Social media is going into meltdown over these comments. People are very confused and they don’t clearly understand what the implications of this are.

We won’t hear from the governement until Tuesday April  1st 2021 at the earliest.

Originally Posted by: Heavy Weather 2013 

Your first sentence is unprovable so I cannot comment.

The plan and the argument behind it seems like a very good or at least well thought out one -

• let the less vulnerable get it as we cannot stop a virus like this


• while the younger/less vulnerable recover and are immune the older or more vulnerable are protected (development of this unpopular so called “herd immunity” system)


• By the time the self-isolation period is complete there will be much less spread to the vulnerable groups and consequently less strain on the NHS.

That’s the logic and it makes sense whether it works or not is another matter. Things will continue to change and I hope the communication improves a bit.

Originally Posted by: doctormog 

To my mind, it all smacks of "We don't have a bloody clue what we are doing".

It would be laughable tbh were it not so serious. The incompetence and ineptitude of Johnson and his so-called government over this virus has reached levels that I had previously thought wasn't possible even for him & them.

Originally Posted by: David M Porter 

  You only have to look on this thread to see how information/misinformation changes the mood and opinions of people.  People don’t bother to check whether something’s true before reacting or reaching a conclusion.   

Originally Posted by: Caz 

The approach seems very scientific, the delivery of the message at times less so.

Do you think the strategy outlined is wrong.? Would you prefer a national lockdown and if so for how many months? Bearing in mind the virus could come back shortly after that period.

Originally Posted by: doctormog 

My first sentence is an assumption and unproveable as you say, but I think a fair assumption given how this virus spreads and how only hospital patients are getting tested. That leaves many with mild symptoms free to roam (not all will self-isolate).

I understand the logic, I just think the implementation and communication from HMG is deeply flawed right now. I sense you have confidence in Hancock, Johnson, Cummings and co. I do not share that confidence. I have also lost some confidence in Whitty and Vallance, though that is mainly due to how their words are being misinterpreted.

Originally Posted by: SJV 

The problem is, Michael, that it seems that public health policy is being drawn up on the hoof in response to media events. You cannot even describe that as a strategy - it is a recipe for confusion at best.

What is dreadful is 'pre-announcing' half baked ideas with no indication of what people should do in the interim. It sows fear and confusion among vulnerable groups.

We need consistency even if that means a minister saying: on week 1, we will do this; on week 2, we will do this; on week 3, etc.

There is no consistency here at the very time that we need a steady hand on the tiller.

Originally Posted by: Justin W 

The problem is, Michael, that it seems that public health policy is being drawn up on the hoof in response to media events. You cannot even describe that as a strategy - it is a recipe for confusion at best.

What is dreadful is 'pre-announcing' half baked ideas with no indication of what people should do in the interim. It sows fear and confusion among vulnerable groups.

We need consistency even if that means a minister saying: on week 1, we will do this; on week 2, we will do this; on week 3, etc.

There is no consistency here at the very time that we need a steady hand on the tiller.

Originally Posted by: Justin W 

For the reasons I mention they simply cannot and should not do that or if they do, if it is based on real time data they will have to change the timing regularly and then inevitably they will be lambasted for changing their approach.

The current approach does not have clear timings as the spread of the virus doesn’t work to an absolute timetable. If it spreads faster than anticipated the actions should reflect that and likewise for a slower than anticipated spread. 

However, yes much better communication is needed, provided people listen to the whole message not just the headline (and we know whether that is usually the case). 

Things will change constantly based on the situation at the time, it would be madness if it were to be otherwise.

Originally Posted by: doctormog 

Hancock's message of " if you have a symptom no matter how mild then you MUST stay at home to protect yourself and others "

That just does not work , business's will shut 

Originally Posted by: Gooner 

Businesses are going to shut whatever.

I expect the country to move to a command economy setup very soon. The printing presses will be switched on. There will be an enforced moratorium on loan and mortgage repayments. I expect the BoE to start issuing so-called 'helicopter money' given that the economy is about to lose between 5 and 10% of GDP. We are facing an economic crisis not seen since 1929.

The army will be out delivering food. Police will enforce curfews. This is likely to go on until the end of the summer.

Life is about to become very different.

Originally Posted by: Justin W 

Why do you say that ? Just out of curiosity , we as a business are doing our best to manage this 

Originally Posted by: Gooner 

The approach seems very scientific, the delivery of the message at times less so.

Do you think the strategy outlined is wrong.? Would you prefer a national lockdown and if so for how many months? Bearing in mind the virus could come back shortly after that period.

Originally Posted by: doctormog 

Because demand is collapsing across every sector apart from food retail. Some businesses will survive of course. But many won't. So many are so dependent upon cashflow.

Originally Posted by: Justin W 

Here are some excerpts from the execrable little twerp Hancock's 'plan'. You will see there is no plan other than there not being a place for 'herd immunity' and to get car plants to make ventilators:

We have a plan, based on the expertise of world-leading scientists. Herd immunity is not a part of it. That is a scientific concept, not a goal or a strategy. Our goal is to protect life from this virus, our strategy is to protect the most vulnerable and protect the NHS through contain, delay, research and mitigate.

And:

We are working through our clear action plan. Like all our decisions, the plan is based on the bedrock of the science, with maximum transparency. We will do the right thing at the right time, based on the best available science.

To protect life, we must protect the vulnerable, and protect the NHS and flatten the curve.

And:

Today, we take further action, with a call to arms for a drive to build the ventilators and other equipment the NHS will need. We are better equipped thanks to the NHS than most other countries, but we will need many more. We now need any manufacturers to transform their production lines to make ventilators. We cannot make too many.

And:

Next week we will publish our emergency bill, to give the Government the temporary powers we will need to help everyone get through this. The measures in it allow for the worst case scenario. I hope many of them won’t be needed. But we will ask Parliament for these powers in case they are.

The country is in need of clear leadership and direction as we head into this difficult period. Instead, we have a PM who has no interest in detail being guided by a megalomaniac adviser with a personality disorder. Hence we get the 'take it on the chin' and 'herd immunity' policy only for these to be dumped at the first sign of body bags. 

What will be dumped next weekend when we have 16,000 cases and more than 150 dead?

This is a shambles and it will cost lives. We need Gordon Brown at a time like this - instead we have a dangerous buffoon as a PM and a duplicitous little pr1ck for a health secretary.

Originally Posted by: Justin W 

Herd immunity not our policy. I thought the idea that slowing the virus would help protect our NHS - understandable and sensible. I also thought we'd still have a widespread infected population, just over a longer period of time to ease the strain.

If we're not aiming for immunity then I fear for everyone next winter. A second wave is certainly possible.

Originally Posted by: SJV 

The herd immunity thing has rather got out of hand as a message/"policy aim". Look at Germany - no one there is talking about herd immunity as a policy, yet they are still predicting up to 70% infection rates (which will more than meet the estimated herd immunity threshold).

The message I fear is becoming garbled and the Government are not doing a good job on this. The science, however, remains solid.

Originally Posted by: Arcus