When will it be safe to resume punting?

[Moby Dick]

Don't forget the deaths that have genuinely been avoided from reduced traffic on the road and accidents at work.

I haven’t heard anything in the news about youths stabbings for a while.

[masseyferguson]

The problem is what it is doing, is it’s spreading fear...

I really think that the deaths after the lockdown will dwarf the numbers lost at the moment.

People are afraid, the news networks spread fear.

The numbers that will die from being afraid to go to hospitals, the people who need critical surgery will certainly be greater than the present numbers.
If you add in the loss of people due to the economic impact, how many will die from Mental Illness, Famine and traditional illnesses whilst the 1st world nations are distracted by the pandemic.

+1 with bells on, I couldn't agree more Kev, we need to get a sense of proportion about this situation. The costs mounting up for the next few generations to pay off are staggering and way beyond what the advantages are of keeping a few thousand old people alive for a couple more years. We're suffering from a collective panic that blinds us to the facts.
For example, apparently the cost in the UK of medically gaining the average person one extra year of life has increased by a factor of more than twenty times since the coronavirus broke out here. Do people understand what that means, it means that suddenly, as a society, we're valuing life much more highly than we did before, why ?
On top of that the logic of preserving the life of somebody who statistically is more likely than not to die within the next 12 - 18 months anyway is incredible, and by the way that'd probably also be at the expense of younger people who could benefit from life saving treatment.
The cost to the economy of one days covid19 lock down would build about ten brand new state of the art hosiptals, imagine how many lives that would improve immeasurably over the next couple of decades !!

[Spencer Fobby]

+1 with bells on, I couldn't agree more Kev, we need to get a sense of proportion about this situation. The costs mounting up for the next few generations to pay off are staggering and way beyond what the advantages are of keeping a few thousand old people alive for a couple more years. We're suffering from a collective panic that blinds us to the facts.
For example, apparently the cost in the UK of medically gaining the average person one extra year of life has increased by a factor of more than twenty times since the coronavirus broke out here. Do people understand what that means, it means that suddenly, as a society, we're valuing life much more highly than we did before, why ?
On top of that the logic of preserving the life of somebody who statistically is more likely than not to die within the next 12 - 18 months anyway is incredible, and by the way that'd probably also be at the expense of younger people who could benefit from life saving treatment.
The cost to the economy of one days covid19 lock down would build about ten brand new state of the art hosiptals, imagine how many lives that would improve immeasurably over the next couple of decades !!

Brutally put, but true.  Unfortunately we (the government/the media/the public) have catastrophised this pandemic to such a point that it is difficult to gain a sense of perspective without being accused of being inhumane and selfish.  I'm not generally inclined towards utilitarianism, but in this case what we are undergoing is not serving the greatest good for the most people and the long term consequences are potentially worse than the unacceptable notion of herd immunity.
I'm all for a short term lockdown, a modest control of behaviours to reduce the spread of the virus and at the same time ramping up the NHS's resources, but we have to get a grip.
In the south west there were 6 deaths today reported on the news as if it was an unacceptable loss of life.
Jeez!

[winkywanky]

+1 with bells on, I couldn't agree more Kev, we need to get a sense of proportion about this situation. The costs mounting up for the next few generations to pay off are staggering and way beyond what the advantages are of keeping a few thousand old people alive for a couple more years. We're suffering from a collective panic that blinds us to the facts.
For example, apparently the cost in the UK of medically gaining the average person one extra year of life has increased by a factor of more than twenty times since the coronavirus broke out here. Do people understand what that means, it means that suddenly, as a society, we're valuing life much more highly than we did before, why ?
On top of that the logic of preserving the life of somebody who statistically is more likely than not to die within the next 12 - 18 months anyway is incredible, and by the way that'd probably also be at the expense of younger people who could benefit from life saving treatment.
The cost to the economy of one days covid19 lock down would build about ten brand new state of the art hosiptals, imagine how many lives that would improve immeasurably over the next couple of decades !!

Talking of facts, what about all the much younger people currently dying, and what about the many more NHS workers who'd be dying while Hospitals become totally overrun?

It still amazes me how many people simply don't get it.

Why do you think every country on earth is taking similar steps? 

[Malvolio]

We need to remember that punting was never a 100% safe activity to begin with - we should all know the numerous risks involved.

Just as important a question is when will a reasonable selection of WGs reappear?

[willie loman]

Talking of facts, what about all the much younger people currently dying, and what about the many more NHS workers who'd be dying while Hospitals become totally overrun?

It still amazes me how many people simply don't get it.

Why do you think every country on earth is taking similar steps? 

Like Sweden?

[Kev40ish]

Talking of facts, what about all the much younger people currently dying, and what about the many more NHS workers who'd be dying while Hospitals become totally overrun?

It still amazes me how many people simply don't get it.

Why do you think every country on earth is taking similar steps? 

What don’t people get???
It is really sad when anyone loses their life if it can be prevented.
What people don’t get is 1.7million people die every year from TB, which is preventable and curable.

Why aren’t all the countries in the world helping with this??

Maybe it’s because it is unlikely to affect you or me...

So I think a lot of people need to get some perspective...

[winkywanky]

Like Sweden?

You're not comparing like with like, they got it later than we did and people just started doing the right thing off their own bat, like avoiding the Metro and WFH. Germany was along the same lines, but also they did a load of testing from the off.

The situation we find ourselves in now, with deaths starting to stabilise, was as a direct result of the sudden Lockdown from 23rd March which was 4wks ago. if we'd carried on pretty well as we were, ICU admissions and deaths would have gone through the roof.

[willie loman]

What don’t people get???
It is really sad when anyone loses their life if it can be prevented.
What people don’t get is 1.7million people die every year from TB, which is preventable and curable.

Why aren’t all the countries in the world helping with this??

Maybe it’s because it is unlikely to affect you or me...

So I think a lot of people need to get some perspective...

I was roundly shouted down when I said similar a few weeks back.

[winkywanky]

What don’t people get???
It is really sad when anyone loses their life if it can be prevented.
What people don’t get is 1.7million people die every year from TB, which is preventable and curable.

Why aren’t all the countries in the world helping with this??

Maybe it’s because it is unlikely to affect you or me...

So I think a lot of people need to get some perspective...

This will be my last post about this on this thread because I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall.

Read my above post.

If we hadn't started this Lockdown 4wks ago, deaths would be going through the roof now and still going upwards, the NHS would be overrun, many people, including the young and those under 50/60 with underlying health conditions (that's millions of people in the UK) would be dying, hundreds of NHS workers would be dying, there'd be pandemonium.

This is not me telling you, this is pretty well every govt around the world. I don't know what makes you think you're right and every scientist is wrong? 

Like I said, last post, it's pointless any more  .

[willie loman]

Through the roof?  Its the language of hyperbole that exasperates me, 250,000, casualties, 5000, 000 casualties, 50% of the police on sick absence, riots on the streets, unable to bury our dead, food shortages, all of these observations have been made on this forum,, anyone who questions this , is seen as some kind of lunatic.

[winkywanky]

I was roundly shouted down when I said similar a few weeks back.

Because you were talking ill-advised crap.

And you still are.

You're still using the word 'flu' in your posts about this too, FFS, making your silly little (erroneous) point  .

THAT was my last post  .

[willie loman]

You're not comparing like with like, they got it later than we did and people just started doing the right thing off their own bat, like avoiding the Metro and WFH. Germany was along the same lines, but also they did a load of testing from the off.

The situation we find ourselves in now, with deaths starting to stabilise, was as a direct result of the sudden Lockdown from 23rd March which was 4wks ago. if we'd carried on pretty well as we were, ICU admissions and deaths would have gone through the roof.

How did Sweden get it later than us? Surely it stands to reason that most of Europe got it at the same  time more or less? What is true is that every gov reacted in a different way.

[willie loman]

Because you were talking ill-advised crap.

And you still are.

You're still using the word 'flu' in your posts about this too, FFS, making your silly little (erroneous) point  .

THAT was my last post  .

Ill advised crap that is spoken by no end of people on the outside world, but curiously not on here.

[willie loman]

Because you were talking ill-advised crap.

And you still are.

You're still using the word 'flu' in your posts about this too, FFS, making your silly little (erroneous) point  .

THAT was my last post  .

Oh so using the word flu, negates everything I say?  My views are held by ian Duncan smith, and myriad other commentators.

[willie loman]

This will be my last post about this on this thread because I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall.

Read my above post.

If we hadn't started this Lockdown 4wks ago, deaths would be going through the roof now and still going upwards, the NHS would be overrun, many people, including the young and those under 50/60 with underlying health conditions (that's millions of people in the UK) would be dying, hundreds of NHS workers would be dying, there'd be pandemoniu

This is not me telling you, this is pretty well every govt around the world. I don't know what makes you think you're right and every scientist is wrong? 

Like I said, last post, it's pointless any more  .

MILLIONS, of people under 50 with underlying health conditions? in Britain? you want to be taken seriously?

[Doc Holliday]

6000 sounds a lot, but 1370 people die every day in the UK.  So it's really not an enormous increase on what is normally expected.

Did you look at the spreadsheet in the link?

The average number of deaths over the last five years for the week ending 3rd April was 10,305. For 2020 for it was 16,387 for the same week.

That equates around an extra 870 deaths a day.

[Doc Holliday]

On top of that the logic of preserving the life of somebody who statistically is more likely than not to die within the next 12 - 18 months anyway is incredible,

But that's the point many of the people who are dying would not have died within the next couple of years. People live with long term illnesses for a great many years.

[willie loman]

This will be my last post about this on this thread because I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall.

Read my above post.

If we hadn't started this Lockdown 4wks ago, deaths would be going through the roof now and still going upwards, the NHS would be overrun, many people, including the young and those under 50/60 with underlying health conditions (that's millions of people in the UK) would be dying, hundreds of NHS workers would be dying, there'd be pandemonium.

it
This is not me telling you, this is pretty well every govt around the world. I don't know what makes you think you're right and every scientist is wrong? 

Like I said, last post, it's pointless any more  .

If only it was your last thread on the virus, you have been posting alarmist guff for weeks.

[Kev40ish]

This will be my last post about this on this thread because I just feel like I'm banging my head against the wall.

Read my above post.

If we hadn't started this Lockdown 4wks ago, deaths would be going through the roof now and still going upwards, the NHS would be overrun, many people, including the young and those under 50/60 with underlying health conditions (that's millions of people in the UK) would be dying, hundreds of NHS workers would be dying, there'd be pandemonium.

This is not me telling you, this is pretty well every govt around the world. I don't know what makes you think you're right and every scientist is wrong? 

Like I said, last post, it's pointless any more  .

I have never questioned how serious it could potentially be.

What I question is the hypocrisy of people who when an illness can threaten them they suddenly get a pang of morality and need to tell everyone what is right and wrong.

I am questioning the worlds hypocrisy of suddenly becoming caring when Millions die each year.

[petermisc]

Of course the lockdown has mitigated the impact and reduced the numbers, but the key is how many extra lives has it taken.

Yes, there may be some who decide not to go to their GP or hospital, and a few of those may die.  But that number is miniscule compared to the number who would die if GPs and hospitals were totally overwhelmed with C-19 patients.   There are also likely to be a few more suicides.  However, chemotherapy patients have to lock-down for six months minimum, often a year or more, and the suicide rates are not significant, so I see no reason to believe that they should be for this lock-down.  I don't see any reason why the number of extra lives lost due to the lock-down would be significant, certainly not compared to the massive loss of life that would certainly have occurred without the lock-down.

In Russia, there are massive queues of ambulances outside hospitals, and reports of a patient being turned away from 80 hospitals.  And New York is resorting to burying people in mass graves.  That is what happens when you don't lock-down fast enough.  The same could easily happen if a lock-down is lifted too early, and we effectively go back to more or less the same situation as it was before the lock-down.

[petermisc]

How did Sweden get it later than us?

Because:
a) Arlanda is not the global hub that Heathrow is
b) they have far less people coming in from China than we do

Sweden has applied a far-less stringent lock-down than we have, but the Swedes seem to have obeyed their lock-down far more stringently than we have obeyed ours.  They didn't have the masses sun-bathing in parks and people driving off to places like the Lake District and Snowdonia like we did.

[LLPunting]

I have never questioned how serious it could potentially be.

What I question is the hypocrisy of people who when an illness can threaten them they suddenly get a pang of morality and need to tell everyone what is right and wrong.

I am questioning the worlds hypocrisy of suddenly becoming caring when Millions die each year.

Exactly, it's the inequality of the value of lives not of the locality, the relevant demographic or possibly nationality or race.   £20+ million for 100 laps, under normal conditions a child would struggle to get a few hundred quid for a 5k run.  How far did Eddie Izzard run?

The chances that this reality check for the true humility of humankind will bring about greater community and sharing?  Low for anything particularly permanent but high for everything transient and political.

[Kev40ish]

Because:
a) Arlanda is not the global hub that Heathrow is
b) they have far less people coming in from China than we do

Sweden has applied a far-less stringent lock-down than we have, but the Swedes seem to have obeyed their lock-down far more stringently than we have obeyed ours.  They didn't have the masses sun-bathing in parks and people driving off to places like the Lake District and Snowdonia like we did.

Totally agree you can’t compare Sweden with the Uk as they are far less densely populated than the Uk.

I don’t think they are more diligent in obeying the rules

They certainly are suffering more than their neighbours

The Swedish Public Health Agency announced a death toll of 1,203 people from Covid-19 on Wednesday, a rate of 118 per million inhabitants, compared with 55 in Denmark and just 13 in Finland, both of which imposed strict early lockdowns to curb the virus’s spread.

[petermisc]

In the south west there were 6 deaths today reported on the news as if it was an unacceptable loss of life.
Jeez!

The lock-down was applied too late in London, after the virus had already infected a significant number of people.  This is why there have been a significant number of deaths in London.

Fortunately, for most of the regions, the virus had not really spread out and taken hold to the same extent by the time the lock-down was applied.  The lock-down has prevented mass infections in the SW, which is why there have been so few deaths in the SW.  However, if we lift the lock-down now, then the virus will start spreading in the regions like it did in London before the lock-down, and the regions will start to see increasing numbers of deaths. 

As the regions generally have poorer hospital facilities than London, they are far more susceptible to being overwhelmed.  It is therefore even more important for the regions that the lock-down is maintained, even though they currently have less deaths.

While it is the 60+ age-group who are currently most likely to die of the virus, it is the 30-60 age-group who are most likely to need hospitalisation in order to survive C-19, and therefore this age group that is most at risk if they can't get that hospital treatment due to their local hospital being overwhelmed.

[Kev40ish]

The chances that this reality check for the true humility of humankind will bring about greater community and sharing?  Low for anything particularly permanent but high for everything transient and political.

Totally agree, the nurses will still be underpaid, the supermarket workers will still be exploited on minimum wages.

Nothing will change, the people on here who seem to  have taken the moral high ground by caring for once in their life and vilifying anyone who doesn’t do what they believe is right, will go back to their normal behaviours when they are no longer at risk.

I obviously do not want to tar everyone with the same brush and there probably are some on here who do really care and not just for themselves.

There will still be millions dying around the world from poverty, curable illnesses but it will be okay they will be safe as these things don’t affect them..

[Doc Holliday]

Guys,

I know many of us are suffering the effects of lockdown, but perhaps we could strive to discuss this in a 'grown up' civilised manner. I have consistently tried to practice what I preach and where possible base my posts on facts and evidence and a degree of experience. Let’s be clear this is an ever evolving situation with much to learn. As a result the facts and evidence can be confusing, and often contradictory. Much of it is unproven and frequently speculation. Much of what is also largely untried. Any opinions I have are hopefully based on such evidence within those limitations.

As a result I have changed my mind a number of times on a number of points and will continue to do so as it unfolds. I suggest others may need to do the same and keep an open mind rather than a 'digging your heels in' approach to these discussions. Disagree by all means but respect the opinion of others and avoid the resulting animosity.

[Kev40ish]

Guys,

I know many of us are suffering the effects of lockdown, but perhaps we could strive to discuss this in a 'grown up' civilised manner. I have consistently tried to practice what I preach and where possible base my posts on facts and evidence and a degree of experience. Let’s be clear this is an ever evolving situation with much to learn. As a result the facts and evidence can be confusing, and often contradictory. Much of it is unproven and frequently speculation. Much of what is also largely untried. Any opinions I have are hopefully based on such evidence within those limitations.

As a result I have changed my mind a number of times on a number of points and will continue to do so as it unfolds. I suggest others may need to do the same and keep an open mind rather than a 'digging your heels in' approach to these discussions. Disagree by all means but respect the opinion of others and avoid the resulting animosity.

I totally agree and like you I am changing my views listening to what others have to say and when challenged it makes me investigate further.

Both you and WW have opened my eyes to other sides of the arguments which I do appreciate 

[Beamer]

Guys,

I know many of us are suffering the effects of lockdown, but perhaps we could strive to discuss this in a 'grown up' civilised manner. I have consistently tried to practice what I preach and where possible base my posts on facts and evidence and a degree of experience. Let’s be clear this is an ever evolving situation with much to learn. As a result the facts and evidence can be confusing, and often contradictory. Much of it is unproven and frequently speculation. Much of what is also largely untried. Any opinions I have are hopefully based on such evidence within those limitations.

As a result I have changed my mind a number of times on a number of points and will continue to do so as it unfolds. I suggest others may need to do the same and keep an open mind rather than a 'digging your heels in' approach to these discussions. Disagree by all means but respect the opinion of others and avoid the resulting animosity.

Excellent post with good advice.

[Grumpy Pumpy]

Great post Doc. My views are changing, as are the views of the scientists, medics and governments.

As others have said, earlier in the thread, punting is never without risk. But those risks are substantially higher now. What appears to be known is:

- The death rate is around 1 in 100. Not huge, but neither is it vanishingly small
- Men are affected more than women
- BAME patients are harder hit
- The older are more susceptible and at risk
- Smokers and those with underlying health conditions are at high risk

I dont tick every at risk box. But I tick enough to be cautious. So, right now, I don't see me racing back to punting for several months. Quite possibly not for another year.

Though, as you suggest, this view could change many times over the coming months.   

[southcoastpunter]

Too right Doc. Unfortunately what you have said should be obvious but looking at this and particularly other threads, clearly its not. And respecting others views should be fairly standard as well. However we have (overall rather than just on this thread) too many guys that present their OPINION as a FACT.

well thats my opinion!

[Doc Holliday]

I totally agree and like you I am changing my views listening to what others have to say and when challenged it makes me investigate further.

You have indeed 

On that note 

What people don’t get is 1.7million people die every year from TB, which is preventable and curable.

Why aren’t all the countries in the world helping with this??

At the risk of going off a tangent, TB kind of highlights a related issue and a comparison. Bluntly it is a bugger of a disease that has been with mankind for thousands of years and we have never conquered .. and we have tried and are continuing to try.

Bacterial in origin rather than viral it is a respiratory disease spread in the same way, but is even more contagious in that it remains longer in the air and only takes a very small quantity to infect. It is however a chronic condition for those who succumb and not an acute viral one which if fatal will do so fairly rapidly. To complicate it more in those countries with high rates there is often a link with the prevalence of HIV.

The problem with treatment/eradication is not really a medical one per se (it can be treated although not easily) but an infrastructure one. To provide that somewhat complex and lengthy medical solution requires a considerably rigid and efficient public health system to be in place which simply does not exist in many countries. The UK has done exceptionally well in this respect but it has not been easy.

Changing that infrastructure is not about just the healthcare structure, but probably changing the country's entire structure which is much bigger project. TB prospers amongst the poorest and the sickest and unless you tackle that you cannot treat it medically.

Which takes me full circle to the comparison. Should Covid19 get a foothold in those same countries eg India and Africa (and so far rather interestingly it hasn’t?) then the 1.7 million deaths from TB may be small in comparison and for the same reasons TB has not been conquered.

The difference is though that if the developed world can produce an effective vaccine (and it is a big if) then it ultimately has a better chance of success in all countries. A mass vaccination programme is still a challenging undertaking, but it does not require the same infrastructure changes that TB  would need for medical treatment to be more successful.

[Kev40ish]

You have indeed 

On that note 

At the risk of going off a tangent, TB kind of highlights a related issue and a comparison. Bluntly it is a bugger of a disease that has been with mankind for thousands of years and we have never conquered .. and we have tried and are continuing to try.

Bacterial in origin rather than viral it is a respiratory disease spread in the same way, but is even more contagious in that it remains longer in the air and only takes a very small quantity to infect. It is however a chronic condition for those who succumb and not an acute viral one which if fatal will do so fairly rapidly. To complicate it more in those countries with high rates there is often a link with the prevalence of HIV.

The problem with treatment/eradication is not really a medical one per se (it can be treated although not easily) but an infrastructure one. To provide that somewhat complex and lengthy medical solution requires a considerably rigid and efficient public health system to be in place which simply does not exist in many countries. The UK has done exceptionally well in this respect but it has not been easy.

Changing that infrastructure is not about just the healthcare structure, but probably changing the country's entire structure which is much bigger project. TB prospers amongst the poorest and the sickest and unless you tackle that you cannot treat it medically.

Which takes me full circle to the comparison. Should Covid19 get a foothold in those same countries eg India and Africa (and so far rather interestingly it hasn’t?) then the 1.7 million deaths from TB may be small in comparison and for the same reasons TB has not been conquered.

The difference is though that if the developed world can produce an effective vaccine (and it is a big if) then it ultimately has a better chance of success in all countries. A mass vaccination programme is still a challenging undertaking, but it does not require the same infrastructure changes that TB  would need for medical treatment to be more successful.

Appreciate the information. Covid19 is high on the agenda as it is affecting everyone.

There are estimates of upto 3 million deaths in Africa if Covid gets a hold in these countries. I hope that it gets the support from the 1st World nations that seems to be sadly lacking in other problems they face.

[Spencer Fobby]

Guys,

I know many of us are suffering the effects of lockdown, but perhaps we could strive to discuss this in a 'grown up' civilised manner. I have consistently tried to practice what I preach and where possible base my posts on facts and evidence and a degree of experience. Let’s be clear this is an ever evolving situation with much to learn. As a result the facts and evidence can be confusing, and often contradictory. Much of it is unproven and frequently speculation. Much of what is also largely untried. Any opinions I have are hopefully based on such evidence within those limitations.

As a result I have changed my mind a number of times on a number of points and will continue to do so as it unfolds. I suggest others may need to do the same and keep an open mind rather than a 'digging your heels in' approach to these discussions. Disagree by all means but respect the opinion of others and avoid the resulting animosity.

You make a very good point and your posts are never other than balanced and calm. Thank you.
My views on this have also changed over the last month. 
My family and I began self isolating a week before the official lockdown and we have been very rigorous is observing the physical distancing and staying at home etc. 

As time has gone on, I have seen the future of my new business fall to pieces, seen the resources we have in place dwindle, felt cooped up and frustrated and have read information daily from a variety of sources. And I fear for the future - both on a financial and on a personal level.

Ultimately, I have come to believe a more utilitarian approach would be a better way forward and as someone in the higher risk categories I have come to terms with the fact that this means it may cost me my life to stand by my beliefs. 

We have always lived with risks, and over my lifetime we have seen more and more of these risks reduced as the world has become a safer place, while at the same time we (the media) have catastrophised and created a growing culture of fear. 

My understanding is that the lockdown was put in place to flatten the curve and prevent overwhelming the NHS.  We (the public) have done our part to achieve this aim while the authorities have failed to provide the NHS staff with sufficient PPE.  Now that we have significantly slowed the rate of infection and are better resourced (with a dedicated hospital), the time has come IMO to begin relaxing the measures and prevent the impact of lockdown having unforeseen consequences.

[RobinBrod]

I think WW, as usual, has got mosty of this right. The facts are simple: nobody should be punting at the moment. We just have to accept that. I usually do mine when I come up to London, and have accepted that there is no chance of being able to do that for some time to come. I suspect that I won't be able to punt until late summer, if lucky. I have an annual dinner in October and hope that I shall be able to combine that with a night with my regular. Until then, sadly, it is Mother Hand and her 5 daughters.

[Doc Holliday]

You make a very good point and your posts are never other than balanced and calm. Thank you.
My views on this have also changed over the last month. 
My family and I began self isolating a week before the official lockdown and we have been very rigorous is observing the physical distancing and staying at home etc. 

As time has gone on, I have seen the future of my new business fall to pieces, seen the resources we have in place dwindle, felt cooped up and frustrated and have read information daily from a variety of sources. And I fear for the future - both on a financial and on a personal level.

Ultimately, I have come to believe a more utilitarian approach would be a better way forward and as someone in the higher risk categories I have come to terms with the fact that this means it may cost me my life to stand by my beliefs. 

We have always lived with risks, and over my lifetime we have seen more and more of these risks reduced as the world has become a safer place, while at the same time we (the media) have catastrophised and created a growing culture of fear. 

My understanding is that the lockdown was put in place to flatten the curve and prevent overwhelming the NHS.  We (the public) have done our part to achieve this aim while the authorities have failed to provide the NHS staff with sufficient PPE.  Now that we have significantly slowed the rate of infection and are better resourced (with a dedicated hospital), the time has come IMO to begin relaxing the measures and prevent the impact of lockdown having unforeseen consequences.

I largely agree and everyone's personal situation is unique, although it will have some common factors. This will influence how we feel and our views. I am retired with a good income .. not to mention a comfortable large house and gardens. Whilst no spring chicken, I have no 'relevant' comorbidities, so my perception is one of personal low risk ... a case of "I'm alright Jack" (with the proviso the virus can kill anyone if it has your name on it)
 
However as I progress across my large extended family (including those of my immediate household) the bigger picture becomes far more complex and with one family member in a similar position as your own personal situation.
 
My logical brain struggles with making sense of it all in terms of the future. I am largely an optimist but equally a realist and the latter makes me struggle with the former.

As you point out, the lockdown has undoubtedly bought us some time and so far prevented healthcare being totally overwhelmed and also given some breathing space to think. That must change ... although I feel we are not yet quite at that point of starting the process?

However, pending an effective vaccine at some point (far from guaranteed) this virus is currently virulent and contagious enough to mean we will likely require a regime involving a controlled rate of hospital admissions and deaths over a much longer period of time. We may get some short term natural immunity to assist but this cannot be relied upon. Those deaths could over time be potentially very high in number and undoubtedly many of them will be ahead of their time on this earth. We may have no choice but to accept that.
 
Whilst we rightly condemn the powers that be, for their lack of preparedness and incompetence, which has led to our present predicament, I do not envy the future choices that they will have to make.

Whilst we are all 'armchair experts', I wouldn't want the burden of actually having to take those difficult decisions, especially with a previous poor history in that respect!

[RLondon99]

When will it be safe, as in safe from intrusion by the authorities and perhaps the law due to breaking lockdown rules? Perhaps late May, depending on the sequence of lockdown relaxation. Can the government afford to keep the economy closed beyond the end of May? Bankruptcies (up 70% in March) and unemployment (heading for 10% according the Office for Budget Responsibility) are already at meltdown levels, so maybe not.

When will it be safe, as in safe for your health? Never. Punting was never safe.

When will it be safe as in safe from you getting this virus and potentially passing it on to someone? When there is a vaccine that confers durable immunity. Maybe 2021, maybe 2022, maybe never. This is where the Covid-19 threat is different from routine punting risks. Pre-pandemic if your sex life was confined to prostitutes the risks you took were limited to yourself. With Covid the risk which includes risk of death is to yourself and anyone you interact with.

This goes beyond the prostitution scene. Many people may have to reconsider how they live.

[Vice Admiral]

I have just been reading today's quota of wise, measured and well-informed words on this thread from a number of members of this site. 

The front page of today's Times carries a report that begins thus: "The government's chief scientific adviser has cautioned against banking on a Covid-19 jab, warning that new vaccines are 'long shots'."

Everyone, even the experts, is guessing about almost everything.  All one can say is that educated predictions are (probably) more valid than uneducated ones.

My own prediction – and it somewhat horrifies me even as I make it – is that those of us who survive will be living with SARS-CoV-2 around us in the community (certainly) for most of this year, (possibly) for most of next and (not impossibly) for longer still.

During whatever period it may turn out to be, every activity other than sitting in one's house or garden will involve risk. 

Shopping for food.  Shopping for paint or plants.  Going to work (if applicable).  Visiting family and friends.  Seeing hookers (if applicable).

There will be no easy decisions in this dystopian future; and, as the months pass – and the government's rules become more flexible – everyone will have to make his own decision about where along the risk-range he positions himself.

[king tarzan]

I have just been reading today's quota of wise, measured and well-informed words on this thread from a number of members of this site. 

The front page of today's Times carries a report that begins thus: "The government's chief scientific adviser has cautioned against banking on a Covid-19 jab, warning that new vaccines are 'long shots'."

Everyone, even the experts, is guessing about almost everything.  All one can say is that educated predictions are (probably) more valid than uneducated ones.

My own prediction – and it somewhat horrifies me even as I make it – is that those of us who survive will be living with SARS-CoV-2 around us in the community (certainly) for most of this year, (possibly) for most of next and (not impossibly) for longer still.

During whatever period it may turn out to be, every activity other than sitting in one's house or garden will involve risk. 

Shopping for food.  Shopping for paint or plants.  Going to work (if applicable).  Visiting family and friends.  Seeing hookers (if applicable).

There will be no easy decisions in this dystopian future; and, as the months pass – and the government's rules become more flexible – everyone will have to make his own decision about where along the risk-range he positions himself.

Excellent 🐅 aware alertness  mind..

[David50]

I won’t punt until there is a vaccine

[Spencer Fobby]

There will be no easy decisions in this dystopian future; and, as the months pass – and the government's rules become more flexible – everyone will have to make his own decision about where along the risk-range he positions himself.

Seems the good doctor has encouraged some measured and thoughtful contributions today.

As to the quote above, when the time comes for us to make our own decisions regarding risk, I shall try to be quick to praise and slow to condemn.  But I can foresee a possible trend where people who choose riskier behaviours are pilloried for putting others at risk which might not help the cohesion of wider society.

[masseyferguson]

Just to kick off the debate again
But with the best of intentions because I'm seriously concerned for the future and for our younger generations.
This guy might well be wrong, after all anybody can be, but he's indisputably well qualified to comment.
   
External Link/Members Only

[funfungoodguy]

Two people I know well have had this now. One man in his 60s, fit and well, healthy. told me he was closer to death than he had ever been and couldn't even get across the landing for a pee without stopping on the way for a rest to get his breath back. Been in bed three weeks. Ambulance came once they thought he was conking out but after checking they left him being well cared for at home, but the biggest fright of his life. The other a woman in her late 40s, perfectly fit and well person, doesn't know how she got it, was NINE DAYS in hospital, felt dreadful, again, worst experience of her life. I would be certain neither went on public transport or to busy places very much, just daily life, both must have had it developing badly in the first few days of the curfew, (but might have 'caught' it earlier of course). Anyway the point is, getting onto bed with a stranger who does who knows what with who knows who when you are not there is obviously an extremely silly idea just at the moment, however well you think you know the WG (if still working then says a lot about her attitude to health for her and others doesn't it?).  Really do try to abstain gentlemen for the time being  so the answer is - NOT YET.....

[king tarzan]

Two people I know well have had this now. One man in his 60s, fit and well, healthy. told me he was closer to death than he had ever been and couldn't even get across the landing for a pee without stopping on the way for a rest to get his breath back. Been in bed three weeks. Ambulance came once they thought he was conking out but after checking they left him being well cared for at home, but the biggest fright of his life. The other a woman in her late 40s, perfectly fit and well person, doesn't know how she got it, was NINE DAYS in hospital, felt dreadful, again, worst experience of her life. I would be certain neither went on public transport or to busy places very much, just daily life, both must have had it developing badly in the first few days of the curfew, (but might have 'caught' it earlier of course). Anyway the point is, getting onto bed with a stranger who does who knows what with who knows who when you are not there is obviously an extremely silly idea just at the moment, however well you think you know the WG (if still working then says a lot about her attitude to health for her and others doesn't it?).  Really do try to abstain gentlemen for the time being  so the answer is - NOT YET.....

i am trying and and it is damn difficult but i am succeeding 

[daviemac]

Just to kick off the debate again
But with the best of intentions because I'm seriously concerned for the future and for our younger generations.
This guy might well be wrong, after all anybody can be, but he's indisputably well qualified to comment.
   
External Link/Members Only

At 151 Sweden has the highest death rate per million population of all the Nordic countries. The next nearest is Denmark with 61, quite a difference.

[blackd2103]

Two people I know well have had this now. One man in his 60s, fit and well, healthy. told me he was closer to death than he had ever been and couldn't even get across the landing for a pee without stopping on the way for a rest to get his breath back. Been in bed three weeks. Ambulance came once they thought he was conking out but after checking they left him being well cared for at home, but the biggest fright of his life. The other a woman in her late 40s, perfectly fit and well person, doesn't know how she got it, was NINE DAYS in hospital, felt dreadful, again, worst experience of her life. I would be certain neither went on public transport or to busy places very much, just daily life, both must have had it developing badly in the first few days of the curfew, (but might have 'caught' it earlier of course). Anyway the point is, getting onto bed with a stranger who does who knows what with who knows who when you are not there is obviously an extremely silly idea just at the moment, however well you think you know the WG (if still working then says a lot about her attitude to health for her and others doesn't it?).  Really do try to abstain gentlemen for the time being  so the answer is - NOT YET.....

Agreed. Many people around me have been affected by this. A friend of mine lost her dad to this and although he was in his 70's was fit and well with no health issues. I'm not taking any chances and will certainly wait until the all clear is given. I don't see that happening until the end of summer at least

[masseyferguson]

At 151 Sweden has the highest death rate per million population of all the Nordic countries. The next nearest is Denmark with 61, quite a difference.

But with respect that proves nothing, nobody is disputing that the / a lock down will slow the progress of infections and many draconian measures will be tried. The point is that the disease will run it's course eventually, we are just being arrogant about nature ( just the same as we are vis a vis global warming ) if we think we can defeat it or stop it, there are far larger forces at work.
A vaccine will hopefully eventually assist with the achievement of herd immunity, but that will largely already be gained by the passage of time anyway.

[Beamer]

Agreed. Many people around me have been affected by this. A friend of mine lost her dad to this and although he was in his 70's was fit and well with no health issues. I'm not taking any chances and will certainly wait until the all clear is given. I don't see that happening until the end of summer at least

Agreed. Better to take a bit more pain now and have a better landing on the other side of it.

[daviemac]

But with respect that proves nothing, nobody is disputing that the / a lock down will slow the progress of infections and many draconian measures will be tried. The point is that the disease will run it's course eventually, we are just being arrogant about nature ( just the same as we are vis a vis global warming ) if we think we can defeat it or stop it, there are far larger forces at work.
A vaccine will hopefully eventually assist with the achievement of herd immunity, but that will largely already be gained by the passage of time anyway.

You linked to an article where a Swedish 'expert'  claims the lockdown is the wrong course of action, I would argue the number of deaths tell a different story.

If you are OK with lives being sacrificed then that your choice, I'll stick with the lockdown, even if it is an over reaction.

[cunningman]

This guy might well be wrong, after all anybody can be, but he's indisputably well qualified to comment.
   
External Link/Members Only

Wow!  Extremely interesting!   Thanks.