancet)

It simply isn’t safe to put us through the disease.

And it is heartless to just write us off as not ‘as many deaths and sequelae as we feared‘

Please remember that you’re saying these things in front of the very people who you’re happy to write off for the greater good.

(Not just Boris channelling the inner Farquad)

While that percentage was reported and published in the Lancet, it was the percentage at that time. The percentage is unlikely to be always the case because of new treatments and procedures.

With regards to the reinfection case in Hong Kong, (also cases in Belgium and Holland I believe?), if you read the news articles about this thoroughly, you will see virologists expect some mutations because that is what coronaviruses do. They have taken this into account all along.

Many of us are tempted, myself included, to be armchair scientists and proclaim whether there will be a vaccine or not. But I don't think many of us know. Even Professor Sarah Gilbert probably can't be certain yet.

China has apparently been vaccinating people since July.

[quote Racoonworld]@mrshoho

Different groups are more susceptible to different things though, for example diabetics seem to be more vulnerable to Covid, severe asthma more vulnerable to flu and pneumonia but less so (surprisingly) to Covid. There are many other illnesses too.

What protections are you thinking the vulnerable to Covid should have?[/quote]
It's not at all surprising that diabetics are more vulnerable to Covid than asthmatics. It's a vascular and inflammatory disease rather than a respiratory one.

@Nat6999 It's the other way round now. The earlier phase trials (to establish safey) were on young healthy people. Now it's being trialled on people over 70 or those younger with preexisting conditions. That's the Oxford vaccine. Not sure about the others.

Obviously the vaccines aren't just about preventing deaths. We're seeing potentially permanent damage to the heart, lungs, or brain, and ongoing debilitation of Long Covid. Young previously healthy people are amongst those affected.

I think there is a very high percentage of people who have had Covid but were never tested as they were either asymptomatic or had the virus before it was actually admitted there was this new virus.
Also scientists believe that the earliest case of Covid contracted in the UK so far, was in February in the Nottingham area.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-53907629

I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's eventually proved that the earliest contracted case within the UK was back in November or December last year.