Furlough the players to avoid a cashflow crisis

[IndoMike]

We do not know the answer to that.

Alistair
Experts say that 50% of the population would need to be infected for herd immunity to be effective. That would mean around 30 million would need to be affected in the UK. Are you seriously suggesting that herd immunity was/is a viable proposition?

 

[geoffwp]

I agree that the Govt's response has been poorly co-ordinated and too ponderous.
In order for people to get back to work the anti-body tests are vital, but the Govt has failed miserably to procure them.
The herd immunity policy also seems to have proven to be the wrong measure. I am inferring that you think the lockdown was not necessary? Am I right in inferring that?

Well it's preventing Malc from making money and anything that does that Must be questionable.

 

[Alistair20000]

Alistair
Experts say that 50% of the population would need to be infected for herd immunity to be effective. That would mean around 30 million would need to be affected in the UK. Are you seriously suggesting that herd immunity was/is a viable proposition?

I am suggesting nothing. Some medical experts suggest it is the most appropriate response. Sweden has been trying it. Others would have an 18 month lockdown and all shades of opinion in between.

Remember that this lockdown is a mechanism to flatten the spread of this disease rather than to eliminate it.

 

[IndoMike]

No, but I think it could be more intelligently applied. Only the stupid enter without have some idea of how to exit. Unfortunately, this is where we seem to be.

Considering the characters we have leading us, it would be no surprise if there was no exit strategy in place. However, we don't know that for sure.
So you are saying you agree with implementing a lockdown but you would like to know the exit strategy, right?
The problem is that formulating an exit strategy depends to some extent on the data regarding how many people (and who) have developed immunity through anti-bodies, but we haven't got a grip on the testing yet.

 

[IndoMike]

I am suggesting nothing. Some medical experts suggest it is the most appropriate response. Sweden has been trying it. Others would have an 18 month lockdown and all shades of opinion in between.

Remember that this lockdown is a mechanism to flatten the spread of this disease rather than to eliminate it.

Regarding your last sentence : yes. Much more sensible than having 30 million people infected, right?
You said we do not know the answer yet, but you have already answered : you have to flatten the curve

 

[IndoMike]

Well it's preventing Malc from making money and anything that does that Must be questionable.

I thought Malcs seemed a bit more miserable than usual .
I'm trying to tie him down to the fact that he'd prefer no lockdown and just get on with business (and many do think that) but he's not biting.

 

[Alistair20000]

Regarding your last sentence : yes. Much more sensible than having 30 million people infected, right?
You said we do not know the answer yet, but you have already answered : you have to flatten the curve

I did not say you have to flatten the curve. I said that was the primary objective of the lockdown. Some experts who espouse the herd immunity approach say there is no point in flattening the curve.

For the sake of clarity all I am saying is that nobody knows for certain if the action we are currently taking is better than the alternatives.

 

[malcolms]

Well it's preventing Malc from making money and anything that does that Must be questionable.

Not really, Geoff. Fortunately, I don't need the money, but virtually everyone, except those working for the government, will face a very uncertain future if this situation is extended beyond May..I'm suggesting a solution which is already being implemented by a number of countries, who are slowly lifting restrictions whilst maintaining a shield for the vulnerable. We seem to be blundering on with the only strategy being lockdown.

 

[IndoMike]

I did not say you have to flatten the curve. I said that was the primary objective of the lockdown. Some experts who espouse the herd immunity approach say there is no point in flattening the curve.

For the sake of clarity all I am saying is that nobody knows for certain if the action we are currently taking is better than the alternatives.

You either have a lockdown or you don't have one.
We can't predict the future, of course, but all logic, the opinion of most experts, and the experience of most countries lead us to believe that lockdown is the most effective measure. Once we make the choice your statement becomes irrelevant, since we can't compare the result of the UK on lockdown March - June with the result of the UK not on lockdown March - June.

 

[Rosencrantz]

Herd immunity works to an extent on the basis you have a vaccine to protect the most vulnerable (as with the regular flu) otherwise you risk a higher amount of avoidable deaths and increased stress on the NHS in peak times which is already at full stretch due to lack of investment. As Covid-19 is much more virulent and therefore deadly virus than normal flu with no available vaccine than it is unthinkable for any politician to pursue that policy which would leave deaths in the hundreds of thousands and the NHS in severe meltdown. They wouldn't get elected again for a generation.

Herd immunity will play a part in the exit strategy, but not until accurate and abundant testing is in place to partially lift the lockdown and not until a vaccine is available for fully lifting the lockdown.