If vaccinating the vulnerable and lockdown gets us out of this current hospital crisis - what next?

[bookmarket]

I'm failing to see how we can get our lives back even after the most vulnerable have been vaccinated and hospital admissions to ICU are lowered.

My whirring thoughts....

Can we really expect much of normal life to return when a huge percentage of the population won't be vaccinated? How will that look? Won't it just flare up again and will that be okay if ICU isn't overrun, even if large amounts of people end up in hospital?

Will we have to show a negative test before we can do anything, travel, weddings, sport events, theatre? How can we ever plan anything if we have to have a negative test to be allowed to participate? How will Universities and schools be normal in the winter if people and close contacts still have to self-isolate if they are covid+. Will those who are vaccinated still be vectors and might they spread it more as their behaviour, and those who are related to them, will change?

I think many people think that once the risk of death has been lowered to an acceptable level, it means we'll be able to go back to life as usual, treating it like flu. But the numbers of people who will be significantly ill, even if not at risk of death, could still be high and problematic if it is occurring simultaneously.

1st year University students already succumb to freshers flu every year, so we know covid will easily spread again through University halls of residence if the virus has not been suppressed. Will they spend two terms of isolation and learning from their rooms again?

As I say - questions whirring round my head. I'm happy to be pointed towards some stats and possible case scenarios

@Getitdonesharpish

From what I have heard their is an expectation that for the next two winters we may have to expect restrictions.

They can try but we don’t have to follow them. No one I know will once the vulnerable are vaccinated by spring.

Even though the majority of the deaths have been in the over 70s age group, hospitalisations are much more spread across different age groups.

They are people in their 30s, 40s and 50s in hospitals all the time too.
If we drop all restrictions after the priority groups have been vaccinated, won't the number of cases go up hugely - meaning more people get ill and more younger people will need hospital treatment?

And they think about 10% will be left with long-covid regardless of the severity of their initial symptoms... So if you had 100 000 daily cases, that would be 10 000 people every day affected by long term health issues.

And they think about 10% will be left with long-covid regardless of the severity of their initial symptoms... So if you had 100 000 daily cases, that would be 10 000 people every day affected by long term health issues

Have you got a source for that?

Also, how do you define 'long-term'? The virus has only existed for a year, so surely it's too soon to say for sure that 10% will have long-term health issues?

Once my family and I are vaccinated I’ll be seeing them as normal again. Chris Whitty and co can shove their restrictions up their arse. We’ve done our bit, our lives belong to us not the government.

As for locking down every winter, how ridiculous. How about the money spent on that is spent instead on funding the NHS, winter does after all occur every year, it’s completely ridiculous that year on year it can’t cope.

@IcedPurple

And they think about 10% will be left with long-covid regardless of the severity of their initial symptoms... So if you had 100 000 daily cases, that would be 10 000 people every day affected by long term health issues

Have you got a source for that?

Also, how do you define 'long-term'? The virus has only existed for a year, so surely it's too soon to say for sure that 10% will have long-term health issues?

Lots here: www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/long-covid-symptoms-meaning-study-a9679876.html

And yes, of course it's as yet difficult to know if people will experience symptoms for weeks, months, years... Time will tell but it does show it's not just like a cold like some people are saying. I know someone who has kidney damage after covid - she's in her late 30s and was fit and healthy before...

@atomt

Even though the majority of the deaths have been in the over 70s age group, hospitalisations are much more spread across different age groups.

They are people in their 30s, 40s and 50s in hospitals all the time too.
If we drop all restrictions after the priority groups have been vaccinated, won't the number of cases go up hugely - meaning more people get ill and more younger people will need hospital treatment?

And they think about 10% will be left with long-covid regardless of the severity of their initial symptoms... So if you had 100 000 daily cases, that would be 10 000 people every day affected by long term health issues.

Yep- completely agree on your point on people under 50 getting hospitalised. It's scary to think of how fast the virus will spread amongst younger people once restrictions are lifted- if we're looking at millions of cases the NHS will again be overwhelmed.

And yes, of course it's as yet difficult to know if people will experience symptoms for weeks, months, years... Time will tell but it does show it's not just like a cold like some people are saying. I know someone who has kidney damage after covid - she's in her late 30s and was fit and healthy before...

All it says is that 1 in 10 people had 'symptoms' 3 months later. That doesn't sound 'long-term' to me. Post-viral syndrome has always been a thing.

And everyone on MN knows healthy people who were running marathons before being struck down with severe illness. That doesn't mean it's statistically common (it is not), much less that it's worth shutting down society and the economy long-term.

@MadameBlobby

Once my family and I are vaccinated I’ll be seeing them as normal again. Chris Whitty and co can shove their restrictions up their arse. We’ve done our bit, our lives belong to us not the government.

To be fair Chris Whitty and co only advise the government.

The government then ignores that advice until they realise that Chris Whitty and co were telling them to act asap to stop the NHS being overwhelmed and the public seeing pictures like Italy.

In regards to the vaccinations, it should stop people ending up in hospital so until all over 18s have been offered the vaccine things won't go back to normal.

I agree. With everything we are hearing about the younger age of hospitalised patients, i don't see how vaccinating just those first few groups fixes the problem. It reduces deaths but doesn't remove the risk of overwhelming the hospitals, so lockdowns will continue. I am also mightily irritated to read older or vulnerable people telling front line workers to just crack on once THEY'VE had THEIR vaccines because WE won't die. I'm a teacher, I've had Covid and I didn't die. But neither do I want it again and in my line of work I probably will get it again. I want a vaccine.

strawberry Chris Whitty and then backed up by Graham Medley. It sounds plausible. Note restrictions, not necessarily full on lockdown.

Thanks for the responses, it has helped me to harness my thoughts better.

I guess what I am curious about is whether we'll be able to treat it like flu, once risk of death is greatly reduced. Or, if the virus spreads out of control later in the year - even among non-vulnerable groups - will it remain problematic at a population level even if not a personal level?