Exit strategy predictions

[JonathanH]

I wonder if once the death and infection rate is down to a relatively low level whether we could largely lift all of the restrictions and follow the Swedish model? Basically life as normal, but no large gatherings and smaller gatherings have certain rules (principally, outside if possible and handwashing/sanitisers to be available and used.
Seems to be working for them.

Isn't that what we were doing in early March? Doesn't seem to have worked.

 

[Meerkat]

Isn't that what we were doing in early March? Doesn't seem to have worked.

If our deaths peaked on April 8th then the assumed Covid infection to death cycle would imply that the measures before lockdown flattened the curve before lockdown even started.......

 

[nlogax]

I wonder if once the death and infection rate is down to a relatively low level whether we could largely lift all of the restrictions and follow the Swedish model? Basically life as normal, but no large gatherings and smaller gatherings have certain rules (principally, outside if possible and handwashing/sanitisers to be available and used.
Seems to be working for them.

Germany's R (infection rate) is back up to 1.0 from 0.7, possibly as a result of some restrictions being eased. I'm sure that's being watched very carefully by the UK government.

 

[trebor79]

Sweden’s death rate might be lower than ours but it certainly isn’t pretty. And it’s pretty chilly up there so they wouldn’t be moving around like we would in the height of summer.

Yeah but we've all got to die of something. Sooner we realise this virus is going to be circulating for ever and we can't just hole up for a few months and wait for it to go away the better.
And it being chilly will mean more socialising indoors, which is more likely for spreading a virus that outdoors.
All this claptrap about a vaccine. No vaccine for a coronavirus has even been successfully discovered. It would be nice to have one, bit it shouldn't be a cornerstone of the the strategy.

 

[edwin_m]

All this claptrap about a vaccine. No vaccine for a coronavirus has even been successfully discovered. It would be nice to have one, bit it shouldn't be a cornerstone of the the strategy.

I don't think the authorities would be doing anything different if they knew there was going to be a vaccine or they knew there wasn't. Either we stay in lockdown until the numbers have got low enough for testing and contact tracing to work, or we very cautiously lift some measures with the hope of keeping R below 1. Or we lift a lot of measures and find that by the time we see an uptick in hospital admissions each infected person has infected two or three more - which would mean the NHS being overwhelmed a couple of weeks later.

 

[takno]

Sweden’s death rate might be lower than ours but it certainly isn’t pretty. And it’s pretty chilly up there so they wouldn’t be moving around like we would in the height of summer.

Sweden's death rate includes deaths in nursing homes, which accounts for half of what they are reporting. They fully acknowledge that if they had a different model of nursing home, or had taken more effective action to isolate nursing homes earlier then their death rates would be lower, probably around the levels of other Scandinavian countries. As in the UK right now though, doing anything more on lockdown for normal people would make more or less no difference to nursing home deaths.

We can't stay locked down now because we feel guilty about not having locked down nursing homes earlier.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

I wonder if once the death and infection rate is down to a relatively low level whether we could largely lift all of the restrictions and follow the Swedish model? Basically life as normal, but no large gatherings and smaller gatherings have certain rules (principally, outside if possible and handwashing/sanitisers to be available and used.
Seems to be working for them.

The problem with basing easing restrictions on a falling death rate is of courrse, how do you know how many people died of coronavirus as opposed to those who died with coronavirus (ie they tested positive for the virus but it didn't cause their death).

Bearing in mind that, on a typical day, 1500 people die in the UK, would it be fair to assume that once deaths of coronavirus drop to less than 300 a day, then restrictions can start to be lifted?

Whatever happens, I think if it gets to 7 May and Boris announces the lockdown will be extended again then people will increasingly start to ignore it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't that what we were doing in early March? Doesn't seem to have worked.

We weren't. People were still packing into e.g. pubs.

I'd venture that British style "vertical drinking" in packed pubs mainly in London was a huge early spread vector. European countries don't by and large do "vertical drinking".

 

[bramling]

Whatever happens, I think if it gets to 7 May and Boris announces the lockdown will be extended again then people will increasingly start to ignore it.

Many people already are from what I can see. It’s been conspicuously quieter today, no doubt the result of some much-needed grey sky and rain.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Many people already are from what I can see. It’s been conspicuously quieter today, no doubt the result of some much-needed grey sky and rain.

We could really do with 3 weeks of bad (but not catastrophic) weather. Some good old British "5-10 degrees, all-day drizzle" would do it. Lives would be saved as everyone would voluntarily stay in.

 

[JonathanH]

The problem with basing easing restrictions on a falling death rate is of courrse, how do you know how many people died of coronavirus as opposed to those who died with coronavirus (ie they tested positive for the virus but it didn't cause their death).

Bearing in mind that, on a typical day, 1500 people die in the UK, would it be fair to assume that once deaths of coronavirus drop to less than 300 a day, then restrictions can start to be lifted?

Whatever happens, I think if it gets to 7 May and Boris announces the lockdown will be extended again then people will increasingly start to ignore it.

The estimate by the Continuous Mortality Investigation of the Institute & Faculty of Actuaries is that the number of excess deaths in 2020 so far is between 41,000 and 48,000 although it relies on some extrapolation of the Public Health England figures.

https://www.actuaries.org.uk/documents/england-wales-mortality-monitor-covid-19-update-week-16-2020

 

[al78]

We could really do with 3 weeks of bad (but not catastrophic) weather. Some good old British "5-10 degrees, all-day drizzle" would do it. Lives would be saved as everyone would voluntarily stay in.

No I don't want my allotment food crop wrecked by adverse weather, that would mean having to do extra shopping for vegetables in the summer and autumn (i.e. unintended consequences). Not that it matters, it is never going to be 5-10C for three weeks in May unless you live on the Cairngorm plateau. I would argue that continuous poor weather will make things worse, with a deterioration in mental health. The beautiful weather in April has allowed people to spend quality time outdoors in their garden, and go for local walks in the fresh air and sunshine, which is better for physical and mental health than being a prisoner in their home.

 

[Ianno87]

We could really do with 3 weeks of bad (but not catastrophic) weather. Some good old British "5-10 degrees, all-day drizzle" would do it. Lives would be saved as everyone would voluntarily stay in.

Or those who suffer from things like SAD may be pushed over the edge, sadly....

 

[takno]

The estimate by the Continuous Mortality Investigation of the Institute & Faculty of Actuaries is that the number of excess deaths in 2020 so far is between 41,000 and 48,000 although it relies on some extrapolation of the Public Health England figures.

https://www.actuaries.org.uk/documents/england-wales-mortality-monitor-covid-19-update-week-16-2020

That document assumes that we should be comparing to 2019, because the year started off as well as 2019 did, which is okay as a claim, but I think most people would regard comparing mortality against the 5 or 10 year average as fairer. The fact that last year and early this year was unusually low can't be taken as predictor that the good times were going to roll forever. Indeed if a couple of light flu season back to back and not-too-hot summer in between has left a few thousand vulnerable people alive, then you've really set up a timebomb where the next significant weather or disease event is going to kill a lot of people who arguably have been lucky to have an extra 6-12 months of life.

It then goes on to slightly pointlessly extrapolate out for weeks where the more-reliable overall death figures aren't available. That extrapolation has been scienced up with a spot of clever-looking demographic information, but actually the model used is a simple multiplier which assumes that deaths in hospital will be a set proportion of excess deaths. This is extremely unlikely to hold. We don't know whether the real numbers will be better or worse, but we do know that they will probably be very different. So overall, we are presented with an fancy document, which on the face of it reports on something we know to be a relatively meaningful indicator, but is actually mostly composed of a cheap extrapolation from figures we already had, and already didn't think much of.

 

[Huntergreed]

There's been news reports today stating that this virus may be related another illness, similar to the the serious 'Kawasaki' disease which is a serious illness for children under 5 with a sadly high mortality rate it seems.

If there is proven to be a relationship between COVID19 and this new disease, I can see much harsher measures being put in place for a much longer period of time, as this is a much greater risk to children and has a much higher mortality rate compared to COVID19. Hopefully there proves to be no relationship and this is just a coincidence.

 

[takno]

No I don't want my allotment food crop wrecked by adverse weather, that would mean having to do extra shopping for vegetables in the summer and autumn (i.e. unintended consequences). Not that it matters, it is never going to be 5-10C for three weeks in May unless you live on the Cairngorm plateau. I would argue that continuous poor weather will make things worse, with a deterioration in mental health. The beautiful weather in April has allowed people to spend quality time outdoors in their garden, and go for local walks in the fresh air and sunshine, which is better for physical and mental health than being a prisoner in their home.

Agreed. Being able to spend time in the garden has been transformative to me. I think we're likely to see a massive rise in the number of people sneaking round to each others homes for visits if the option of being able to talk to people outside from a couple of metres away is removed

 

[Bantamzen]

We could really do with 3 weeks of bad (but not catastrophic) weather. Some good old British "5-10 degrees, all-day drizzle" would do it. Lives would be saved as everyone would voluntarily stay in.

I hope you are not being serious. After what can only be described as a catastrophic winter, with widespread floods up and down the country, the last thing we need is more to destroy what is left of an already reduced crop output from farms. While you are at it, how about a plague of locusts or perhaps fire and brimstone to liven things up a bit more?

 

[takno]

There's been news reports today stating that this virus may be related another illness, similar to the the serious 'Kawasaki' disease which is a serious illness for children under 5 with a sadly high mortality rate it seems.

If there is proven to be a relationship between COVID19 and this new disease, I can see much harsher measures being put in place for a much longer period of time, as this is a much greater risk to children and has a much higher mortality rate compared to COVID19. Hopefully there proves to be no relationship and this is just a coincidence.

It's an extremely rare condition. A small proportion of the under 5s get Covid to start with, and an tiny proportion may (or may not) be going on to develop a specific condition. For the children who do develop this condition it is sadly quite often fatal, but that is a tiny number of people. It's highly unlikely that this will figure highly in death rates for the under 5s, and in all probability far more under 5s are being affected by the reduced ability to do post-natal visits and check on the health of new-borns and their parents.

 

[Ianno87]

Agreed. Being able to spend time in the garden has been transformative to me. I think we're likely to see a massive rise in the number of people sneaking round to each others homes for visits if the option of being able to talk to people outside from a couple of metres away is removed

A very real risk: "Oh, just come inside!"

 

[yorksrob]

What if they can’t?

There's always a way to mitigate risk, if the will is there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I hope you are not being serious. After what can only be described as a catastrophic winter, with widespread floods up and down the country, the last thing we need is more to destroy what is left of an already reduced crop output from farms. While you are at it, how about a plague of locusts or perhaps fire and brimstone to liven things up a bit more?

What, a bit of drizzle for 3 weeks (which is common in April-May) - hardly going to destroy crops.

 

[Bantamzen]

What, a bit of drizzle for 3 weeks (which is common in April-May) - hardly going to destroy crops.

You said bad weather, I took that to mean heavy rain. Maybe drizzle is bad down in MK, up here we don't even notice it. However making people even more miserable with grey skies for 3 weeks is not going to help people's moral either.

 

[Domh245]

It also assumes that drizzle puts people off - I went out to grab some milk earlier in the middle of the drizzle and thought I'd be able to waltz straight into Lidl - everyone else must have had the same idea as there was a queue about 10 deep, not dissimilar to a friday morning when I last went in considerably better weather! Generally seemed to be as many if not more cars about than I last remember, so I'm not convinced that it does actually put people off in the way you might think it would - especially for those who can drive to shops, etc

 

[6862]

Following tonight's press conference - making testing available to workers who have to leave home to work sounds encouraging, hopefully it will allow employers to begin to plan some way of operating in the future. Not saying it will make it possible for everyone to go back to work immediately, but perhaps gives some hope in the medium term that there might be a way for some workplaces to reopen.

 

[jellybaby]

if there was public support I would have thought there would already be more than the minority who currently wear them??

I don't think you will get the majority wearing masks until they are easily available.

I'm perhaps looking in the wrong places but everywhere I've looked is sold out or price gouging.

 

[greyman42]

I don't think you will get the majority wearing masks until they are easily available.

I'm perhaps looking in the wrong places but everywhere I've looked is sold out or price gouging.

You won't get the majority wearing them, full stop. They are a waste of money.

 

[scotrail158713]

We could really do with 3 weeks of bad (but not catastrophic) weather. Some good old British "5-10 degrees, all-day drizzle" would do it. Lives would be saved as everyone would voluntarily stay in.

That’ll do nothing around me - that’s decent weather in Scotland.

 

[greyman42]

We could really do with 3 weeks of bad (but not catastrophic) weather. Some good old British "5-10 degrees, all-day drizzle" would do it. Lives would be saved as everyone would voluntarily stay in.

So you think lives are being lost because of the decent weather we are currently experiencing?

 

[Luke McDonnell]

I have some questions about what happens regarding travel when the lockdown restrictions are eased. I have read speculation on this forum (that sounds similar to what some other countries have done e.g. Italy) that when the first phase of easing of restrictions takes place non essential travel by public transport may continue to be restricted or prohibited. Presuming that transport by private car is permitted after this I believe this could be a problem for those who do not have access to a car when visiting friends or family is permitted. You have also got to bear in mind that many people cannot drive cars for medical reasons, so if private car non essential travel is permitted but train/bus is not do you believe this could have legal implications under the Equality Act as it could be discriminatory against those with disabilities especially those who cannot drive for medical reasons as well as possibly under other legislation such as the Human Rights Act so if the regulations regarding non essential travel are legally enforceable like the leaving home regulations (can anyone clarify this regarding public transport? Advisory or legally binding?) I could certainly see the scope for legal challenge if non essential PT travel was restricted when visiting friends/family is permitted/non essential car travel.

I have Asperger's/Autism and I am a holder of both a Merseytravel disabled travel pass and a DSB railcard so does anyone see the case that after the lockdown is lifted and visiting friends and family is permitted again that at the very least you should be permitted to travel by public transport if you hold a disabled travel pass and/or a DSB railcard with provision for a carer to travel as well if necessary at the very least to see friends or family - friends or family that you may not have seen for a long time. My own opinion on this having autism is that this is imperative for our well being I have a friend that I travel to see on a regular basis who is also on the autistic spectrum and also does not drive. Also in the stay at home regulations if you have autism or a learning difficulty you are permitted outside up to 3 times a day and you could claim that seeing your friend is an essential health reason under this but as I said above IMO non essential travel for Disabled Pass and DSB railcard holders should not be restricted after lockdown easing?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think you will get the majority wearing masks until they are easily available.

I'm perhaps looking in the wrong places but everywhere I've looked is sold out or price gouging.

They are. Take one old T-shirt and cut to suitable size, tie round your mouth and nose. It's that sort of thing that's being proposed (e.g. to catch coughs/sneezes), not medical grade ones to protect you. It's about altruism, like most of this is.