Gael23 wrote: » Say they do another 2 weeks of these restrictions, what then. I imagine that will be the limit of public cooperation
housemouse wrote: » I've already done far more work than you in this thread. I am now here just to remind you that you failed to understand what was said. There are some other people here who might actually add to the discussion. Let's give them a chance to speak now.
Jurgen Klopp wrote: » Johnson and Johnson have already committed to selling at cost. They are ramping up production of their vaccine which they know may not be approved just to get ahead of it if it is However all the money in the world won't help magic away that they'll need at least 12 months for human testing and observations plus I'd another 6 for adequate production and deployment could even be up to 24 months and that assuming we hit the ground running with an effective one I think some vaccine was allowed skip animal trials straight to human volunteers in the US 2 weeks ago So I think as the HSE consultant said we will have to accept an attrition rate while we limp on as much as it upsets me. But unfortunately that's reality
Blueshoe wrote: » Am I seeing people trying to find an excuse to get the builders back to work while the pen pushing folk stay home. Many working from home but many also doing SFA and getting 300 a week for it? What's the reasoning behind it
VonLuck wrote: » Well what's the argument for doing it for construction sites and not any other business which is technically "closed"? Also, it may sound okay in theory, but you still have architects, engineers, one off sub-contractors, inspectors etc. visiting multiple sites and increasing the risk of spread. Hard to control.
Aidric wrote: » That's the crux, there is a huge commercial vs public play here. Pharm makes a huge R&D investment in developing a vaccine but are they going to sell to the government at cost and make no margin?
TheCitizen wrote: » A vaccine for this won't be short of funding
Idbatterim wrote: » surely the funding it bit, will be less than a drop in the ocean, given the insane daily cost this is having?
robinph wrote: » No, but you could run a closed site and nobody gets in or out for a month at a time. Do some variation of two weeks in isolation, two weeks in the site doing whatever needs doing and not worrying about social isolation as they are in a closed site, go home for two weeks, two weeks in isolation, two weeks on site, etc. Pay them double for the duration. If it needs doing then there are ways they can make it happen. I'm sure there isn't any social isolation going on on oil rigs or in the space station or in the antarctic bases. They are closed sites and they have full control over who gets in or out under their terms. Can do the same for a big building site if need be.
Hmmzis wrote: » Some of that can be mitigated by proper PPE and training. Wearing a mask, gloves and goggles shouldn't be that outlandish in a building site.
salmocab wrote: » Can social distancing be practiced on a building site? In my 20 years on sites I’d have thought it would have been difficult to keep 2 mts from people very much. Lots of things require 2 people to lift or one holding whilst one fixes. That’s aside from the day to day closeness necessitated by different trades trying to work side by side.
Aidric wrote: » Simple. It's based on clinical trails which need to go through several phases before submission for regulatory approval. Also a question of scale and finance. If a small bio company creates an approved vaccine they don't have the scale to produce it for a global population. That's where you need a global pharma player to step in and who will fund it ultimately?
Cyrus wrote: » I would take what that consultant says as the opinion of someone with a little more info that most of the rest of us Nothing more and nothing less
VonLuck wrote: » You have developers on the radio saying that social distancing can be maintained on their sites, but the reality is that it can't. Mostly because of canteen facilities, toilets, lifting heavy materials requiring more than one person. It may just be a case that the government is happy with the additional risk until it reaches a point where cases increase again whereby stricter measures are reintroduced. Continue ad-nauseam until a vaccine is developed.
Idbatterim wrote: » I'd love to know, what the vaccine time line is based on. I am assuming never in history, have so many, with so many resources and urgency, worked on something like this...
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » Read the HSE consultant`s comments in the post that was quoted.
ITman88 wrote: » The groups the HSE consultant has mentioned most at risk of this will be unlikely to be returning to work in the construction or engineering industries which have now closed. So social distancing can remain with those industries restarted
Aidric wrote: » Q121 is the best estimate of a vaccine. Until then anti virals are the best hope of treating victims but no leading candidate has been tested or trialed in the volume you would need to green light such a treatment. Additional to the complexity of the situation is that this is a new virus and science hasn't yet caught up to the reality. Data from China would help. It's easy to say lockdown until a vaccine is found is fantasy but in reality what is the credible alternative? If you have no vaccine or anti virals to mitigate the situation then any government cannot responsibly give its citizens the all clear to resume normal life. If they relax the restrictions the likelihood is another spike in numbers and then they would have to reintroduce lockdown. That would take us potentially in to winter and flu season. A combination of a rampaging flu and covid epidemic would overwhelm any public health system. The economic consequences are driving the conversation but if we don't properly address the health problem first then the consequences could be truly catastrophic.
Cork Boy 53 wrote: » Yes. And also if no vaccine is developed by the autumn then the death toll from then onwards will dwarf what is happening now. Anyone who thinks this crisis is nearing an end needs to wake the **** up.
Summary: People talking with any certainty about lockdown being done in 2 to 4 weeks or in for the whole year don't know what they're talking about. The probability is lockdown till the end of May followed by a gradual reduction in the severity of lockdown until a death rate, which is deemed the maximum level which the public will tolerate on an ongoing basis, is reached and allowed run to October. In Q4 we'll have to see a tightening of restrictions again to keep the death rate down. What death rate will they view as acceptable? I suspect 50 dead a day or less will be the level but don't know, a lot depends on what the public tells them is acceptable. In 2021 it'll all be about keeping the death rate at an acceptable daily level until we get the vaccine. As treatments improve fewer social and economic restrictions will be required to maintain a stable daily death rate which is acceptable to the public.
