At least retaining legal requirement for mask wearing - once it becomes only a company rule on public transport and in shops, etc, then you are going to get a great reduction in compliance. If nothing else, this should be retained until we are well past the peak of this current wave and we have vaccination rates right up to projected herd immunity levels. My worry is that the removal of a legal requirement for wearing masks is essentially a green light for many people to return to pre-pandemic ways of thinking and acting.
The huge wave on the run up to Christmas and beyond was a direct consequence of a relaxation of restrictions. Restriction that had reduced cases to a trickle prior to the big summer blow out ordered by the chancellor. We had a summer of subsidised food and people made the most of the freedom. Hence transmission in the community showed a distinct increase. That was not a consequence of face masks it was due to people doing as they wanted having spent 3 months locked down from March to June/July. Transmission rates take a while to gain traction but once they are going they take a lot of bringing down.
I sympathise with you,but,masks aren't proven to stop transmission. If people want to wear masks in crowded places,fine,it's up to them. If I go into a shop,or a bus or a train and I'm asked to wear a mask I'll put one on........but,otherwise,I'm done.
Common sense is valued so much because it is so rarely encountered - if everybody had it then it wouldn't be valued! The 'common' in common sense doesn't mean that it is widely distributed, unfortunately is just means it is accessible without specialised ability. It would be much better if it were just re-named as basic sense!
It is obvious you define improvement differently to most. I like to think keeping deaths and hospitalisations down massively is an improvement. The lockdowns were designed to do that so the nhs would have space for not only COVID patients but also for acute trauma and all those others that end up requiring life saving treatment regardless of a pandemic. The lockdown did its job and continued to do the job until the vaccines came online to provide a modicum of immunity in the population. That was always the long term plan. It’s not an either/or situation. Yes it’s here to stay and yes we have to learn to live with it to a large extent however, it is running rampage at the moment and to be honest long COVID should be the focus now as sickness from this could potentially kill off fragile businesses before they have managed to recover. There’s a lot of anecdotal evidence of staff shortages already without a spike in long term sickness hitting the country.
Locking down and keeping hospitals from overflowing isn’t an improvement, because they were never overflowed in the 1st place. So what improvements were made before the vaccine?
No, that wasn't the point, your original question was "How have their measures controlled this disease?" (see below) which several people have explained more than adequately.
Vaccines aren't proven to stop transmission either. The point is that vaccines, masks, social distancing all form individual parts of a multilayered defensive strategy - the so called swiss cheese model.
Over half of the total beds in a lot of nhs trusts were filled with COVID patients. That’s over 50% of the beds usually taken up by other patients who were in for elective surgery etc. This was a direct consequence of relaxing rules when there was no immunity in the population to speak of. During this time people still had heart attacks, car accidents, strokes, cancer and all the other stuff that results in a hospital stay. To say they were not overflowing denies the very real struggle a lot of nhs staff were dealing with day to day. Dealing with death rather than the health of their patients. The nhs was pushed to the limit during this time. Because of a relaxation of restrictions. The lockdown delayed this peak over summer perhaps that’s where the mistake was made they should have kept the lockdown to delay the peak until now when the vaccines have been rolled out. Allowing this virus to rampage through the population unchecked would have been a disaster the lockdown had the effect of reducing the impact of this to ensure the nhs could cope with all patients coming through the door. That’s an “improvement”.
The world health organisation or John’s Hopkins university who compiled them globally. If you read what I said I agreed that I didn’t believe the numbers from China but those are the number that suggest they contained it with restrictions. Unless you have data to the contrary?
