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.

I tend to agree OP. We're not seeing the extent of death and ill health presently and there are so many other health conditions we now have to get back to focusing on.

Will people still be happy with restrictions and lockdowns during the 40th wave? I imagine some people might be but I'm not one of them.

The present variant does not seem to be causing major disease due to vaccination program etc, and what if it is in fact protective against a more serious future variant, and subsequently prevents it from causing greater deaths.

I can appreciate concerns about other countries which are not at the same place with vaccination programs but that could be addressed by implementing very strict protocols regarding travel, which I think we are probably still too lax about.

@Warhertisuff

As I suspected someone would, you immediately make the false comparison with Spanish Flu.

Flu has been around for thousands of years, and periodicially a new variant comes along that is more deadly, and gets mutated away by variants that are less deadly but more contagious. The first wave of Spanish Flu was similar to most seasonal outbreaks - not that deadly and mainly affecting the very old. The second and third waves did the damage - after that further mutations took it back to standard fare for flu. It returned to the norm.

Covid isn't likely to mutate (back) to harmlessness, firstly because it was never harmless in the first place and secondly because it would gain no advantage in doing so. It's not a new variant of an existing virus (as H1N1 was) - it's a completely new virus (to humans).

A better comparison for covid (in so far as how long will it last) would be smallpox when it was introduced to the Americas. Clearly a far deadlier disease, but it took around a century to kill the vast majority of the indigenous population.

Vaccines make an enormous difference of course, but it's like fighting an enemy when we don't know how many troops/ships/planes/bombs they possess. You can beat what they throw at you, but until you've seen the complete arsenal, you don't know if you're going to win in the end or not. SARS has surprised scientists with its ability to mutate quite readily - at some point, like Flu it will run out of tricks and future variants will tend to be rehashed versions of what we've seen before, but we have no idea when that point will be - until then we need to treat this virus with serious respect.

Incidentally OP
But we'd be letting things rip AFTER those who were vulnerable had been vaccinated! I never argued for such a thing pre-vaccination!

For many vulnerable people, vaccines are useless or confer so little protection their risk is still very high. If covid were to become as commonplace as rhinoviruses, then we'd be condemning a lot of people to death - far fewer than without vaccines of course, but still a significant number. Not an argument NOT to do this, but people need to be honest about what they're saying. It's not a case of "let it rip, the vulnerable are ok" - it's "let it rip, the economic damage outweighs the lives of a hundred thousand or so CEV people".

I reckon we’re definitely being prepped for the easing of most restrictions now.
They’ll probably keep in place foreign travel restrictions and some mask wearing. But I think all social distance requirements will be removed.
The responsibility will be placed on us.
Which means a vocal minority of SM will keep banging the drum to socially distance etc but the ordinary majority will go back to normal life where and when they can.

[quote PearlclutchersInc]@Warhertisuff, so I'm assuming you wont mind catching it, ending up in hospital or dealing with long covid and you wont complain when any of your family get it, and you have to change your circumstances to car e for them.

But of course, it wont happen to you....[/quote]
Yes, I'm double vaccinated so am prepared to take my chances, as I do every time I do anything!

I'm incredulous that there are so many who seem to believe we should continue under Covid restrictions forever! When exactly, if ever, would we ever emerge from this as Covid will be around forever now.

I don't think people actually care at all about the vulnerable when they make suggestions like this (or factor in that they may become one of the vulnerable). It's like a doctor speaking from an overwhelmed hospital in the middle of the current wave in Argentina said:

“There’s an attitude of: ‘People are going to die but I have the right to carry on with my life the way I used to.’”

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

You know that the variants don't arrive, it emerges from virus replicating itself and making a mistakes in copying the dna sequence? So more it spread, more chance of getting mutation?
It seems to be the immunity of the past illness doesn't work well for new delta variant too. So if you let it rip through without mitigation, it's more likely that this illness keep on spreading, and there will be no end to this pandemic.
I despair someone think like this, that let it rip is a good idea.

“There’s an attitude of: ‘People are going to die but I have the right to carry on with my life the way I used to.’”

This is true of how many diseases/causes of death are seen, in fairness.

We could do huge amounts more to prevent RTAs, cancer, heart disease, flu deaths, along with the many who die in the developing world from entirely preventable things (mostly due to funds).

In time, we will view Covid in exactly the same way, with some people further along that trajectory than others.

@TheKeatingFive

“There’s an attitude of: ‘People are going to die but I have the right to carry on with my life the way I used to.’”

This is true of how many diseases/causes of death are seen, in fairness.

We could do huge amounts more to prevent RTAs, cancer, heart disease, flu deaths, along with the many who die in the developing world from entirely preventable things (mostly due to funds).

In time, we will view Covid in exactly the same way, with some people further along that trajectory than others.

It’s going to be a very long time before we reach the stage of viewing Covid that way.

I’m glad you mentioned RTAs it’s a great analogy because we have speed limits, seatbelts, airbags, the Highway Code all in place to limit the number of deaths and accidents on the roads considering the huge volumes of traffic we have.

Letting it rip is essentially us saying no need to follow the Highway Code, do as you please and just hope the seatbelts save you.

Considering this is supposed to be a mild pandemic (there’s bigger ones on the way apparently) I think we’ve strung it out and made it worse in many ways OP.

Humans think they know everything. We think we’re God. But in reality (scientists included) we know a minuscule fraction of what is really going on. Our interventions are blunt tools.

Letting nature take its course would have lead to the same number of deaths and a shorter pandemic, I reckon.

TheKeatingFive , but how does individual person prevent others getting cancer, or hear disease, or someone else having RTAs?
With covid, you can, to a certain degree, by being careful and considerate.

*I’m glad you mentioned RTAs it’s a great analogy because we have speed limits, seatbelts, airbags, the Highway Code all in place to limit the number of deaths and accidents on the roads considering the huge volumes of traffic we have

And we could do so much more, from banning cars entirely, to yearly testing, to a total review of speed limits, to much harsher penalties for transgressions, to limiting cars to the absolute safest models.

But we don’t. We have become comfortable with a certain number of deaths. We’ll get there with Covid too.

@TheKeatingFive

“There’s an attitude of: ‘People are going to die but I have the right to carry on with my life the way I used to.’”

This is true of how many diseases/causes of death are seen, in fairness.

We could do huge amounts more to prevent RTAs, cancer, heart disease, flu deaths, along with the many who die in the developing world from entirely preventable things (mostly due to funds).

In time, we will view Covid in exactly the same way, with some people further along that trajectory than others.

I have no issues with people putting that argument forward - indeed it was a perfectly valid one to make even last February - the UK could have done what Brazil did - obv hindsight should make it clear to everyone that we did the right thing, but nobody back then could say definitively how the two strategies would compare - they could only talk about some of the risks. But for example, if we hadn't been able to come up with a viable vaccine then things would have been very different.

Anyway, the argument is just as valid now, as it was then, BUT those making that argument MUST understand it. At the moment, my feeling is that most do not. There's too many false comparisons with flu. Too many claiming the vulnerable are all protected now and too many throwing out the strawman that the alternative to "letting it rip" is restrictions forevermore.

Bold fail soz

@unwuthering

I don't think people actually care at all about the vulnerable when they make suggestions like this (or factor in that they may become one of the vulnerable). It's like a doctor speaking from an overwhelmed hospital in the middle of the current wave in Argentina said:

“There’s an attitude of: ‘People are going to die but I have the right to carry on with my life the way I used to.’”

I care about the people vulnerable to covid as much as I care about the people vulnerable to other viruses. Now we have vaccines our measures should be proportionate to those we have for other viruses. People vulnerable to covid will now have the same choices as people vulnerable to other viruses.

@Dustyboots

Considering this is supposed to be a mild pandemic (there’s bigger ones on the way apparently) I think we’ve strung it out and made it worse in many ways OP.

Humans think they know everything. We think we’re God. But in reality (scientists included) we know a minuscule fraction of what is really going on. Our interventions are blunt tools.

Letting nature take its course would have lead to the same number of deaths and a shorter pandemic, I reckon.

Letting nature take its course would be akin to telling everyone over 70 off you go carry on with your business, just take some lemsip and hope for the best. The deaths would have been far worse than the horrific numbers we already have.

There are plenty of illnesses we don’t have vaccines for. Many far more serious to children. I think people are worrying about the wrong things now.

Personally I know full well I am much more likely to die of heart disease, a stroke, cancer. Now I know these aren’t illnesses you spread but perspective is needed. Everyone should really think what is the risk from Covid now? Even before vaccines for many people it was asymptomatic or mild (shock horror even in the elderly. I’ve known asymptomatic 90 year olds).
We have an army of vaccines that make it even less serious and transmissible. What are we scared of now?

@justwanttodanceagain

"Covid isn't likely to mutate (back) to harmlessness, firstly because it was never harmless in the first place and secondly because it would gain no advantage in doing "

Actually just the opposite- viruses that mutate to kill their hosts more readily tend not to be very successful as a virus because the dead host cannot pass on the virus. Whereas a virus that mutates to be more contagious and less deadly (ie the common cold) is much more successful as a virus.

Personally I know full well I am much more likely to die of heart disease, a stroke, cancer. Now I know these aren’t illnesses you spread but perspective is needed.

I think this all the time and have no fear left to give to this virus.

[quote 1dayatatime]@justwanttodanceagain

"Covid isn't likely to mutate (back) to harmlessness, firstly because it was never harmless in the first place and secondly because it would gain no advantage in doing "

Actually just the opposite- viruses that mutate to kill their hosts more readily tend not to be very successful as a virus because the dead host cannot pass on the virus. Whereas a virus that mutates to be more contagious and less deadly (ie the common cold) is much more successful as a virus.[/quote]
No - viruses that kill before they can spread aren't successful.

Covid is infectious for days before people even show symptoms, never mind die. Every single new variant so far that has had increased infectiousness, has been more deadly. It doesn't mean that pattern will continue, but there's no evolutionary reason for it not to. This has been stated by so many experts now, so many times.

@Delatron
There are plenty of illnesses we don’t have vaccines for. Many far more serious to children.

Are you going to name any?

@Delatron, I am not scared, I just want this to end soon. I just think it's silly to jeopardize the good situation we are in now just because we can't be patient a little bit longer.

@justwanttodanceagain
Medics are very worried about bronchiolitis this winter. Not sure what your point is though? We know Covid has always been mild for most children.

I don't think people actually care at all about the vulnerable when they make suggestions like this (or factor in that they may become one of the vulnerable).

On the contrary, i believe this would benefit those for whom the vaccine isn't effective by offering them a swifter return to normality... The fact is the vaccines are effective for the majority. I appreciate that's cold comfort if you have auto-immune problems which mean you are unfortunate to be in the tiny minority of those for whom the vaccine isn't effective, but we have a choice:

1. We belatedly try a NZ approach and attempt zero Covid. That's never going to happen and wouldn't work if we tried.
2. We open up tentatively keeping many restrictions in place and reintroducing others as numbers rise in some kind of endless purgatory as we eke out over infections in the months and years ahead in some kind of Covid no-man's land. Infections are suppressed to a point but never eliminated. In this world the immunity-suppressed will still be at risk from low level simmering infections
3. We accept that restrictions can't continue forever, and that come 19 July, we need to bite the bullet and go back to normal, completely normal. We recognise that the vast majority can get back to this normality with the potential that they contract a mild illness with a residual risk of something more serious. Infection spreads amongst this group freely, filling in the gaps that vaccination missed, with the high transmissibility of Delta meaning this won't take long - a month or so before the pool of potential people diminishes and Covid fades fast. The CEV may need to take extra precautions over this period but once it has ripped through, society becomes much safer for them again, far more quickly than 2), and they get return to something much closer to normality.

Option 3 is better for everyone!

Covid is infectious for days before people even show symptoms, never mind die. Every single new variant so far that has had increased infectiousness, has been more deadly. It doesn't mean that pattern will continue, but there's no evolutionary reason for it not to. This has been stated by so many experts now, so many times.

So what's the solution. Endless restrictions as we fight a losing battle, or we snuff it out by giving it no new "Covid virgins" to infect and like the flu, it has to battle against a population that has comprehensive acquired immunity.

Op, I really hope it works out as you say. But reality is far from it, I believe.