Does this mean the end of human contact until there is a vaccine?

VonLuck

theological wrote: »

What exactly does that mean? Easing the lockdown would require some form of easing to social distancing. That's effectively what it would have to mean.

Otherwise the measures would be defacto identical to what we have now.

Yes, exactly my point. Lockdown (which is effectively the current measures) is never going to be maintained as is until 2021 and no one is suggesting that.

tdf7187 wrote: »

OP, please state your scientific qualifications and expertise, otherwise you are just another chicken licken on the internet.

Do I need scientific qualifications to raise a discussion now? I haven't stated anything that isn't common knowledge.

theological

VonLuck wrote: »

Yes, exactly my point. Lockdown (which is effectively the current measures) is never going to be maintained as is until 2021 and no one is suggesting that.

Do I need scientific qualifications to raise a discussion now? I haven't stated anything that isn't common knowledge.

Could you answer my question about what maintaining social distancing would look like after the lockdown is eased?

I agree that pubs, cafes and restaurants are probably going to be among the last to open.

What Username Guidelines

theological wrote: »

Could you answer my question about what maintaining social distancing would look like after the lockdown is eased?

I agree that pubs, cafes and restaurants are probably going to be among the last to open.

I think it means limits on everything. So you'll still queue for shops and there will be limited occupancy of each shop at a time. Masks maybe, screens for cashiers, a push towards more online spending where possible for retailers. Things like concerts/gatherings/sport is unknown.

Looking at Italy and Spain, their surges came from zero restrictions - large protest in madrid with 80k people, etc. The idea is to deal with that surge now, get over the 'hump' and then open slowly with distancing so there isnt another surge. More focus on handwashing/coughing/etc will put a dent in it, unknown how much of a dent.

The big issue is that in Italy now, as they open up some shops, there are no customers. The big fear that was initially instilled in people to keep them home, is keeping them home now. This helps keep spread down alright, but doesnt do a lot for the economy. Even if people were dying to get out, slower throughput via social distancing means less revenue, and thats assuming people have money to spend in the first place.

It's a very, very difficult scenario that no one has the correct answer to unfortunately.

hmmm

We will develop a better understanding of how the virus transmits, and this knowledge will allow us to relax restrictions. At the moment, because we have so little information, we have to stop everything.

In my completely non-expert opinion, there is very little evidence of transmission in outdoor settings, so perhaps meeting up with people outdoors might become acceptable. Not great in our climate, but we'll have to adapt! There is lots of evidence of transmission in places like bars, restaurants, churches - enclosed indoor spaces.

I think ultimately if it drags on we will all have a health status (or at least those who want to interact). The Chinese have already developed this - the West were looking on tut-tutting at what China has done, but they are ahead of the game. Everyone in China now gets a health score - so depending on your health status and travel history, you get a particular colour grade. Perhaps in the dating of the future you might have it as a criteria that someone has to meet a particular health score, or you might use the same criteria to judge whether you want to meet up with family, or invite someone to that party.

What Username Guidelines

hmmm wrote: »

I think ultimately if it drags on we will all have a health status (or at least those who want to interact). The Chinese have already developed this - the West were looking on tut-tutting at what China has done, but they are ahead of the game. Everyone in China now gets a health score - so depending on your health status and travel history, you get a particular colour grade. Perhaps in the dating of the future you might have it as a criteria that someone has to meet a particular health score, or you might use the same criteria to judge whether you want to meet up with family, or invite someone to that party.

This is how it should work but I just cant see it being accepted by enough to make it feasible. I believe the contract tracing apps in eastern countries grade you when you're supposed to be in isolation for example, so you're not allowed enter restaurants/public transit, etc.

Immunity certs, if immunity is a thing, would also allow this or at least help with it, but that's a massive divisive issue - if they announced that, you'd have a minority allowed to do as they please, the most vulnerable locked down, and the rest going around licking trolley handles taking their chances.

Harry Palmr

Social distancing is the space between two people. not closed shops and businesses.

MadYaker

So every couple that isn’t cohabitating are going to stay 2 metres away from each other for the next two years? Yeah right. Do the government really think it’s realistic for there to be no bars, clubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities etc none of these places can operate with social distancing. Harris needs to come up with a much, much better plan. I’m thinking I might move back to France for a year or two if that’s what it’s going to be like here.

Harry Palmr

What do you think it'll be like there? Have you checked?

MadYaker

Harry Palmr wrote: »

What do you think it'll be like there? Have you checked?

They are working towards half a million tests a week. Stuff in Paris is reopening in 3 weeks. Remains to be seen if society will be a bit more open there but it’s looking like it will be.

theological

MadYaker wrote: »

So every couple that isn’t cohabitating are going to stay 2 metres away from each other for the next two years? Yeah right. Do the government really think it’s realistic for there to be no bars, clubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities etc none of these places can operate with social distancing. Harris needs to come up with a much, much better plan. I’m thinking I might move back to France for a year or two if that’s what it’s going to be like here.

To be honest it is already nigh on impossible to keep people at the required distance in the supermarket already!

I think it's going to be impossible to stop people meeting
within the 2m range when the measures get eased. It's probably more a case of restricting the size of gatherings. Reducing social contact may be possible but eliminating it entirely long term won't work.

ILoveYourVibes

Yes.

No visiting friends etc. No pubs.

ILoveYourVibes

MadYaker wrote: »

So every couple that isn’t cohabitating are going to stay 2 metres away from each other for the next two years? Yeah right. Do the government really think it’s realistic for there to be no bars, clubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities etc none of these places can operate with social distancing. Harris needs to come up with a much, much better plan. I’m thinking I might move back to France for a year or two if that’s what it’s going to be like here.

Schools and universities fine.

Sporting events pubs etc ..nope.

Perhaps you have a list of people you are going to interact with and no interacting with people outside of that circle.

BanditLuke

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Christmas will be miserable, even more than normal.

An upside at long last.

VonLuck

MadYaker wrote: »

So every couple that isn’t cohabitating are going to stay 2 metres away from each other for the next two years? Yeah right. Do the government really think it’s realistic for there to be no bars, clubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities etc none of these places can operate with social distancing. Harris needs to come up with a much, much better plan. I’m thinking I might move back to France for a year or two if that’s what it’s going to be like here.

Realistically I don't think any government could impose those restrictions long term.

The question I guess I'm asking is that once these restrictions are lifted, the responsibility lies with the individual. The risk will always be there until there is a vaccine.

Would people be willing to visit their over 70 parents if the government lifted social distancing restrictions, even temporarily?

theological

VonLuck wrote: »

Realistically I don't think any government could impose those restrictions long term.

The question I guess I'm asking is that once these restrictions are lifted, the responsibility lies with the individual. The risk will always be there until there is a vaccine.

Would people be willing to visit their over 70 parents if the government lifted social distancing restrictions, even temporarily?

That depends on the circumstances. For example if I'm working in an environment where I am in contact with a lot of people I would possibly avoid this scenario. But if I live alone and I have not been in contact with anyone else all week then the risk is extremely low.

Scotty #

UrbanFret

Vaccine will be available before year end. Then the wait to manufacture enough of it to treat the world. Highest bidders will get it first. I'd say we'll be in the 2nd tier.

Downlinz

It's a choice between social distancing or everyone wearing masks

hmmm

MadYaker wrote: »

So every couple that isn’t cohabitating are going to stay 2 metres away from each other for the next two years? Yeah right. Do the government really think it’s realistic for there to be no bars, clubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities etc none of these places can operate with social distancing. Harris needs to come up with a much, much better plan. I’m thinking I might move back to France for a year or two if that’s what it’s going to be like here.

It's a virus, it's not like he can simply wave a wand and have it disappear.

Ultimately we may have some restrictions lifted, but unless you (personally) are willing to take a risk there is going to be advice to remain socially distant until a vaccine or some other medical solution emerges.

The couples, schools, bars, clubs etc are going to have to come up with a plan of their own, the government can only set broad guidelines. Some businesses will simply not be able to exist while the virus circulates (e.g. crowded pubs, nightclubs).

JustAThought

everybody sensible.

In the meantime our local pub has opened yesterday with a big fanfare of hand dispensers outside in the street and signs to keep socail distance inside and the usual boyos hanging around taking drags at the door sipping theor pints. Garda station 30 seconds stroll up the road ... not bothered

Scotty #

UrbanFret wrote: »

Vaccine will be available before year end.

I hope you are right but I think this is fantasy.

Here's a list of vaccines developed > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_vaccines

Most were developed many many years after the disease was discovered. Smallpox is still the only disease to have ever been eradicated.

theological

UrbanFret wrote: »

Vaccine will be available before year end. Then the wait to manufacture enough of it to treat the world. Highest bidders will get it first. I'd say we'll be in the 2nd tier.

That's the hopeful scenario. It could be 18 months away either. In which time we're going to have to learn how to live with the virus.

When the curve drops substantially the case for the lockdown will end. Pressure is already mounting because of other countries but they are further ahead by 2 to 3 weeks.

trapp

hmmm wrote: »

We will develop a better understanding of how the virus transmits, and this knowledge will allow us to relax restrictions. At the moment, because we have so little information, we have to stop everything.

In my completely non-expert opinion, there is very little evidence of transmission in outdoor settings, so perhaps meeting up with people outdoors might become acceptable. Not great in our climate, but we'll have to adapt! There is lots of evidence of transmission in places like bars, restaurants, churches - enclosed indoor spaces.

I think ultimately if it drags on we will all have a health status (or at least those who want to interact). The Chinese have already developed this - the West were looking on tut-tutting at what China has done, but they are ahead of the game. Everyone in China now gets a health score - so depending on your health status and travel history, you get a particular colour grade. Perhaps in the dating of the future you might have it as a criteria that someone has to meet a particular health score, or you might use the same criteria to judge whether you want to meet up with family, or invite someone to that party.

This ain't China and never will be.

Not a hope of something like that ever being implemented in Ireland.

And Thank heavens for that.

Whatever game China are ahead of, I'm glad we're not playing it.

JustAThought

Didn’t they find vial of it knocking around a few years back - just in case ... some old lab being decomissioned or ex military base - can’t remember the detail - it created quite the furore. I can’t remember if Julian or Wikileaks had something to do with it but I remember watching a report on it on the BBC who I am more likely to
give credence to than the internets conspiracy theories.

Regarding vaccines shockingly before all this started I happened to google Ebola and was watching a podcast about the survivor doctor who they treated with antibodoes for Ebola from another surviving WHO contractor and who they thought was cured - Dr Ian Crozier. His interview was filmed in 2014 and extremely darkly in this he predicted a global catastrophic pandemic even worse than Ebola of the Meres Coronavirus or worse. He was 6 years ahead of his time.

He also spoke about his Ebola ‘illness’ and how he noted and they subsequently discovered that the Ebola virus although absent ‘cured’ from his immune system has been found living and mutating in his eyes. I felt a bit sick when I heard that. Apparently the eyeball has a closed immune system that operates separate to our main immune system. On the basis of
his discovery the WHO has since funded research on other west african ebola survivors and they have found the same thing - the virus is alive and mutating inside their eyes and also has an after life in the soil of at least 60 days. They are less attentive of burials in graveyards and the run off into agricultural water tables over there.

I would be skeptical about ‘our’ ability to produce, test and be confident about a miracle vaccine for a global population. I would also be extremely concerned about the testing of it.

‘You’ should google that Dr Ian Crozier interview - it lasts about an hour - and has frightening parallels.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xi29GJZllts

Personally although I’m
not necessarily happy about it I’ll be happy to queue in safe distance and forego pubs and hugs of I’m not stuck for life with some of the after effects those who have had it (Cocid19) several months ago and survived - ongoing heart and breathing difficulties, shortness of breath, reduced lung capacity and lungs that constantly feel as if they are on fire. Frightening stuff.

VonLuck

theological wrote: »

That depends on the circumstances. For example if I'm working in an environment where I am in contact with a lot of people I would possibly avoid this scenario. But if I live alone and I have not been in contact with anyone else all week then the risk is extremely low.

The risk may be low, but there still is a risk. I was listening to a woman on the radio this morning in her 90's who recovered from Covid-19. She said she was in complete isolation and still caught it.

I would hate to be the one who infected a loved one and will be a tough decision for anyone to make, even if the risk is minimal.

MadYaker

I’m ok with taking risks myself. I’m young and fit but I don’t want to infect others who may die.

ixoy

It won't because people aren't built that way. More likely are "circles of trust" - close family will have to trust their family members, coupes dating, but not-cohabiting, trust the other (that's already happening). Friends will make a decision themselves. Of course circles will overlap but if they social distance from strangers it'll reduce the risk and transmission.

The chances of people completely avoiding any close contact from anyone outside their household for any length of time is nil. Avoiding strangers is likely the best we can realistically achieve in any medium to long-term.

And in certain cases it'll be inevitable - public transport is rammed to capacity as is, so either masks will come into play or people will have to take a risk given our transport infrastructure is at capacity.

theological

VonLuck wrote: »

The risk may be low, but there still is a risk. I was listening to a woman on the radio this morning in her 90's who recovered from Covid-19. She said she was in complete isolation and still caught it.

I would hate to be the one who infected a loved one and will be a tough decision for anyone to make, even if the risk is minimal.

The risk is effectively zero in the second scenario. If one wanted to be particularly cautious one could keep to a 2 metre distance. Then the risk is non-existent.

The problem at the moment is that numbers have not reduced sufficiently in terms of cases and deaths. The other problem is that we don't have sufficient data in testing to determine where the virus is. When we have this plus the contact tracing apps then we will be able to adopt a South Korean approach of track, test, isolate. This will allow more freedom.

People should probably maintain a group of people they are in contact with without going beyond this and understanding who the others in their restricted group are in contact with. This will still reduce spread.

My understanding of what I'm doing at the moment is giving the government time to put these measures in place. If the government haven't done this is by the coming weeks then people have every right to ask what the heck have you been doing with the time I'm giving you.

Savecoronabeer

It will be tough going for those of us who are single and have certain needs. I was only really starting to enjoy singledom too after a crappy breakup.

Sono Topolino

The main reason that strict social distancing is a priority right now is that it reduces the R0 such that our ICU capacity is not overwhelmed. Over time, the hope is to increase our ICU capacity so that it can handle the increased load. There is also a global shortage of PPE and pretty much everything else that we need to fight this. In time, supply should catch up with demand.

We're currently reacting to the virus, because we don't fully understand it (it's a novel virus), but with time we will be able to plot a course out of social distancing.

I can see a number of things happening in the following order:

1) Personal distancing measures are relaxed in conjunction with an increase in ICU capacity, availability of PPE and capacity to conduct contact tracing.
2) Younger, fitter and healthier people are allowed out of doors to socialise (albeit wearing masks), while those with chronic illnesses and the elderly are encouraged to continue cocooning. Cocooning advice will have to be specific and tailored. Healthy, active people over 70 certainly will not appreciate being told not to go about their lives while young whippersnappers can do as they please.
3) The prognosis of people with the disease improves, as our knowledge of the disease increases and new treatments are discovered and come on the market.
4) A vaccine is discovered and brought to market, and as this is rolled out the remaining social distancing regulations are gradually removed.
5) Pubs and restaurants reopen, but with hand sanitiser, enough soap in bathrooms and less capacity.

Having said that, this disease will result in permanent changes to how we socialise and how businesses operate. Hand sanitiser usage will become more normal, as will working from home and the use of apps to conduct business meetings and even socialise over long distances as opposed to meeting up.