Forum Topic

Complete Lockdown Needed

This morning there was "good news" from China that they have no new "local" grown cases. Still some from border movement.Our Government's approach throughout this crisis has been one of "dragging their heels" Only doing things when they are forced to. This seems to be driven by the objective of keeping the economy working and avoiding a crash. Yet has the exact opposite result.The China example is one that only a complete lockdown can knock this virus on the head. Every last case must be identified and neutralised.It's still possible to manage this outbreak in UK and stop it. That can only be done with eradication of EVERY case in UK. To do that we need a lockdown inlcuding borders - one where you are no allowed out. Testing prioirty of people who don't seem to have it rather then only people who obvioulsy seem to have it.That's a complete shutdown of the economy, movement etc for a month or possibly two.With the current approach I fear we are going to have a effective shutdown of everything without hitting this virus on the head. As long as the government drags it feet this crisis will drag on for 18 months or longer.

Richard Potts ● 2422d13 Comments

Have you ever applied to be the Government Scientific Adviser?

Paul Fisher ● 2422d

So now we are supposed to trust the Chinese? They arrested and silenced the doctor who first identified the problem.What is the evidence that even if a complete lock-down is effective in the short term that once it has been reversed that there will not be a second, and even a third spike?I claim no expertise in epidemiology but what are your qualifications for saying a complete shutdown is the best solution?

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 2421d

You don't need qualifications, just common sense. Shutdown saves lives NOW and gives the pharmaceutical industry a chance to get a vaccine out before the next outbreak. No, I don't trust the Chinese, but I don't trust Johnson and his government either.

Ken Munn ● 2421d

The "scientific advice" that the government has been following is primariy based on mathematical modelling rather than medical knowledge.Their first strategy (the Herd immunity one) was abandoned when Imperial College pointed out the folly of this plan. But it's all about controlling the peak so the NHS doesn't collapse.The current stategy is effectively a "lockdown" but done in a very British way where we "keep calm and carry on" and make our own judgemebts. This gives selfish idiots room to "go to the pub/restaurants and bollocks to the virus" without caring that they are either likely to get it or pass it on.The key mathemical modelling that the Govt use is based on 1 infected person passing it on to 2.4 people and hopefully over time reducing that to less than 1 so it starts reducing. If it's more than that we are in big trouble.If you are are 50+ you have a 1 in 10 chance of ending up in hostpital, 60+ 1 in 6 and for anyone over 70 you have a 50% chance of ending up in  hospital. So it's easy to see how the NHS can quickly become overwhelmed.Because UK has been so useless at testing, the current death rate looks like 5% to number of cases. No-one thinks it's this is correct because there are probably loads more case that haven't been identified. These are the mild ones but also the most dangerous ones - because they are the ones where people are unwittingly most likely to pass it on.That's why a lockdown for 2+ weeks like France/Italy/Spain makes sense. At least until Boris gets the number of daily tests from 5k/day to the 250k/day he just mentioned in his press conference. (if you believe him)Hopefully our European neighbours can get on top of it. But all wish that they had locked down sooner. Sam. If you ignore what the Chinese have done because you don't like their regime you are even more stupid than I thought. But don't you think it's rather stupid to observe others mistakes and then follow them.

Richard Potts ● 2421d

Richard I just could not agree with you more. We have to make sacrifices which are not so hard compared to what may happen if we don't.

Kathy Burges ● 2421d

\What balderdash,

Jeffrey Cope ● 2421d

I claim no expertise in epidemiology but what are your qualifications for saying a complete shutdown is the best solution?Sam,  perhaps look at other countries who have shut down to flatten the curve? And again remind me what qualifications Chris Grayling had to be secretary of state for transport?

Matthew Swain ● 2421d

I agree with both Richard Potts (and Kathy Burges) on this. Instead of framing our response to Government advice according to whether we are pro- or anti-Boris, we must look towards our own behaviour first and foremost.Which means that unless/until we do more to shield ourselves from the virus personally, then it is more likely that the government will impose a complete lockdown.Anyone who doesn't see the benefit of this should listen to this edition of BBC Radio's "The Inquiry", which provides an excellent (and apolitical) 30 minute analysis of how/why China finally managed to get on top of their own crisis:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3csythh

Richard Cathcart ● 2421d

Richard is spot on and Jeffrey is the living embodiment of a triumph of ideology over intelligence.

Paul Campbell ● 2421d

Isn’t this how the last Ebola outbreak was contained? And smallpox finally eradicated? This illness is less identifiable but would shutting everyone away for three weeks end it?

Vivienne Cox ● 2421d

Message for PC: Ooh! you know how to hurt, never mind, I'll grin and bear it.Message  for RP: My chances of hospitalisation are 5o% according to you.I'll let you know at a later date if you are right or wrong. Would you be willing to apologise if wrong?

Jeffrey Cope ● 2420d

I some respects you're right, in others, wrong.The last Ebola outbreak(quite recent) was contained with the help of the vaccine that has been refined over several years.Smallpox (now technically eradicated but in reality still in existence) took from the 50's to the Noughties to deal with.As stated on TV, Corovirus ain't going be solved in three weeks - rather 12-18 months to contain it. To eradicate it now will take decades if the will exists. Remember it's not as virulent as smallpox in terms of mortality.

Jeffrey Cope ● 2420d

JeffreyIF you get it.But I very much hope that you stay well and continue to be blinkered and call me an idiot.Just follow the govt advice and don't go near anyone. I hope you have someone to do shopping for you? The numbers are not mine but from the "experts". They base this on modelling on what they know so far. Cllr Sam Hearn would refuse to trust anything the Chinese told him but luckily Imperial College, the government and all the experts do look at the evidence from China and other places and are gradually implementing the right things to supress and mitigate the spread of this virus.

Richard Potts ● 2420d