SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please)

[Ludens the Red]

Restaurants, bars and pubs can deal with 100 people. Factories can reorganize to separate better people while keeping the functionality. Sports and musicians are entertainment so they come dead last in the list of priorities.

100 is just a number so it could be 200 or 500 or 1000, but I think there is no chance that we will see concerts or sport matches with thousands or tens of thousands of people attending them. That would be nuts, we are not doing this massive lockdown to have to do another lockdown another month after we open. People have to learn to deal with the life after covid 19 until we get vaccinated. We are still at a very early stage, so the situation will evolve, but life won’t go back to normal for quite a while.

The problem here is you’re too fixated on the actual sport and events, you’re not seeing the bigger picture. It’s not purely about that, it’s about everything that comes with it, especially jobs etc.
All the ones I just listed in my previous post, that working class people do on a daily basis to get through life, a lot on zero hour contracts, a lot of young people, a lot of migrants.
Not sure how those effected can just “learn to deal with life”. How on earth are they supposed to just ‘learn to deal with it’ for 18 months.
Maybe you just don’t get it because you’ve not been in that position?

 

[Mr Pigeon]

I don't think they would all have stayed open. In fact I think the vast majority would have closed. Almost all of them if a decent compensatory scheme were introduced.

The common sense of the populace would have lead to huge reductions in their businesses and policies such as the 80% furlough payments would have lead to them temporarily shutting down of their own volition.

I suspect the small minority that stayed open would have implemented measures that would hugely stem infection rates (e.g. taking temperatures on arrival, ensuring no-one showing symptoms was permitted, ensuring tables were a few metres apart and that the people diving were part of the same family, increasing cleanliness, enforcing use of hand sanitizer, requesting that no-one 70+ or with underlying conditions entered).

I believe wholeheartedly that we could have achieved almost identical outcomes with zero use of force.

Again I'd be interested to know what level of mortality would cause you to be comfortable with the aforementioned couple of limitations to civil liberties?

The thing is that the day before the pubs were shut we were seeing photos and videos of places absolutely jam packed. We've even got posters here saying that they've lost the freedom to visit their friends. Well, yeah. Because you could spread a highly contagious virus to them.

People were given the opportunity to follow "advice" and some people ignored that advice so much that it needed to become something that was enforced. All the complaints about restrictions being put in place are because not everyone was taking this seriously enough, and it needs everyone otherwise we're all in danger. There's a big chance that we'll see further restrictions such as curfews and regional isolation, outright bans on going outside unless it's for your designated 30 minute slot to buy food with your ration card, giant ED-209 robots patrolling the streets and rabid police dogs patrolling the motorways. Maybe that last part should be the other way around...

If, in six months time, we're still sitting here with heightened restrictions and the robot bees are circling our house to take infrared images of our households to confirm that we're indoors, and Officer Tom is making us dance seductively for a half bottle of fresh water. THEN I'll happily take all the "I told you so" remarks that come my way. Until then, stay safe.

I'm not following you, honest.

 

[sammsky1]

I suspect the small minority that stayed open would have implemented measures that would hugely stem infection rates (e.g. taking temperatures on arrival, ensuring no-one showing symptoms was permitted, ensuring tables were a few metres apart and that the people diving were part of the same family, increasing cleanliness, enforcing use of hand sanitizer, requesting that no-one 70+ or with underlying conditions entered).

Offices, schools, places of worship etc etc have been closed and you're hypothesising about your right to go to the pub?

And all that just to ensure that asymptomatic covid19 carriers can enjoy a pint at an out of home venue, whilst infecting others?

You're really losing the plot.

 

[Sarni]

The problem here is you’re too fixated on the actual sport and events, you’re not seeing the bigger picture. It’s not purely about that, it’s about everything that comes with it, especially jobs etc.
All the ones I just listed in my previous post, that working class people do on a daily basis to get through life, a lot on zero hour contracts, a lot of young people, a lot of migrants.
Not sure how those effected can just “learn to deal with life”. How on earth are they supposed to just ‘learn to deal with it’ for 18 months.
Maybe you just don’t get it because you’ve not been in that position?

Problem is there may not be a choice to make before there is vaccine really. You allow those events to happen, you are potentially exposing yourself for another outbreak which would be even more costly than the one we are going through now. It’s very likely cheaper to offer compensation to those missing out on income rather than allow next outbreak to happen.

 

[Utdstar01]

My sister is in the police force. She got coughed on by this cnut the other day.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...man-saying-super-spreader-coughed-4027535.amp

 

[Sparky_Hughes]

Is either of you in isolation? Surely this is allowed?

According to the exact letter of the law no, not allowed to socialise with people you dont live with or visit other people, I would but she is playing it exactly by the book mate

 

[Pexbo]

My sister is in the police force. She got coughed on by this cnut the other day.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...man-saying-super-spreader-coughed-4027535.amp

Jesus, the state of it. Least he’s in jail now.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

My sister is in the police force. She got coughed on by this cnut the other day.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...man-saying-super-spreader-coughed-4027535.amp

Good on that man! Sticking it to the system! That'll shoe those pigs that they can't break down our Society!

/Sarcasm

Feck that dude, hope your sister and her colleagues are ok.

 

[Carolina Red]

If, in six months time, we're still sitting here with heightened restrictions and the robot bees are circling our house to take infrared images of our households to confirm that we're indoors, and Officer Tom is making us dance seductively for a half bottle of fresh water. THEN I'll happily take all the "I told you so" remarks that come my way. Until then, stay safe.

 

[Sparky_Hughes]

My sister is in the police force. She got coughed on by this cnut the other day.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.de...man-saying-super-spreader-coughed-4027535.amp

Disgusting, we had a case if this in hereford too, the chavvy little mare has been sentenced to 16 weeks.

 

[Walrus]

Thing is, I actually don't disagree with a short and managed lockdown to give the NHS time to get what capacity it can. All I was trying to say is that it's a nonsense to try and pretend that lockdown is easy and isn't much of a sacrifice. It's a massive, huge, gigantic sacrifice that the vast vast majority of people in this country are making very admirably.

I dont think it is the huge, gigantic sacrifice you are making out. It is a few months (most likely) of your life. We are not talking a life sacrifice, or being locked away in a prison for years, we are talking a few weeks/months at home. Some people find that easier than others - I am quite happy in my house for the most part, whereas my extroverted mother is going insane from the lack of constant social contact. Either way though, lets not pretend that it is a major part of your life in the long term, unless you are a terminal cancer patient (or similar) who very literally doesnt have that long left to live - in which case I entirely sympathise and agree that it is a major sacrifice and hardship.

I don't think they would all have stayed open. In fact I think the vast majority would have closed. Almost all of them if a decent compensatory scheme were introduced.

Where do you honestly expect this sort of money to come from? The world is already going to be entering a major economic crisis as a result of this pandemic, you are seriously suggesting that the government can somehow fund the business operations of the country for weeks/months? Even if they could, it would simply mean taking vast sums of money out of other parts of the country that would then suffer. You have to focus first and foremost on the essential services, which is roughly what has happened.

 

[sammsky1]

 

[Ludens the Red]

Problem is there may not be a choice to make before there is vaccine really. You allow those events to happen, you are potentially exposing yourself for another outbreak which would be even more costly than the one we are going through now. It’s very likely cheaper to offer compensation to those missing out on income rather than allow next outbreak to happen.

I think there is going to have to be a choice made. Awaiting a vaccine isn’t realistic. Difficult decisions are going to have to be made and I would not want to be the one to make them. But it’s clear that things are going to have to be put in place where those most susceptible to the virus are kept away from the core of society for a long time (until vaccine) like really, really strict measures. People will have to be held accountable for breaking such measures too.
I didn’t even mention schools and universities earlier, but these are places where people will gather in excess of the 100’s, whether that be in a canteen, playtime, playgrounds, assembly.
Offering money to all of these people for 18 months is also not realistic long term financially.
Ultimately the healthy majority in this country are going to have to go back out there and get infected. And that will have to happen within the next eighteen months, probably a lot sooner. It’s just all very complicated and there is no quick, easy fix with a fairytale ending.

 

[sammsky1]

 

[Grinner]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/07/the-road-to-recovery-for-covid-19-patients

Long term effects sound pretty grim.

“They get better in time but it may take a year and needs an army of physiotherapy, speech and language, psychology and nursing staff to facilitate this,” said Hepburn. “The few weeks on a ventilator are a small footnote in the whole process.”

 

[giggs-beckham]

Fears about the erosion of freedoms and civil liberties are generally very legitimate. It's therefore a shame that those who bring up these fears are so often unbearably tiresome.

It's one thing to point out that a lot of the restrictions we are currently experiencing would in normal times be deemed massively excessive and that we should be wary of the potential for them to be extended past the point where they are necessary.

It's another to woefully decry the loss of those liberties in the middle of the pandemic, pointing to the sort of restrictions that anyone with even an ounce of common sense or perspective would expect to be curtailed as a basic public health measure. It's such an unbelievably callow argument to make at a point when there are so many more pressing issues at stake.

Very well said. I dont care in the short term about privacy if it means we can track/trace and limit the spread of this virus.

First post in nearly 10 years

 

[Penna]

Very well said. I dont care in the short term about privacy if it means we can track/trace and limit the spread of this virus.

First post in nearly 10 years

Hello, good to meet you. I agree with you.

 

[Revan]

The problem here is you’re too fixated on the actual sport and events, you’re not seeing the bigger picture. It’s not purely about that, it’s about everything that comes with it, especially jobs etc.
All the ones I just listed in my previous post, that working class people do on a daily basis to get through life, a lot on zero hour contracts, a lot of young people, a lot of migrants.
Not sure how those effected can just “learn to deal with life”. How on earth are they supposed to just ‘learn to deal with it’ for 18 months.
Maybe you just don’t get it because you’ve not been in that position?

And as I said, those jobs can be done with some relaxation of constraints. Restaurants can open, as can bars. Pubs, probably will have to suffer.

Factories will open IMO within a month or two. They would probably need some reorganization to allow more space for people, but they have to open.

Sports and concerts on the other hand, no way. Too much risk for some entertainment. Not many people lose the jobs (yes, some do, but that is inevitable).

I think that this is an equivalent of a World War. People will suffer, some really hard, some will die, the economy will suffer and there will be bad consequences directly related from that. But the alternative is tens of millions of deaths (just read University College study), and that is even worse, much worse.

I do not see how we can go back to life as usual without a vaccine. We saw that one case resulted in tens of thousands of cases within 2 months. Even after this stage of mitigation, there are going to be thousands of infected people in most countries. Go back to life as usual, and within 2-3 weeks we are back at the same position we are now. Which brings the question, why do this lockdown in the first place, if it just postpones stuff for a month? I believe that a situation like in Korea, where many things are banned and reduced, the economy gets a hit, but still the society and economy is functional is the best we can hope for before we get the vaccine. And even for that, we have to fight hard.

 

[Godfather]

Very well said. I dont care in the short term about privacy if it means we can track/trace and limit the spread of this virus.

First post in nearly 10 years

That's what people said during the economical crisis after world war one in Austria. The Austrian cancellor of the time was given the right to rule via regulations. People thought it would only be temporarily. It was the start of the Austrian fascism under Dollfuß.

Not comparing this whole situation with the time back then. At all. Measures taken are necessary. But not caring about your basic rights surely isn't the right thing to do now. We need to be very careful with what our governments are doing and how they are doing it. Just look at Hungary. fecking Orban used Corona to pretty much shut off the parliament.

 

[Skills]

Ultimately the healthy majority in this country are going to have to go back out there and get infected. And that will have to happen within the next eighteen months, probably a lot sooner. It’s just all very complicated and there is no quick, easy fix with a fairytale ending.

No they don't. The vast majority of people, do not need to get infected. You can manage the spread within the community by effectively testing, tracing & isolating.

Schools, universities & other places can also manage by systematically testing and identifying outbreaks in places like those. You can reduce their likelihood by changing timetables, shift patterns & still keep society functioning. Even pubs etc can open as long as you limit the crowds inside of them.

This whole thing about having 36m people infected over 18 months (i.e. 60%) relies on a dreadful assumption that you will manage to split it evenly over 18 months. That's the only way we can manage the load on the healthcare system & that doesn't work.

 

[redshaw]

What’s happening in France? Worldometers reporting 11,000 new and 1400 deaths. That can’t be right....

France now report deaths outside hospitals since April 2nd. Some are backdated but wasn't expecting to see more huge numbers continue like today. Worldmeters just adds them all up but note other countries haven't released them yet.

Hospital
78167 cases +3777
30027 hospitalized +305
7131 intensive care +59
7091 dead +607

Care homes
30902 cases +7282
3237 dead +820

Perhaps other countries will be similar but a UK report suggests maybe care home deaths are 7% of the hospital total as most are said to arrive in hospital anyway but France's care homes deaths are about 45% of the hospital deaths.

Italy is thought to be quite high outside hospitals but there's a huge backlog, they're not withholding or under reporting.

 

[Sarni]

I think there is going to have to be a choice made. Awaiting a vaccine isn’t realistic. Difficult decisions are going to have to be made and I would not want to be the one to make them. But it’s clear that things are going to have to be put in place where those most susceptible to the virus are kept away from the core of society for a long time (until vaccine) like really, really strict measures. People will have to be held accountable for breaking such measures too.
I didn’t even mention schools and universities earlier, but these are places where people will gather in excess of the 100’s, whether that be in a canteen, playtime, playgrounds, assembly.
Offering money to all of these people for 18 months is also not realistic long term financially.
Ultimately the healthy majority in this country are going to have to go back out there and get infected. And that will have to happen within the next eighteen months, probably a lot sooner. It’s just all very complicated and there is no quick, easy fix with a fairytale ending.

It’s a huge challenge and honestly I don’t see how we get out of this. We will, I’m sure, but I just cannot fathom how and when. Western Europe have resources to deal with this through tracing, distancing, improving healthcare and try to soften economic blow through supporting people and businesses. I don’t have nearly as much hope for my country as our government will be focused on keeping their offices and buying votes for elections, they won’t support businesses as that will go against their agenda and we don’t really have resources to deal with the whole situation because they’ve given it all away six months ago when they were buying votes for parliament elections.

 

[Tincanalley]

With big Donald leading from the front.

Why.
Do you believe that we should all just take it on the chin.
Especially the families and loved ones of the many ten's of thousands of those who have had their lives cut short by the virus.

Not to mention the massive economic damage to hundreds of countries and their citizens.

Your point is about Government incompetence, is it? Thank goodness for wise and prudent administration?

 

[Scrumpet]

We should be using this time to talk about how awful Dominic Raab is in case he gets sick and we're no longer allowed to.

 

[Eboue]

We should be using this time to talk about how awful Dominic Raab is in case he gets sick and we're no longer allowed to.

 

[Dancfc]

We let the virus into our countries.

We allowed our people to travel for their spring/March breaks.

We didn't screen them when they came home.

Now look at us.

Not convinced screening would have even been that effective, Milan Malpensa did screenings from early February and it turned out to be about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

 

[Revan]

No they don't. The vast majority of people, do not need to get infected. You can manage the spread within the community by effectively testing, tracing & isolating.

Schools, universities & other places can also manage by systematically testing and identifying outbreaks in places like those. You can reduce their likelihood by changing timetables, shift patterns & still keep society functioning. Even pubs etc can open as long as you limit the crowds inside of them.

This whole thing about having 36m people infected over 18 months (i.e. 60%) relies on a dreadful assumption that you will manage to split it evenly over 18 months. That's the only way we can manage the load on the healthcare system & that doesn't work.

Even that assumes that UK will be able to handle 2 million infected people at the same time. They can't.

We saw Italy's system collapsing with less than 100k infected people. We are seeing what is happening in New York with less than 100k infected people. It is hard to see a country the size of UK being able to deal with 2m infected people at all time, for 18 months. Heck, doctors and nurses will be already dead if they will have to work in a very infected environment, in double shifts for 18 months. It was always, a totally nonsense plan that had no basis in reality.

And as you said, fof that to happen, you need a uniform distribution. Which would be pretty much impossible to achieve. What is going to be instead is something that looks like a Gaussian, when 10m+ people will get infected in the same time, and hundreds of thousands if not more are gonna die within a few weeks.

Which begs the question, if countries have to do that after the lockdown, why bother with a lockdown in the first place? We actually saw University College's study that showed that a lockdown followed by going back to life as normal has the same number of infections and fatalities as no lockdown at all. Which is why the removal of constraints is going to be gradual, and life as usual will continue only in 2022 if we are lucky to have a highly effective vaccine. Until then, hopefully a South Korea scenario, which while is not ideal, it is pretty acceptable.

 

[giggs-beckham]

Hello, good to meet you. I agree with you.

Thank you. I've been on this forum the whole time since I quit posting since then. I must say u guys are awesome I dont go anywhere else for facts as it's all posted here and fact checked, by doctors and various experts and crazy guys who are so committed. My gf reads just Facebook.
I look at China etc and am jealous of their handling as a super power, they test, trace and send u a message on an app. I think we should be doing similar to that, some things are more important than a bit of temporary civil privacy.

 

[barros]

France now report deaths outside hospitals since April 2nd. Some are backdated but wasn't expecting to see more huge numbers continue like today. Worldmeters just adds them all up but note other countries haven't released them yet.

Hospital
78167 cases +3777
30027 hospitalized +305
7131 intensive care +59
7091 dead +607

Care homes
30902 cases +7282
3237 dead +820

Perhaps other countries will be similar but a UK report suggests maybe care home deaths are 7% of the hospital total as most are said to arrive in hospital anyway but France's care homes deaths are about 45% of the hospital deaths.

Italy is thought to be quite high outside hospitals but there's a huge backlog, they're not withholding or under reporting.

I didn’t expect France would have such high numbers when was I think the first nation to close schools and other places....maybe I’m wrong

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Very well said. I dont care in the short term about privacy if it means we can track/trace and limit the spread of this virus.

First post in nearly 10 years

Nice to hear from you.

See you again in 2030?

(And I'm not that bothered about breaches of my civil liberties. Some people are desperate to politicise anything, including the impact of a pandemic.

When I'm subject to a mind experiment a la Clockwork Orange, I'll be bothered. When I'm asked to stay at home for 1, 3 or 6 months to save my life and collectively save thousands of other lives (or more), I've got no issue with it.)

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Not convinced screening would have even been that effective, Milan Malpensa did screenings from early February and it turned out to be about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

Fair point. We could have forced them to self-isolate, though.

 

[Ayush_reddevil]

Crazy that anyone from the UK actually believes that people and businesses would have understood the impact themselves without it being enforced by the government. Almost like the two weeks before that never happened

 

[Ludens the Red]

No they don't. The vast majority of people, do not need to get infected. You can manage the spread within the community by effectively testing, tracing & isolating.

Schools, universities & other places can also manage by systematically testing and identifying outbreaks in places like those. You can reduce their likelihood by changing timetables, shift patterns & still keep society functioning. Even pubs etc can open as long as you limit the crowds inside of them.

This whole thing about having 36m people infected over 18 months (i.e. 60%) relies on a dreadful assumption that you will manage to split it evenly over 18 months. That's the only way we can manage the load on the healthcare system & that doesn't work.

Taken what I said out of context. Which can happen if you only quote part of a post.
Earlier in that post I made it clear strict measures will need to be put and kept in place for those at higher risk to this. But there is clearly (people on here for some reason seem to not want to acknowledge this) a large portion of society that this will not effect or effect very little. These are the people I’m saying will need to get out there. And they’re going to have to stay away from the risk groups at all costs.

It’d be a difficult process to implement but I don’t see an alternative and it’s being done now anyway.
The data is there, the information is there and it would be weird and feel slightly big brotherish but I don’t see an alternative. Well I do but they’re not realistic nor sustainable.
@Revan

 

[Skills]

Even that assumes that UK will be able to handle 2 million infected people at the same time. They can't.

We saw Italy's system collapsing with less than 100k infected people. We are seeing what is happening in New York with less than 100k infected people. It is hard to see a country the size of UK being able to deal with 2m infected people at all time, for 18 months. Heck, doctors and nurses will be already dead if they will have to work in a very infected environment, in double shifts for 18 months. It was always, a totally nonsense plan that had no basis in reality.

And as you said, fof that to happen, you need a uniform distribution. Which would be pretty much impossible to achieve. What is going to be instead is something that looks like a Gaussian, when 10m+ people will get infected in the same time, and hundreds of thousands if not more are gonna die within a few weeks.

Which begs the question, if countries have to do that after the lockdown, why bother with a lockdown in the first place? We actually saw University College's study that showed that a lockdown followed by going back to life as normal has the same number of infections and fatalities as no lockdown at all. Which is why the removal of constraints is going to be gradual, and life as usual will continue only in 2022 if we are lucky to have a highly effective vaccine. Until then, hopefully a South Korea scenario, which while is not ideal, it is pretty acceptable.

Yes exactly. The lockdown gives us a chance to go back to square 1 and any competent govt now will be working on increasing their testing capacity & planning for life after lock down. Life isn't going back to normal anytime soon, but its obvious having people locked in for months on end will cause society to collapse anyway. So we need a compromise & the SK model is the best one on the table.

 

[Tincanalley]

Just block them. There are too many ignorant, uneducated and lazy people in this thread. The mods have fixed a lot but some are still being given airtime. They're just not worth it.

Thank you

 

[giggs-beckham]

Nice to hear from you.

See you again in 2030?

I laughed at that one. U could be right I keep reading, say a random thread and think one opinion and its not long till someone says the same thing so i dont bother. This thread though is a bit more important to me than say if I think ole is good enough or whatever.
I think this forum has never been so valuable as it is right now.

 

[finneh]

So a majority of pubs, clubs, restaurants, cinemas, malls, theatres etc etc would close, with the hordes of people who would naturally assume this soft touch approach by the government implies the virus really is “just a bad flu” (remember that bullshit?) all crammed into the minority that remain open. What could possibly go wrong? “Identical outcomes” my hole.

Your hypothetical scenario is pointless. We’re discussing a real scenario. With a real virus. No need for any straw men. For what it’s worth, I imagine what we’re seeing in parts of France or Spain right now is about as bad as it will get.

If the government articulated a non-authoritarian approach and spoke candidly about death rates under various social responses, along with a pleading for extreme social distancing, hugely reduced social gatherings etc and the amount of peoples lives that this approach would save... I don't agree that people would merely carry on regardless. The "bad flu" rhetoric was back when Boris was also shaking hands with everyone he met, several days before the lockdown this nonsense was already purged from all but the most idiotic of minds. Obviously a small minority would, but these are the same minorities that will be flouting the current rules just in a more surreptitious manner. At least if they're out in the open we can model on the reality than x% won't follow the guidelines (whether enforced or strongly requested).

This is before even talking about the deaths caused by the authoritarian measures. How many children remain in at risk households because their court hearings have been delayed? How many criminals will offend again because their hearings have been pushed back? How many spouses are at risk due to spousal abuse in confined spaces? How many years of lives will be cut short by the poverty such a lockdown will cause? How many elderly people will waste the last several weeks of their lives not seeing loved ones?

There are so many unknown factors (for any person or body to analyse right now) so for people to merely accept the implementation of authoritarian measures simply because government is doing what governments always do and use a scary situation as a power grab terrifies me. We've seen it too many times before. Using people's immigration fears to implement inhumane measures for the greater good. Using people's fears of terrorism to hold people in a cell for longer than should be deemed equitable. Using people's fears of crime to aggressively increase surveillance.

Don't get me wrong I don't have all the answers and am aware the government don't either. Likewise I'm not a conspiracy theorist who thinks the government were rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of implementing the measures to increase their powers; I just think it's very rare for a government to relinquish powers once they have them. I'm also aware that government are politically motivated so if given the choice of 100000 years of life being taken from a terrifying invisible illness that can be directly compared to our European neighbours next year and 150000 years over a 60 year period that can't be so simply compared /calculated or held accountable they'd inevitably opt for the latter.

Overall I think there's far too many motivating factors that would (and does) attract government to strict measures over less authoritarian ones, even if they could be equally as effective. I think the quick change of UK tact a couple of weeks ago suggests this.

 

[Brwned]

I don't think they would all have stayed open. In fact I think the vast majority would have closed. Almost all of them if a decent compensatory scheme were introduced.

The common sense of the populace would have lead to huge reductions in their businesses and policies such as the 80% furlough payments would have lead to them temporarily shutting down of their own volition.

I suspect the small minority that stayed open would have implemented measures that would hugely stem infection rates (e.g. taking temperatures on arrival, ensuring no-one showing symptoms was permitted, ensuring tables were a few metres apart and that the people diving were part of the same family, increasing cleanliness, enforcing use of hand sanitizer, requesting that no-one 70+ or with underlying conditions entered).

I believe wholeheartedly that we could have achieved almost identical outcomes with zero use of force.

Again I'd be interested to know what level of mortality would cause you to be comfortable with the aforementioned couple of limitations to civil liberties?

What proportion of businesses did voluntarily close after a decent compensatory scheme was introduced?

 

[barros]

Thank you. I've been on this forum the whole time since I quit posting since then. I must say u guys are awesome I dont go anywhere else for facts as it's all posted here and fact checked, by doctors and various experts and crazy guys who are so committed. My gf reads just Facebook.
I look at China etc and am jealous of their handling as a super power, they test, trace and send u a message on an app. I think we should be doing similar to that, some things are more important than a bit of temporary civil privacy.

Don’t believe what comes from China, independent news reported the arrival of 5000 urns just for one funeral home -they have 8 on that city, the numbers of infected and dead people must be huge. They lied to the world, they didn’t stop the spreading of the virus to other countries and WHO leaders must get a supplement check from china, the same ones who said US banning planes coming from China was wrong.
yes im bored to death and my wife gave me a list of things to do around the house I kept postponing for years ...damn I really hate the chinese government and WHO

 

[Revan]

Taken what I said out of context. Which can happen if you only quote part of a post.
Earlier in that post I made it clear strict measures will need to be put and kept in place for those at higher risk to this. But there is clearly (people on here for some reason seem to not want to acknowledge this) a large portion of society that this will not effect or effect very little. These are the people I’m saying will need to get out there. And they’re going to have to stay away from the risk groups at all costs.

It’d be a difficult process to implement but I don’t see an alternative and it’s being done now anyway.
The data is there, the information is there and it would be weird and feel slightly big brotherish but I don’t see an alternative. Well I do but they’re not realistic nor sustainable.
@Revan

But people live with each other. They have parents, at times in the same home.

Also, people in their fifties who might be considered low-risk category could overwhelm the system on their own, if all of them get the disease. The risk is less for those under 40, but if most/all of the gets sick, it is gonna be bad, a total collapse.

There is no way to both achieve herd immunity and to keep the number of deaths small. No way. Which is why I said that Boris' plan was nuts back then, backed by experts or not. And the plan changed two days later, because you know, it was nuts.

I think we can have both a functional society and economy, and limit the number of deaths. This is not a thought experiment, South Korea has already demonstrated that you can do so, without even having a lockdown, without closing the factories, without even closing restaurants. So yes, I am in favor for a gradual relaxation of constraints when the number of infections get low (hopefully by the end of the month). But relaxing some constraints to have a working economy does not mean going back to before, and having thousands of people in sporting events, or concerts, or having hundreds of people in pubs are steps too far. Do that, and you will be forced to do another lockdown just 2 weeks later.