Whatever about 'herd immunity', one thing Euro Governments need to publicly advocate against is the increase in herd mentality. 

Several hundred thousand people die every year in normal times.

And, while full herd immunity might need 80% plus of us to get it, is it the case the more people who have immunity the slower it will spread until it gradually stops? I wonder what the % is to get it to slow? Well, if 50% have immunity it has to spread more slowly (err, does it? I've actually no idea, it's a question for modellers) than if no one has immunity?

Hello Ben good news is most virus mutations are of negative value of the virus and the same vaccine can be used rather than explain I came across this a bit of a long read but interesting as the other day I wondered myself.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-mutations.html

Lockdowns now starting in Spain

After midnight, no one will be able to leave Igualada, Santa Margarida de Montbui, Òdena and Vilanova del Camí. More than 65,000 people live in this area. https://t.co/i2KcPIhiaF

— BNO Newsroom (@BNODesk) March 12, 2020

I think deaths are "nailed on" no matter what approach we take

I instinctively like the UK Gov. approach becuase it takes a hit in the shorter term for a better long term outlook.

The 2 things that can go wrong though are :-

1. Exponential growth and a overwhelmed  NHS  leading to a massive  death rate.


2. We  suffer a  lot of deaths but don't achieve the immunity desired and get clobbered a 2nd time.

The policy of containment may work if a vaccine is developed before the 2nd wave strikes.  If   a vaccine is still a year away  (which most people say it is) then those in the containment lobby will have virtually a full flu  season to endure in addition to  this year.  The chances of maintaining containment throughout that entire 2nd period must be slim and containment failure may be worse if teh 2nd wave is more virulent than the first (people seem to think this is likley from the Spanish Flu precedent)

That is clearly wrong as demonstrated by other countries and it goes completely against what the WHO is recommending.

I find the UK approach to be extremely risky and I worry that we'll end up one of the worst countries in Europe.

How can you call the 2 approaches similar given the point above?

Peehaps the missing part of the equation is the number of cases being missed because the symptoms are so mild. The CMO said five to ten times as many could be infected as have actually been identified.  If it's the top figure and the illness is mild then 1% becomes 0.1%  - still not good but maybe with a vaccine after the first wave it becomes an understandable strategy?

Interesting stats:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.09.20033217v1

"Here, we investigate the stability of viable HCoV-19 on surfaces and in aerosols in comparison with SARS-CoV-1. Overall, stability is very similar between HCoV-19 and SARS-CoV-1. We found that viable virus could be detected in aerosols up to 3 hours post aerosolization, up to 4 hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to 2-3 days on plastic and stainless steel. HCoV-19 and SARS-CoV-1 exhibited similar half-lives in aerosols, with median estimates around 2.7 hours. Both viruses show relatively long viability on stainless steel and polypropylene compared to copper or cardboard: the median half-life estimate for HCoV-19 is around 13 hours on steel and around 16 hours on polypropylene. Our results indicate that aerosol and fomite transmission of HCoV-19 is plausible, as the virus can remain viable in aerosols for multiple hours and on surfaces up to days."

Went to my local pizza express tonight and it was almost deserted, the manager said they are seeing already a big impact.

That is more or less the one point of difference.

Not likely if you read this

But most of these mutations negatively affect the virus. If mutations are not beneficial to the virus, they are typically eliminated through natural selection, the mechanism of evolution whereby organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive. Other mutations survive and get embedded into the "average" genome of a virus.

Typically, multiple genes code for traits such as a virus's severity or ability to transmit to other people, Grubaugh wrote. So, for a virus to become more severe or transmit more easily, multiple genes would have to mutate. Despite high rates of mutation among viruses in general, it's unusual to find viruses that change their mode of transmission between humans over such short time scales, he wrote.

So, what does all of this mean for the development of a possible vaccine? 

These viruses "are still so genetically similar that these mutations shouldn't alter a new vaccine," Grubaugh said. It's "unlikely that the developers have to worry about this." Once the vaccine is out, however, the virus could adapt to it and develop resistance, he said, but considering that other RNA viruses — such as those that cause measles, mumps and yellow fever — didn't develop resistance to vaccines, that scenario is unlikely.

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-mutations.html

Coronavirus: 'I've had worse flu, without a doubt' https://t.co/HyIxVAeDfr

— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) March 12, 2020

Which makes the 2 approaches quite different? Lots of events with more than 100 people!

Without being too melodramatic, we are facing a level of distress and loss not seen since WW2. Families will lose loved ones before their time, and the collective resolve of communities will be tested to the limit in the next few months. I suspect we will emerge from this episode with a whole new perspective on our lives and how we approach crises like this in the future.
I have an elderly mother whose respiratory state is to say the least compromised. She lives in a home with 34 equally elderly people in close proximity. Suffice to say we will do all we can to isolate her and minimise her chances of infection, but reading between the lines I fear the worst case scenario is inevitable.
I’m probably not the only one this evening re-evaluating what my priorities are at the moment and I will be spending quite a bit of time with her at the weekend - taking all possible precautions of course.

A number of the booked seats on the flight back from Helsinki today were empty. I suspect a number of people bailed out at the last minute partly because of Trump's announcement.  

Raises interesting questions.

What would be the mortality if, say, measles was introduced to 70million unvaccinated people who'd never encountered it? Many would show no disease, or a mild illness, but a number of people would die - I think the reaction might well be like we see now. Which reminds me of what European diseases did to native south Americans... This virus does not seem to be in that category!

Otoh, do some people get flu and not show symptoms?

Another question is what should you do if you contract it?

Presumably drink lots of water. I also assume eating as well as possible is advisable. More uncertain are things like cough medicine, aspirin, nurofen, paracetamol, codeine, nytol etc. I've not seen official guidance on off the shelf medicines such as these.

Actual footage of my work place next week. I guarantee it. 

https://www.instagram.com/p/B9pbj0EANOb/?igshid=x2wgie9r1cx3

You don’t want measles had that as a young lad was really sick as a parrot with it as was my sister.

I assume you are the manager?

Most supermarkets will have more than a hundred people in them at any one time panic buying bread and bog roll just in case the virus spreads.

Paracetomol is supposed to be helpful for the fever which apparently lasts 2 days. After that, I guess that anything which suppresses breathing, like codeine, is a no no.

Dangerous to extrapolate PL. This virus does not wear the clothes of it's predecessors in so many ways, and we've only just watched the opening credits on the film.