Well, the good news is that the flu is over

[papasmurf]

But I am not wearing a mask.

So you are not going to use public transport?

[Borchester]

"Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius

Sounds reasonable. I bloody well loathe shaving but I don't mind sacrificing my looks for the greater good.

But I am not wearing a mask. And I do enjoy sitting at bus stops coughing and sneezing and farting and taking non essential trips to my allotment.

Actually, shaving off eyebrows and then painting a second set higher up on the forehead was the fashion at the courts of medieval Japan, so if it leads to lots of Japanese dollies giggling along the High Street then I am all for it.

Good idea Bebe, you are on.

[BeElBeeBub]

So not answering the question: what is the minimum level.of measures you would be prepared to take to get back to "normal"?

We should be back to normal now. People should be advised of the risks and be allowed to either take those risks or their own precautions.

Doesn't work like that though.

If we went back to pubs, festivals, no distancing at all, the levels will ramp up again and we'll be back to square 1

we *might* be able to stick at the current level (no pubs, restaurants, spaced out shops etc) because this seems to put R around 1.

a dozen or so US states that have opened back up are seeing their CV levels rising, hospitals are starting to fill again etc.

It's unlikely that we will e able to go back to normal (absent a vaccine or solid treatment).

Even if " People are advised of the risks and allowed to either take those risks or their own precautions.", the economy and normal life won't resume because a subset of people will "take their own precautions" and lockdown.

So businesses will still struggle.

There is no choice between lock down and the economy.  If we didn't lock down our economy would be in an even worse place than it is now.

[papasmurf]

We should be back to normal now. People should be advised of the risks and be allowed to either take those risks or their own precautions.

The problem is far too many people are too thick, intransigent to realise them taking a risk poses a risk to others.

[Barry]

So not answering the question: what is the minimum level.of measures you would be prepared to take to get back to "normal"?

We should be back to normal now. People should be advised of the risks and be allowed to either take those risks or their own precautions.

[papasmurf]

Covid-19 is NOT over looks like the spike is starting.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-53100321

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53091149

[BeElBeeBub]

Say you stop dreaming up ridiculous scenarios and concentrate on the mortality of this virus. Which is so far 0.06% of the population.6 in 10,000

at most 10% of the population have had CV so far. This is the consistent finding.

That's 6,000,000 people.

And 60,000 people have died.

That's 100 in 10,000 or 1%.

The figure of 6 in 10,000 is only so low because the restrictions stopped it infecting the entire population.

You're arguing that hitting another car a 100mph only results in minor damage ignoring the fact we slammed the brakes on so we only hit at 15mph.

Now stop fretting and keep your hair eyebrows on.

So not answering the question: what is the minimum level.of measures you would be prepared to take to get back to "normal"?

[Barry]

Thought experiment for the mask doubters

Say it was proven beyond doubt tomorrow what CV infection could be prevented by 95% of the population shaving off their eyebrows.

The evidence is unimpeachable.  The protection total.

If we all shaved off our eyebrows we could go back to work, open pubs, hold festivals, have BBQs, shop, go on holiday etc etc

Life would resume as before, but without eyebrows

Would you comply?  Or are you eyebrows more important than bearing CV19?

Say you stop dreaming up ridiculous scenarios and concentrate on the mortality of this virus. Which is so far 0.06% of the population.
6 in 10,000. Now stop fretting and keep your hair eyebrows on.

[BeElBeeBub]

Thought experiment for the mask doubters

Say it was proven beyond doubt tomorrow what CV infection could be prevented by 95% of the population shaving off their eyebrows.

The evidence is unimpeachable.  The protection total.

If we all shaved off our eyebrows we could go back to work, open pubs, hold festivals, have BBQs, shop, go on holiday etc etc

Life would resume as before, but without eyebrows

Would you comply?  Or are you eyebrows more important than bearing CV19?

[Borchester]

Sadiq Khan is mayor of London and a sad bugger at best. In moments of stress the first thing he does is to blame the previous mayor who was Boris Johnson. Then he blames the government which is currently run by Boris Johnson. Then he starts on Donald Trump. And then the tea lady...

Finally when there is no one else to blame and the matter at hand has more or less sorted itself out, Saddo takes action. His latest wheeze is that all bus passengers must wear masks. So I put mine on, got on the bus, sat down and took it off. Whereupon the bus grass squealed that I was suppose to be wearing it. Whence I replied eat shit fuckwit (I can be quite droll when the need arises), bollocks to the Chinese flu, I can't sodding well breath. And an old girl a couple of seats agreed with me.

So there you are. Forget the Peking Pox. The real killer is going to be asphyxiation from these bloody silly masks the numbnuts in the NHS are so keen on.

And after Covid, only 99.85% of us will remain.

[Benson]

Sadiq Khan is mayor of London and a sad bugger at best. In moments of stress the first thing he does is to blame the previous mayor who was Boris Johnson. Then he blames the government which is currently run by Boris Johnson. Then he starts on Donald Trump. And then the tea lady...

Finally when there is no one else to blame and the matter at hand has more or less sorted itself out, Saddo takes action. His latest wheeze is that all bus passengers must wear masks. So I put mine on, got on the bus, sat down and took it off. Whereupon the bus grass squealed that I was suppose to be wearing it. Whence I replied eat shit fuckwit (I can be quite droll when the need arises), bollocks to the Chinese flu, I can't sodding well breath. And an old girl a couple of seats agreed with me.

So there you are. Forget the Peking Pox. The real killer is going to be asphyxiation from these bloody silly masks the numbnuts in the NHS are so keen on.

And after Covid, only 99.85% of us will remain.

[BeElBeeBub]

New Zealand's population is 4.7 million, with a density of 46 people per square mile. Compare that to the UK which has a population of almost 70 million and a density of 430 people per square mile. If you created a graph with those figures and traced it backwards you would get to a country with a population of one, if that person had the virus for a week and then recovered, their lockdown would be a week. So the argument that I believe your alluding to, that New Zealand got it right and we didn't does't hold water.

Their problem was a totally different problem to ours.

I don't think you can argue that NZ didn't get it right.

It's fair enough to say that their conditions are different, primarily population density - although their population is still concentrated in Auckland and Wellington.  Auckland has a population density not far short of London.

The length of lockdown is dependent only on the number of cases you have when you start, where lockdown puts your R value and what case numbers you are happy unlocking at.  The size of the population is irrelevant to that calculation.

Japan has controlled CV much better than the UK despite a higher population density and worse demographics (older population).

They seem to be an example of a country that started early (first measures were in Jan, ramped up to a moderate set of restrictions (albeit probably very well adhered to) by early march and are now continuing at that moderate level.  They didn't to "hammer" the outbreak with a stringent lockdown because they went straight to the long term measures. 

NZ hammered it hard at the start and are now trying to get by with a much lower set of long term restrictions.  The problem for them is they will probably have to up these from time to time as outbreaks occur.

The open question is which is economically and socially better?  A constant moderate level of restrictions or an cycle of very low conditions with occasional "mini lockdowns" to control spikes?

[Barry]

It would appear Covid 19 is not over:-

More at link:-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53062885

Coronavirus: factory staff isolate after outbreak
16 June 2020

About a quarter of the workforce at a chicken processing plant are self-isolating following an outbreak of Covid-19, according to unions.

Representatives from 2 Sisters in Llangefni, Anglesey, say there are 13 confirmed cases among staff, with 110 people self-isolating.

The company has not confirmed the number of cases.

But bosses said the firm was "working to provide the safest possible working environment".

In a statement the company said this was the "key priority".

It does seem to be a rather poultry outbreak.

[papasmurf]

It would appear Covid 19 is not over:-

More at link:-

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-53062885

Coronavirus: factory staff isolate after outbreak
16 June 2020

About a quarter of the workforce at a chicken processing plant are self-isolating following an outbreak of Covid-19, according to unions.

Representatives from 2 Sisters in Llangefni, Anglesey, say there are 13 confirmed cases among staff, with 110 people self-isolating.

The company has not confirmed the number of cases.

But bosses said the firm was "working to provide the safest possible working environment".

In a statement the company said this was the "key priority".

[Borg Refinery]

Some may have been immune before it came along and antibodies won't be detected even if exposed.
Why didn't kids get it and show symptoms? Having been exposed, will kids show antibodies?

Last I heard most actual scientists who are qualified in the field are saying it's highly unlikely that anybody was immune before this virus jumped to humans - it's an entirely new virus and therefore humans by definition don't have any inbuilt immunity.

This is also consistent with the rate the virus was spreading in all countries before drastic measures were put in place - if a significant number of people already had immunity it would not have been spreading so quickly.

Regarding children - this is the subject of lots of studies which have given conflicting results.  There are pretty plausible theories about the abundance of the ACE-2 receptor in the respiratory system of children as to why they would be less likely to catch it, and less likely to be seriously impacted.

My admittedly limited understanding is that if you don't show the relevant antibodies, you are very unlikely to be immune to the symptoms of such a virus unless you have some kind of genetic or physical abnormality that means the virus can't work in your body (probably a one in a million or billion thing) - that's how the human body works.  It's the presence of such antibodies that indicates that your body has already learned how to fight off this or a very similar virus.

Fundamentally there are many many studies going on all across the world, and up to now, no-one who knows what they are talking about seriously thinks that more than 10% at most of people in the general population have already had thisl.

Good thoughts (your typo might cause others some confusion though).

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766522

That makes things a lot more complex as you can see... having an abundance might actually be better for fighting the virus, which isn't the case in young kids.