The Lancet ( nothing more to say really)

A new report issued by a group of experts advising the UK government offers a blistering assessment of the country’s previous “herd immunity” approach to coronavirus, suggesting that as many as 250,000 people could die as a result—and that it would do little to stop health-care facilities from being overwhelmed.

The background: Last week, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced that his country would adopt a different coronavirus strategy from the ones its European neighbors have followed. Most governments have sought to suppress the spread of the virus by reducing mass gatherings, imposing quarantine restrictions, and encouraging social distancing. But Johnson said the country would forgo such measures with an unusual plan to prevent the outbreak from overwhelming the health-care system and protect the most vulnerable groups during peak infection seasons. Under the strategy, at least 60% of the population were expected to contract the virus and get better—mostly younger individuals who would face only a mild form of illness. The government believed this would result in a “herd immunity” that would subsequently protect vulnerable groups from infection, while avoiding “behavioral fatigue” that would cause people to stop cooperating with safety measures over time.

Sharp realizations: That strategy was met with fierce criticism over the weekend. The Covid-19 Response Team based at Imperial College in London revealed on Monday that the government’s experts realized only over the last few days that its policy would “likely result in hundreds of thousands of deaths”—potentially 250,000—and that the burden on health systems would exceed their capacities and resources by as much as eight times.

Nothing to do with agenda. This is a democracy and whilst I will support everything the government is doing in its fight against the virus, I absolutely am within my right to criticise and point out what I consider bad decisions.

It is sad to read a label being put on those of us using our democratic right.

Labelling begins to personalise the debate and is never a good thing to do.

I see that The Mail is blaming Barnier for infecting the PM

?????? dear oh dear.

I bet they are straining every credibility to try to blame the EU for the whole of the outbreak.

Everything to do with agenda.

the government was clearly listening to the wrong advice initially. By the time they realised their mistake the virus was out of control.

I don't think the virus is, or ever was, any more "out of control" in the UK than it is elsewhere.

Who are the blamers

When I used the term "blamers" I meant the people who seem to be blaming the UK government for not doing something they, the blamers, think it should have been doing, implying that the UK govt is in the wring and doesn't care, that it's all Boris's fault, etc, etc. As I've intimated above, the covid situation in the UK is no worse than in many other countries whose governments did bring in (at least we're told they did) more drastic measures earlier.

Baggs
I don't think the virus is, or ever was, any more "out of control" in the UK than it is elsewhere

I dont think we are doing too bad either.
The UCL paper was disproved some while ago as those who submitted to the letter were not specialists in the required disciplines or they were students. I wonder why people always look for the negative instead and try to find lime minded glass half empties to strengthen their ‘herd’ instinct.l
No matter what, with this or any other virus, the population has to build herd immunity to get it to a place where it can be controlled whether this is by exposure or inoculation. Ideally it will be at least slowed to a point where an effective vaccine is developed to create a total herd immunity. Those quoting the Lancet should read the editors Wiki page to see what good judgement he does (not) appear to have.

Comparison with other countries is a difficult issue not least because of the different factors that come into play. As well as the scientific evidence of the character and transmission of the disease. The epidemic is doing different things in different places because of such factors as:-

Social mores, political history, relationship with authority etc must all be taken into account.

However, there are tried and tested methods of dealing with a relatively common virus such as corona and this is well known throughout the world. Timely action and use of appropriate technology makes the difference between life and death for a counties population.

An interestin read:
tribunemag.co.uk/2020/03/coronavirus-is-the-end-of-the-end-of-history

Well I disagree Baggs. Had we listened to the right advice we would have had less deaths in the long term. There are several countries out there who exemplify how I should have been tackled.

Exactly WW2

joel if a mixed economy is the result of this virus as the article seems to be trying to suggest, then I am fully supportive.

Had we listened to the right advice we would have had less deaths in the long term. There are several countries out there who exemplify how I should have been tackled.

We cannot know at this stage that there would have been fewer deaths if different advice (which different advice, by the way?) had been followed.

To which countries do you refer as exemplars? And why?
I know Germany, for example, is giving a lower death ratio than we are but that's because the way they are recording the deaths is different.

John Lee in The Spectator has written a very interesting article about the way numbers are being used with regard to covid19. I'll repost his final paragraph here because it highlights the problems of media publishing of medical things:
The UK and other governments have no control over how their data is reported, but they can minimise the potential for misinterpretation by making absolutely clear what its figures are, and what they are not. After this episode is over, there is a clear need for an internationally coordinated update of how deaths are attributed and recorded, to enable us to better understand what is happening more clearly, when we need to.

I don’t think it is a question of different advise, the advise is pretty rock solid, it is a question of political decisions.

I agree about recorded deaths and the need for an agreement though. Once again a political decision.

daddima
And Summerlove, wouldn’t continuing to shop everyday have infected more people than one trip to buy for a week?

If you are told to go into isolation, you should not first run out to the store! You go into isolation. You ask other people to do your shopping.

Running to the store first is the epitome of selfishness. Look at Canada where are all of the returning snowbirds are coming back from Florida and immediately going to Walmart. They are going to spread the disease all throughout the country. Some are even being arrested for their selfishness/stupidity.

An informative page
www.gov.uk/government/news/coronavirus-covid-19-scientific-evidence-supporting-the-uk-government-response

The point is that the herd immunity idea is dangerous and premature at the present time. We're trying to flatten the curve to keep our health services from being overwhelmed, to save lives, and to protect health care workers who, to date, do NOT have adequate protective equipment. Our governments (UK and USA) are NOT listening to the science or they would not be suggesting such things.

We do NOT have anywhere NEAR enough tests, masks and other PPE; we have NO meds proven to fight this particular virus and NO vaccine; it spreads without symptoms; it's at least 10 times more fatal that seasonal influenza; and we have many unanswered questions about its transmission, viability, etc.

The proven course to follow is one of testing, testing, testing and then tracking and social isolation to flatten the curve. A cursory search of something like "nurses and doctors talk about coronavirus", and then a read/listen on Google or YouTube should convince any but the truly willfully stubborn of this need.

Besides herd immunity to something like this virus is best acquired through vaccination rather than this ‘catch it and survive if you’re lucky’ approach.

Of course if the virus mutates then, like ‘flu, there will not simply be one strain to vaccinate against. That is the biggest worry that this virus returns every year in a different form .

I was one of the 'blamers' so described and I was angry a couple of weeks ago, when I could see that our government was far too slow to act when it was clear how the virus would spread because of the evidence from China.

I discussed with medic friends and researched what numerous scientists were saying, many of whom were at odds with the government's early response, which seemed to be prioritising the economy.

I am now of the opinion that the time for blame, anger and political recriminations has gone, we are where we are, and it is so important that we do our best to keep ourselves and others safe by obeying the current rules.