Dublingirl80 wrote: » Yes they are. Many many people have died of all ages, under 20s being the least common. Look up some statistics. Even when it's small percentages of numbers it's of huge numbers, its lots of people. And it's also not the point because people of any age of any underlying health condition should all be protected.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Ok. So are we just waiting for a vaccine that might take a year IF everything goes to plan? Then mass produce the vaccine and roll out and administer it to everyone. So stay in lockdown to minimise the virus transmission until about this time next year. Is that what you think the plan probably is?
trapp wrote: » It is mostly older people. Fact. Others do die but mostly older people.
trapp wrote: » I think we have to get back to some sort of normal soon as waiting for a safe vaccine could be years away and the human impact of the lockdown could be grave. However, as I've said, presuming the virus remains, it will take schools until January at the very earliest to be ready to reopen. At that stage hospitals should be more prepared in terms of capacity too.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I think the herd immunity is the obvious way to go. Keep transmissions as high as the health service can possibly deal with and get through it as quickly as possible. I’d agree hat waiting for a vaccine is too risky. Might not be ready for years. So I’d agree, manage the rate at which we all get it and we can all use the health service if we need it. People are burying their hear in the sand if they think we can eliminate the virus by simply stopping it spreading so it dies out. No government is even pretending to be aiming for that. So what are they aiming for? Managed herd immunity and hope a vaccine is developed in the next couple of years.
[Deleted User] wrote: » There are lots and lots of reasons why we aren’t going to stay in lockdown for a year or more like some of you want. We’d be economically depressed for one. Which would kill way more than Covid 19 will. I’m not talking about 2008 type recession. Back to the dark ages.
Dublingirl80 wrote: » Boris Johnson thought herd immunity was a great idea also and then he changed his mind and eventually ended up in icu himself. Nobody knows what will happen and there is no point in bickering. Maybe those who wish like yourself could volunteer to be the ones to take the risk first if it's such a great theory. Gamble with your own lives instead of others.
khalessi wrote: » Simon Harris even said today this virus is not going away, it will be an attempt to control it until a vaccine is found. Britain and Sweden are discovering the herd immunity approach is not the way to go. Offering up our elders is not the way either
[Deleted User] wrote: » What’s your plan then? Stay locked down until this all blows over? What if it just comes back the minute we go back outside? What happens when we as a country start running out of money?
Deleted User wrote: » What’s your plan then? Stay locked down until this all blows over? What if it just comes back the minute we go back outside? What happens when we as a country start running out of money?
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » It’s not bickering, it’s looking at what’s going on around us. We are aiming for herd immunity. The health services in Ireland and the uk aren’t over capacity yet so they’re managing it fine. This isn’t a disease and it will kill people. That’s going to happen. Johnson will continue with the herd immunity plan just as Leo will. Whether they use schools to help with transmissions remains to be seen. They won’t just keep us in lockdown until there’s a vaccine because the vaccine might take years or might never come. Btw, I haven’t advocated for either approach, I’m describing what is happening right now in front of you and me. I know you haven’t thought about what the plan is but I’d urge you to think about what’s happening in front of you. Why do you think they might consider lifting some restrictions on 5May? Do you think they could lift restrictions without transmission rates increasing?
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » What do you think “ control it until a vaccine is found“ means? Do you think we will all stay in lockdown until a vaccine is available in a year, or 2 years or 5 years or maybe longer? Seriously, it’s important to be realistic about it. We are aiming for herd immunity whether that’s what we call it or not. We might need to cocoon the vulnerable people for as long as it takes and if they choose to do it, but the rest of us will just have to take our chances sooner or later.
trapp wrote: » Well if you think I'm scaremongering with September 2021 then you must believe schools will open before that? I wish they would. Could you explain why you think they will or eve discuss the merits of my argument?
khalessi wrote: » I do understand what he is on about as Im a nurse but no as he himself has said it is about getting reproduction rate of virus below 1% so it is managable and then relaxing restrictions/lockdown. If he wanted herd immunity they would not have bothered with a lockdown, they could have come out with some bs reason like Britain who have quickly retreated on the herd imunity approach as have the US after 100,000 death in NY alone and now are promoting lockdown and masks. It willbe a softly softly approach and schools willbe reopened slowly while maintaining social distancing. He has also hinted that the restrcitions will be relaxed and incresed based on the numbers as he doesnt want hospitals overwhelmed like NY.
Dublingirl80 wrote: » Thank you for working as a nurse in the hardest time possible. And yes I agree.
Dublingirl80 wrote: » I've clearly thought about it there is just no way of knowing. Too many variables. So they try to stop transmission at the moment and then speed up transmission? Why? That's rubbish, the goal will never be to speed up transmission at the risk of people's lives. That phrase is just wrong it is the opposite of what everyone is trying to do.
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » Up to this point we’ve tried to sow it down, but if it falls too low then of course they’ll need to speed it up. There actually aren’t that many variables. There are a few variables like how long it takes us all to become immune through herd immunity. That could happen by waiting, in lockdown, for a vaccine. Or it could happen by at least 2/3 of the population getting it and becoming immune. It’s actually pretty simple calculation. The quickest way through it is for transmissions to be at a level where the health service is close to capacity without going beyond capacity. If transmission rates fall too low then it could take years to achieve herd immunity. Quick maths question for you: with a population of 5m people on the island, how long would it take for everyone to get immunity with a transmission rate of 20,000 per week? How many weeks for 2/3 of the population to become immune with a transmission rate of 20,000 per week?
Dublingirl80 wrote: » Speeding up transmission is not something we want. I think we've discussed this enough. Don't worry I'm perfectly realistic and educated and I know just as much if not more than you about all of this. I really hope treatment improves and a vaccine is found.
khalessi wrote: » Well according to Simon Harris today if they had done nothing we would be looking at 120,000 cases a day. So your herd immunity theory is kinda irrelevent as they could have just done it but they chose not to
Dublingirl80 wrote: » If these questions are for me then I'm done with the discussion. Each to their own.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b02137c72155734a0d6608f88d445229.svg)
