Why did the government lock down so long the first time?

[IheartNiles]

They’ve never bothered to explain this to the population. We were told 3 weeks in March. No one with any sense will trust that any future 2-3 week lockdown is going to finish on the date stated. If it’s enforced then an end date must be written into law.

The NHS (I work in a London hospital) was coping just fine by a month into the first lockdown - the wards had emptied and we were able to restart elective treatments. But for reasons unexplained to this day the government decided to extend locking down the country from 3 weeks to 4 months, with school children missing education for almost 6 months. It obviously wasn’t an elimination strategy as borders were kept open and then at the end people were encouraged to resume overseas travel.

If they’d stuck with occasional 2-3 week ‘circuit breakers’ at the beginning 1. The NHS would’ve coped 2. Business wouldn’t have gone under 3. We’d be closer to the talked about ‘herd immunity’ 4. year 10-13 education wouldn’t be fucked 5. people wouldn’t be utterly fucked off with it / terrified they’ll lose their jobs/home / mental health shot to pieces - and may have been more willing to comply.

@doublehalo yep it is a weird thing but then I guess some people get flu badly and others don’t. Some are just more susceptible to this virus than others. But everyone I know who had it either for it mildly or if badly are fully better now and carrying on life as normal. I think that is another reason blanket lockdown wont work - people that have had it are generally now very relaxed and living as normally as they can.

Who knows what it was all about, pandering to fear generated by the media IMO. There should have been an earlier and more gradual opening up. There definitely should have been some meaningful face to face secondary education during the summer term.
The government also seems to not understand that the restrictions are what’s lead to the mixing inside households. Once we were allowed to meet, I went to people’s homes and gardens I have never been to before because we would always have met in a pub or cafe.

[quote Bool]@doublehalo herd immunity - indeed I struggle to understand when people say there is no herd immunity how they think a vaccine will work!

If there is no level herd immunity there is no vaccine. It’s basic.

I think that if you catch this coronavirus - you are unlikely to catch it again or if you do so your body will have some recognition and you will get it far less severely. I also think this is how a vaccine will work. Maybe we will have to have an annual programme as we do with the flu because of the annual mutation of the virus.

I think we are seeing some effects of herd immunity in London already honestly. I know of sooooo many people who have had Covid and are now just living unworried about catching it again.[/quote]
Just wanted to point out that I know of a patient who tested positive in April and was poorly but got through it while remaining at home .
Due to their occupation which required testing to enter their work premises , had 4 negative results .
Took ill again in July , tested positive again and required hospital admission - very poorly .
Second occurrence was way worse in his case .

I’m therefore wary of assumptions that repeat instances are less severe .

Though I sincerely hope his case is rare and you are correct .

@babbi some people won’t attain immunity, in the same way a proportion are never immune to chicken pox. Most should though and the early data supports this.

@IheartNiles

They’ve never bothered to explain this to the population. We were told 3 weeks in March. No one with any sense will trust that any future 2-3 week lockdown is going to finish on the date stated. If it’s enforced then an end date must be written into law.

The NHS (I work in a London hospital) was coping just fine by a month into the first lockdown - the wards had emptied and we were able to restart elective treatments. But for reasons unexplained to this day the government decided to extend locking down the country from 3 weeks to 4 months, with school children missing education for almost 6 months. It obviously wasn’t an elimination strategy as borders were kept open and then at the end people were encouraged to resume overseas travel.

If they’d stuck with occasional 2-3 week ‘circuit breakers’ at the beginning 1. The NHS would’ve coped 2. Business wouldn’t have gone under 3. We’d be closer to the talked about ‘herd immunity’ 4. year 10-13 education wouldn’t be fucked 5. people wouldn’t be utterly fucked off with it / terrified they’ll lose their jobs/home / mental health shot to pieces - and may have been more willing to comply.

They explained it every evening in their updates! For someone employed in the NHS I'm surprised you are so out of touch with the whole situation. The peak of admissions was around the end of April when thankfully these levelled off and slowly reduced. If everything just opened up after 3 weeks where would the peak have reached? There was something like 58% of intensive care beds occupied by covid patients. The loosening of restrictions was based partly on the NHS being in a position to continue safely and cope with all the other patients needing intensive care. Why the decision not to use the Nightingales I really don't know. I don't work for the NHS but possibly difficulties staffing them safely? Why don't you ask your hospital management and let us know? What London hospital ate you at if you don't mind sharing?

If they’d stuck with occasional 2-3 week ‘circuit breakers’ at the beginning 1. The NHS would’ve coped 2. Business wouldn’t have gone under 3. We’d be closer to the talked about ‘herd immunity’ 4. year 10-13 education wouldn’t be fucked 5. people wouldn’t be utterly fucked off with it / terrified they’ll lose their jobs/home / mental health shot to pieces - and may have been more willing to comply.

Hmm, really? In thre US where they did shorter, less drastic lockdowns, loads of businesses have gone under and everyone seems fairly fucked off with it and worried about their future.

@mrshoho you don’t suit your name by the way.

Ye the ITU beds did fill up and overspill. But after a month our hospital (central London) had a dozen ITU covid patients. And yet we stayed locked down. So you are advocating another lock down longer than this ‘2 week circuit breaker’ then? As that will do what you’re saying would have happened if we’d come out after a few weeks initially.

@babbi omg well if that is the case then we really are screwed. If you catch it and test positive and then negative and then positive again and super poorly then how on earth will a vaccine do it’s job. That is the most scary thing I have heard.

@Aroundtheworldin80moves

Fear. People were still terrified in May.

People are still terrified in October. Even given that we know so much more about it now and even in the highest prevalence areas, 99.99% of people don't have it.

[quote IheartNiles]@mrshoho you don’t suit your name by the way.

Ye the ITU beds did fill up and overspill. But after a month our hospital (central London) had a dozen ITU covid patients. And yet we stayed locked down. So you are advocating another lock down longer than this ‘2 week circuit breaker’ then? As that will do what you’re saying would have happened if we’d come out after a few weeks initially.[/quote]
I name changed last Christmas and was too lazy to change it back!

Your hospital had 12 ICU beds with covid patients. how many free beds did that leave?

Why do say I'm advocating another long lockdown? I'm not. Your question was why was the original lockdown so long and I was answering that. The NHS is not in the same position now but not to say it couldn't happen again. I would hope that shorter circuit breakers would be enough.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/time.com/5899294/reinfection-coronavirus/%3famp=true

This sounds a similar case but obviously I couldn’t be sure .

[quote Bool]@babbi omg well if that is the case then we really are screwed. If you catch it and test positive and then negative and then positive again and super poorly then how on earth will a vaccine do it’s job. That is the most scary thing I have heard.[/quote]
That happens with all diseases, there's always a very small fraction of people who can get them again. There have only been a very tiny number of confirmed cases of people getting reinfected with covid so that's actually good news! It absolutely doesn't mean a vaccine won't work.

@GoldenOmber yep but to catch it again and actually get it WORSE. That goes against all logic of immunity.

I think they said 12 weeks with reviews every 3 weeks.

[quote Bool]@GoldenOmber yep but to catch it again and actually get it WORSE. That goes against all logic of immunity.[/quote]
It doesn't, really, as long as it's only happening to a very very tiny proportion of people that get infected. If it was happening to lots of people who'd been infected before we'd be in trouble. But if it's only happening to 0.0005%, that's not going to get in the way of a working vaccine.

Reinfection is clearly extremely unlikely otherwise we would already have seen thousands of examples.

I’m struggling to comprehend your point here.

Through your own experience you saw an ITU unit breach capacity at relatively low levels of infection through the population yet you disagree with containment at low levels.

This is despite the maths showing how infection grows exponentially and quickly overwhelm the services at which point it’s a lot harder to cope with or get back to a manageable level.

I don’t necessarily advocate another lockdown because it’s a very blunt tool with little room to manoeuvre but at the same time I’m yet to understand what the proposal is to deal with large numbers of people needing medical attention if we’re not going to use the largely proven method we have of actually reducing circulation. Track and trace has worked very well in other countries but the UK has failed to get an effective system in place so until they do it’s not a reliable option.

Am I missing some amazing strategy here?

Ok yep - so reinfection really really low. Which then seems a vaccine would work. And then logic would have it that natural herd immunity would work. Which incidentally is what the Barrington paper argued for and which Matt Hancock this week disputed because he said herd immunity not possible. Now you see why I am scared of the decisions being made by our Health Secretary.

@Cornettoninja which countries have a great track and trace system. Genuine question. I am just seeing panic everywhere in Europe.

@Cornettoninja I think the OP is just saying that the first lockdown was too long. She was not arguing against lockdown per se. Just we were kept in it too long when we would have been better off letting it run slowly through the population during the summer months because now we are up shit creek with an underfunded paddle just as winter approaches.

@Bool

Ok yep - so reinfection really really low. Which then seems a vaccine would work. And then logic would have it that natural herd immunity would work. Which incidentally is what the Barrington paper argued for and which Matt Hancock this week disputed because he said herd immunity not possible. Now you see why I am scared of the decisions being made by our Health Secretary.

Well, no, what he said was that herd immunity without a vaccine wouldn’t happen. Which is probably true. We didn’t get herd immunity to measles or smallpox or chicken pox or polio without a vaccine.

@Bool South Korea, Taiwan, Japan - basically anyone with experience of SARS.

Thanks for the explanation too

I just don’t see we have a viable alternative if push comes to shove. The government got a lot very wrong at the beginning despite having evidence from other countries imho. Even so, I have to cut them a bit of slack because they’re dealing with a complete unknown in covid and every decision they make based on theory (because that’s the best we have in some aspects) is going to lead to criticism.

But we DID get herd immunity to measles before there was a vaccine available. Why do you think herd immunity without a vaccine is not possible? The scientists themselves came out this week and said Matt Hancock got his facts wrong. He even cited malaria which is a vector spread disease.

But we DID get herd immunity to measles before there was a vaccine available

No we didn’t, we had over a hundred thousand cases a year before there was a vaccine available. That’s not ‘herd immunity’. Herd immunity is what we have now, with under a thousand cases a year and most of them imported.

If reinfection is super rare - which we have just established - and why a vaccine is possible - why is herd immunity through natural means not possible. I don’t get that argument - it doesn’t make logical sense.

Not saying we should let it race through the population and crash the health system - but a slow controlled spread should be encouraged. And shield those at most risk. The argument is that the longer we let this run on for the more likely those who are shielding will catch it.