Choice A - look to end the lock down in full by the end of July while protecting the vulnerable and maintaining looser social distancing rules even though there might be another 50k of deaths attributed to Covid 19 either directly or as a comortality Choice B - maintain the current lockdown until a vaccine is found be it another 18 months away leading to a collapsed economy with upwards of 6m unemployed, increased domestic abuse, rise in alcoholism, family break downs , poverty, suicides, insolvencies. Plus deaths from illnesses due to the lack of treatment for cancer etc due to the NHS being focused solely on Corona Virus. Overall, a higher mortality rate than Covid 19.
Before we vote, can anyone suggest any other possibilities. I don't have any answers, but I'm not keen on either of those.
The way you've presented it would have to be A but I really dont think its that simple. If it was we wouldn't be in lockdown.
Very selected easing of the lockdown once we’re confident we’ve left the peak well behind us. No pubs, clubs or restaurants. No large public events. Smaller shops can re-open but with social distancing maintained.
B. Is pure conjecture and your opinion. You May as well say A. Relax social distancing and open up the economy leading to a million deaths B. Stay on lockdown until a vaccine is found leading to people being fitter, more social with their neighbours and deaths at 20,000 All in the wording
A - if I had to choose. Will probably be something like a tighter version of it. No spectator sports or events like music, theatre. No going abroad on holiday. Self catering/camping if lucky. Pubs/restaurants restricted in numbers, if allowed to open at all. High streets buggered, online shopping king. Old and infirm locked down. Anybody ill quarantined along with circle around them.
They are looking at June/July for secondary and probably selective in which years to allow. If not then maybe September for start of new year.
So it's really just which of the 2 outcomes are in the OP's head you want to choose? So thanks but I'm out
When they can provide the 500000+ teachers and support staff with sufficient PPE to ensure that they don't contract the virus from the children at school and open another avenue of HSE cases against the government. Or are school staff disposable? And if school staff are protected and schools reopen, what is protecting the parents of the 10million+ children? While the vulnerable might self-isolate or keep their kids at home, not all those that die have underlying conditions (or didn't know they had one), and the vast majority of ICU admissions would be expected to live for at least several years normally.
I voted A but there must be other options. The scenario given in option B is obviously largely conjecture. The really worrying thing for me is the latest evidence which suggests that getting the virus doesn't necessarily give you immunity. In which case the pressure on the NHS won't reduce much when we do ease the restrictions.
Yes, we have as a country, to up our game on testing. I don't know who can do it? the Government's got the levers to pull, I'd guess.
At work so not had chance to read the other responses but I would imagine the reality will be something between the 2. Still so much for the scientific community to learn about the virus so a lot of things could still change in terms of how to move forward.
