• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

@elltrev asking the elderly above 70 to isolate will come in soon, and probably most are doing this already with the government indicating it will come in soon. This is important, as if you can control infection among the elderly you have taken care of most fatal incidents of the virus (someone must have the %) and eased the burden on the NHS. No doubt shutting schools and even workplaces haven't been taken off the table though.

It isn't that the government's response is perfect - far from it - it is that the alternative is probably not much more effective whilst being harmful to the economy and the nation functioning.

The other thing is, the dispersal of cases is spread across the UK. Italy and China had a high concentration in one area. We have a relatively wide spread without a big concentration - as things are. If one city say had a high concentration, I am sure we would take more dramatic measures and isolate it.
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
@elltrev asking the elderly above 70 to isolate will come in soon, and probably most are doing this already with the government indicating it will come in soon. This is important, as if you can control infection among the elderly you have taken care of most fatal incidents of the virus (someone must have the %) and eased the burden on the NHS. No doubt shutting schools and even workplaces haven't been taken off the table though.

It isn't that the government's response is perfect - far from it - it is that the alternative is probably not much more effective whilst being harmful to the economy and the nation functioning.

The other thing is, the dispersal of cases is spread across the UK. Italy and China had a high concentration in one area. We have a relatively wide spread without a big concentration - as things are. If one city say had a high concentration, I am sure we would take more dramatic measures.
Click to expand...

Yeah the self-isolation of the elderly/vulnerable seems the most sensible single policy to me. I'm surprised they aren't enacting that right now. If they were, I think I could totally understand the overall policy. Why delay it? Maybe just allowing people to get used to the idea before enacting it?

Good point about the regional spread.
 
SpurMeUp said:
@elltrev asking the elderly above 70 to isolate will come in soon, and probably most are doing this already with the government indicating it will come in soon. This is important, as if you can control infection among the elderly you have taken care of most fatal incidents of the virus (someone must have the %) and eased the burden on the NHS. No doubt shutting schools and even workplaces haven't been taken off the table though.

It isn't that the government's response is perfect - far from it - it is that the alternative is probably not much more effective whilst being harmful to the economy and the nation functioning.

The other thing is, the dispersal of cases is spread across the UK. Italy and China had a high concentration in one area. We have a relatively wide spread without a big concentration - as things are. If one city say had a high concentration, I am sure we would take more dramatic measures and isolate it.
Click to expand...

Same is true of Spain.
 
elltrev said:
Yeah the self-isolation of the elderly/vulnerable seems the most sensible single policy to me. I'm surprised they aren't enacting that right now. If they were, I think I could totally understand the overall policy. Why delay it? Maybe just allowing people to get used to the idea before enacting it?

Good point about the regional spread.
Click to expand...

It is effectively enacted. Not just the elderly, most people with underlying health conditions are isolating themselves now. Announcing it is more formality, spin, appearance.
 
elltrev said:
Yeah the self-isolation of the elderly/vulnerable seems the most sensible single policy to me. I'm surprised they aren't enacting that right now. If they were, I think I could totally understand the overall policy. Why delay it? Maybe just allowing people to get used to the idea before enacting it?

Good point about the regional spread.
Click to expand...
They'll do that once the NHS is getting near its capacity to treat them. Then, as people either die or recover, they'll relax it a bit and get some more in.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
A vaccine does more than just replicate the disease though, it also triggers sufficient antibodies to fight the disease without actually having the full-blown disease itself.
Take the common cold. That’s a viral infection. Albeit it relatively benign but a virus nonetheless. There’s no vaccine. Simply catching the common cold does not automatically bring immunity against it. I don’t think it even builds any level of immunity? You can catch it over and over. So is this virus different in that just catching it once builds the herd immunity that otherwise comes with a vaccination programme? Is it known or is it fingers crossed it might work?
Click to expand...
Apparently testing of an old (I believe for the original SARS virus) vaccine has shown good results, albeit in a petri dish. If so, then immunity is possible. Contracting COVID-19 and being immunised will do the same thing in the body - cause our bodies to build the antibodies to destroy it.

Both methods have their advantages. Vaccines usually don't contain a 'live' form of the virus, so they're very safe. The disadvantage is that it might be years before we can get the required proportion of the country immunised. Allowing people to catch and recover from the virus is a very quick way to build the same immunity.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
A vaccine does more than just replicate the disease though, it also triggers sufficient antibodies to fight the disease without actually having the full-blown disease itself.
Take the common cold. That’s a viral infection. Albeit it relatively benign but a virus nonetheless. There’s no vaccine. Simply catching the common cold does not automatically bring immunity against it. I don’t think it even builds any level of immunity? You can catch it over and over. So is this virus different in that just catching it once builds the herd immunity that otherwise comes with a vaccination programme? Is it known or is it fingers crossed it might work?
Click to expand...

My (limited) understanding is there are various 'cold' viruses and once you catch one type, you build up an immunity to it and are very unlikely to catch the same one again. I think there are 150-200 cold viruses out there
 
scaramanga said:
They'll do that once the NHS is getting near its capacity to treat them. Then, as people either die or recover, they'll relax it a bit and get some more in.
Click to expand...

But why not do it sooner? Why effectively sacrifice some of those vulnerable people by delaying their isolation? Can we not reach herd immunity via the non-vulnerable population alone, and then re-introduce the vulnerable into society at that point?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
elltrev said:
But why not do it sooner? Why effectively sacrifice some of those vulnerable people by delaying their isolation? Can we not reach herd immunity via the non-vulnerable population alone, and then re-introduce the vulnerable into society at that point?
Click to expand...
When we're talking about the really old and ill, I think there's a risk to the isolation in itself. We need to try and balance all the objectives of the nation - focusing on just the virus itself (like any other single issue) will not be enough.
 
scaramanga said:
When we're talking about the really old and ill, I think there's a risk to the isolation in itself. We need to try and balance all the objectives of the nation - focusing on just the virus itself (like any other single issue) will not be enough.
Click to expand...

Yeah I guess so, especially those who live alone and/or have caring needs. I guess it should be mostly up to the vulnerable individuals themselves, whether they'd prefer to risk contracting the virus or risk the effects of isolation (given that they're less likely to affect the economy, and so are arguably less of a concern for society as a whole - at the risk of sounding harsh!)
 
I think the governments advisors misjudged the working populations appetite to contract a deadly disease.

Do we want it? No.
When do we want it. Erm, we don’t want it, not ever.

They might as well ask us to develop herd immunity to Ebola.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back