Time to "let it rip"?

[Warhertisuff]

Firstly, let me say that I've been in broadly in favour of restrictions put in place since March 2020, but surely, once we get to 19 July, and we have widespread vaccination coverage (not to mention non-vaccine immunity), we should just go back to normal, completely, and treat Covid like the flu, as effectively that's what we've tamed to be akin to.

No more masks, no more isolation, no more testing and tracing....

Yes, they'll be a spike in cases, and many will get ill, but as long as hospitals aren't overwhelmed and people aren't dying in droves, so be it.

I appreciate that there are those who remain vulnerable even after being double-jabbed, but I'd have thought it would be far better for them to shield themselves for a short period as it rips through and burns out like past epidemics, rather than keeping it simmering and retaining a moderate level of risk over a much longer period as we neither do enough to suppress it completely, nor allow things to open up fully enough for it to rip through in a few weeks.

Then as and when variants do arrive (which they probably will) we'll have an even more comprehensive base level of population immunity.

At some point we can expect to hit a herd immunity threshold where the virus can't find enough people to infect (or if they are infected their immune system manages it without the ability for it to propagate).... Because herd immunity is "lumpy" and due to foreign introductions and future mutations, the virus won't just disappear entirely, but it will be very constrained (at least until the next super-variant emerges, if it does)...

We couldn't just acquire herd immunity previously as it would have overwhelmed health services and mortuaries, but now with vaccines, we're getting to the point where we have enough protection I believe.

Say 5 milllion infections are needed nationally to reach herd immunity... we can either get this out of the way over a month or so... or we can eke it out over time. If we eke it out enough then waning immunity from prior infections and new variants will mean we never get there. Essentially, if 5 million infections occur over 1 month or 12 months, the chances of you getting infected are the same for each ... it is just stretched over a longer period for the latter. Surely it's far better to get it out of the way (given vaccines should mean hospitalisations are manageable), and for the very vulnerable to shield for a short period, rather than play a long drawn out game of Russian Roulette whilst being more exposed overall in the 12 month period (because it's more difficult to shield fully over such a long period).

@Warhertisuff

At some point we can expect to hit a herd immunity threshold where the virus can't find enough people to infect (or if they are infected their immune system manages it without the ability for it to propagate).... Because herd immunity is "lumpy" and due to foreign introductions and future mutations, the virus won't just disappear entirely, but it will be very constrained (at least until the next super-variant emerges, if it does)...

We couldn't just acquire herd immunity previously as it would have overwhelmed health services and mortuaries, but now with vaccines, we're getting to the point where we have enough protection I believe.

Say 5 milllion infections are needed nationally to reach herd immunity... we can either get this out of the way over a month or so... or we can eke it out over time. If we eke it out enough then waning immunity from prior infections and new variants will mean we never get there. Essentially, if 5 million infections occur over 1 month or 12 months, the chances of you getting infected are the same for each ... it is just stretched over a longer period for the latter. Surely it's far better to get it out of the way (given vaccines should mean hospitalisations are manageable), and for the very vulnerable to shield for a short period, rather than play a long drawn out game of Russian Roulette whilst being more exposed overall in the 12 month period (because it's more difficult to shield fully over such a long period).

This is very flawed thinking. We need infections now before vaccine immunity wanes.

But what happens when it then wanes along with protection from earlier infections.

Im

If, once vaccinations have been rolled out to the majority come 19 July, we let Covid take its natural course

If they live, they live; if they die, the die!

Really, even the Tories are more ethical or concerned to look more ethical than this.

If, once vaccinations have been rolled out to the majority come 19 July, we let Covid take its natural course, we should be able get back to normal sooner, with the vaccine allowjng us to manage Covid as a society with the same measures we manage flu.

• This borders on sociopathy
• 19 July is not some kind of magical date
• Covid is not akin to flu
• Allowing it to "take its natural course" is code for letting large numbers of people that are not you become seriously ill or die.

I work for test and trace in wales and we've just had our contracts extended until the end of next March so I don't think it'll be going anywhere lol

'At some point we can expect to hit a herd immunity threshold where the virus can't find enough people to infect'

Most scientists now agree herd immunity is improbable and the virus will instead become endemic like flu
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2

@Warhertisuff

At some point we can expect to hit a herd immunity threshold where the virus can't find enough people to infect (or if they are infected their immune system manages it without the ability for it to propagate).... Because herd immunity is "lumpy" and due to foreign introductions and future mutations, the virus won't just disappear entirely, but it will be very constrained (at least until the next super-variant emerges, if it does)...

We couldn't just acquire herd immunity previously as it would have overwhelmed health services and mortuaries, but now with vaccines, we're getting to the point where we have enough protection I believe.

Say 5 milllion infections are needed nationally to reach herd immunity... we can either get this out of the way over a month or so... or we can eke it out over time. If we eke it out enough then waning immunity from prior infections and new variants will mean we never get there. Essentially, if 5 million infections occur over 1 month or 12 months, the chances of you getting infected are the same for each ... it is just stretched over a longer period for the latter. Surely it's far better to get it out of the way (given vaccines should mean hospitalisations are manageable), and for the very vulnerable to shield for a short period, rather than play a long drawn out game of Russian Roulette whilst being more exposed overall in the 12 month period (because it's more difficult to shield fully over such a long period).

1 percent of 5 million is 50,000. If only 1% require hospitalisation over that month where do you suggest we are going to treat them? And admission to hospital is likely to be higher than 1%

@Heartofglass12345

I work for test and trace in wales and we've just had our contracts extended until the end of next March so I don't think it'll be going anywhere lol

Enjoy being ignored by most people for the next several months I guess

1 percent of 5 million is 50,000. If only 1% require hospitalisation over that month where do you suggest we are going to treat them? And admission to hospital is likely to be higher than 1%

Given I believe that most people admitted into hospital only need to spend a few days in, then if the 50,000 is true, it would be spread over the month (if indeed it is that long), so that gives 10,000 or so - below both previous peaks. The NHS should be able to cope.

@TheClaws

If, once vaccinations have been rolled out to the majority come 19 July, we let Covid take its natural course, we should be able get back to normal sooner, with the vaccine allowjng us to manage Covid as a society with the same measures we manage flu.

• This borders on sociopathy
• 19 July is not some kind of magical date
• Covid is not akin to flu
• Allowing it to "take its natural course" is code for letting large numbers of people that are not you become seriously ill or die.

And yet that is exactly what we do with the flu and no one bats an eye

[quote Indigopearl]'At some point we can expect to hit a herd immunity threshold where the virus can't find enough people to infect'

Most scientists now agree herd immunity is improbable and the virus will instead become endemic like flu
www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2[/quote]
Agreed, it will be endemic... All the more reason not to believe we can continue with restrictions to suppress Covid if it's going to be around forever!

Are we seriously saying that society will no longer be able to meet up in groups of 30 inside (and only then with masks), and that choirs, theatres and nightclubs a thing of the past?... Because that's what the logical conclusions of those who think we shouldn't open up further.

@TheClaws - do you think we need to live with restrictions forever then? Because at some point we will either have to lift restrictions and at that point it will - as the OP put it - let rip, leading to deaths and illness - or alternatively we make the restrictions and permanent change to society.

Most scientists are saying its not going to go away for years. So at what point would it be ok to get back to normal, or are you suggesting we don't?

And yet that is exactly what we do with the flu and no one bats an eye

Honey The flu isn't as virulent or as incapacitating as Covid. It also doesn't have as high a death rate. And we don't allow it to take its natural course, anyway: we vaccinate. Every year.

I agree with you OP.

Sadly though, the government wants us to stay afraid and keep on locking us down.

@Warhertisuff

1 percent of 5 million is 50,000. If only 1% require hospitalisation over that month where do you suggest we are going to treat them? And admission to hospital is likely to be higher than 1%

Given I believe that most people admitted into hospital only need to spend a few days in, then if the 50,000 is true, it would be spread over the month (if indeed it is that long), so that gives 10,000 or so - below both previous peaks. The NHS should be able to cope.

How do we stop it spreading beyond the 5 million though? It is also likely to be higher than 1% of all cases requiring hospitalizations but before we realise it is going to go far beyond the NHS capacity it has already spread and its too late to do anything about it and then we have an influx coming with no space to put them!

[quote MargosKaftan]@TheClaws - do you think we need to live with restrictions forever then? Because at some point we will either have to lift restrictions and at that point it will - as the OP put it - let rip, leading to deaths and illness - or alternatively we make the restrictions and permanent change to society.

Most scientists are saying its not going to go away for years. So at what point would it be ok to get back to normal, or are you suggesting we don't? [/quote]

No, not at all. But I do things hinge on the levels of vaccination within the community, good hand hygiene, distance when shopping and on transport etc., using masks in certain settings, eg. health. I don't think this will be forever.

@TheClaws

And yet that is exactly what we do with the flu and no one bats an eye

Honey The flu isn't as virulent or as incapacitating as Covid. It also doesn't have as high a death rate. And we don't allow it to take its natural course, anyway: we vaccinate. Every year.

The flu vaccine is relatively recent, and also often not that effective. It was estimated that in 2017 it's effectiveness at preventing disease was just 15%! If Covid vaccines were similar I may agree with you. Thankfully, even with Delta, efficacy for 2 does is 95% for hospitalisations .

How do we stop it spreading beyond the 5 million though? It is also likely to be higher than 1% of all cases requiring hospitalizations but before we realise it is going to go far beyond the NHS capacity it has already spread and its too late to do anything about it and then we have an influx coming with no space to put them!

Cases, and Hospitalisations would be monitored... if things did trend unexpectedly badly, despite the evidence we have of vaccine efficacy, we would potentially need more restrictions...

@CautiousBlonde

I agree with you OP.

Sadly though, the government wants us to stay afraid and keep on locking us down.

the government doesn't not want to keep suppression measures forever

the current situation is not benefitting them, we're just on a knife edge in terms of transmission due to delta and the proportion of people vaccinated

So OP what do you propose ECV children and the ECV for whom the vaccine doesn't work but they still have to whilst it rips through? Sorry if already covered but still working through thread

@Backofbeyond50

So OP what do you propose ECV children and the ECV for whom the vaccine doesn't work but they still have to whilst it rips through? Sorry if already covered but still working through thread

Unless we increase restrictions and go back to a lockdown, case numbers will remain pretty high, high enough to cause concern to ECV children and their parents. Given this isn't realistic, numbers need to come down to low levels by another route. The quickest way to do that is to release restrictions entirely, on the basis that any surge should be manageable by the NHS given the tens of millions that have been vaccinated and the efficacy of the vaccine for most. The sooner more immunity, through vaccine or infection, in the population, the less able it will be to flourish. Given how fast the Delta variants spreads, it wouldn't take long to go through any remaining unvaccinated individuals, thereafter cases should reduce, not to zero as people's immunjty will wane and virus will adapt, but this is, I believe the fastest route to suppressing infections to a level that would minimise risk to CEV. The CEV may choose to shield over this period, but that's presumably better than shielding for a longer period as we keep the virus through half-hearted measures.

Unless we increase restrictions and go back to a lockdown, case numbers will remain pretty high, high enough to cause concern to ECV children and their parents. Given this isn't realistic, numbers need to come down to low levels by another route. The quickest way to do that is to release restrictions entirely

@Warhertisuff this is incorrect, and there's a good reason experts are not advising removing all restrictions at once, on the implausible basis this is the quickest way to drive down case numbers

we need to get everyone who wants to be double vaccinated, assess the impact on transmission & hospitalisations and go from there, with some level of restrictions in place whilst this is carefully monitored

track and trace will be integral in getting us to the point of no restrictions, it's crazy that you think otherwise

@Honey12346 they can ignore me all they like, they will end up with enforcement at their doors.
What's not ok is people giving us abuse which happens a lot!

Cases, and Hospitalisations would be monitored... if things did trend unexpectedly badly, despite the evidence we have of vaccine efficacy, we would potentially need more restrictions...

So you don't mean "let it rip" at all then?

The CEV may choose to shield over this period sounds good but in practice that's not possible for many families. Plenty of CEV people live with other people who are expected to go to work or school.