Lockdowns not enough to defeat coronavirus: WHO's Ryan

[webfact]

Lockdowns not enough to defeat coronavirus: WHO's Ryan

 

FILE PHOTO: Executive Director of the World Health Organization's (WHO) emergencies program Mike Ryan speaks at a news conference on the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in Geneva, Switzerland February 6, 2020. REUTERS/Denis Balibouse/File Photo

 

LONDON (Reuters) - Countries can’t simply lock down their societies to defeat coronavirus, the World Health Organization’s top emergency expert said on Sunday, adding that public health measures are needed to avoid a resurgence of the virus later on.

 

“What we really need to focus on is finding those who are sick, those who have the virus, and isolate them, find their contacts and isolate them,” Mike Ryan said in an interview on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.

 

“The danger right now with the lockdowns ... if we don’t put in place the strong public health measures now, when those movement restrictions and lockdowns are lifted, the danger is the disease will jump back up.”

 

Much of Europe and the United States have followed China and other Asian countries and introduced drastic restrictions to fight the new coronavirus, with most workers told to work from home and schools, bars, pubs and restaurants being closed.

 

Ryan said that the examples of China, Singapore and South Korea, which coupled restrictions with rigorous measures to test every possible suspect, provided a model for Europe, which the WHO has said has replaced Asia as the epicenter of the pandemic.

 

“Once we’ve suppressed the transmission, we have to go after the virus. We have to take the fight to the virus,” Ryan said.

 

Italy is now the worst hit country in the world by the virus, and UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has warned that Britain’s health system could be overwhelmed unless people avoid social interactions. British housing minister Robert Jenrick said that production of tests would double next week and ramp up thereafter.

 

Ryan also said that several vaccines were in development, but only one had begun trials in the United States. Asked how long it would take before there was a vaccine available in Britain, he said that people needed to be realistic.

 

“We have to make sure that it’s absolutely safe... we are talking at least a year,” he said.

 

“The vaccines will come, but we need to get out and do what we need to do now.”

 

(Reporting by Alistair Smout; Editing by Catherine Evans and Susan Fenton)

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-03-23

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[leeneeds]

Reminds me of a nursery rhyme,

Ring-a-ring-a-rosies
A pocket full of posies
A tissue, a tissue
We all fall down
A tissue, a tissue
We all fall down

The robin on the steeple
Is singing to the people
A tissue, a tissue
We all…

[Airalee]

What about that inexpensive antimalerial I’ve been reading about....hydroxychloroquine.  Or is that not profitable enough for big pharma?  

[daveAustin]

But it's not about defeating it at this time is it. Idea is to get as many folk out of the way to avoid overwhelming health services, while sorting vaccine. Everyone's going to get it, but let's spread it out eh. 

[richard_smith237]

9 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

But it's not about defeating it at this time is it. Idea is to get as many folk out of the way to avoid overwhelming health services, while sorting vaccine. Everyone's going to get it, but let's spread it out eh. 

I don’t know why Ubon Thai reacted ‘sad’ ?? but this is exactly what the social distancing and isolation measures are about. But, some people just do not understand what these measures are about and why they are necessary.

 

To prevent the spread of Covid-19 at this time is an impossibility. What is possible is to use the prescribed social distancing, isolation and quarantine methods to slow down the rate of transmission. We have read and heard the term ‘smoothing the curve’ - which means what it says. 

 

The Washington post has by far the best explanation of how ‘lockdown works’ and why it will be successful. 

It outlines that the goal is not to stop the spread of Covid-19 as that’s pretty much impossible, people / a virus will always slip through the gaps, but the goal is to slow the spread so that health care is not overwhelmed and people don’t due unnecessary because facilities are overloaded.

Slowing down the spread rate allows more time to study the virus and provides an opportunity for those who do contract the virus later to receive more focused treatment. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/

 

 

[richard_smith237]

22 minutes ago, leeneeds said:

Reminds me of a nursery rhyme,

Ring-a-ring-a-rosies
A pocket full of posies
A tissue, a tissue
We all fall down
A tissue, a tissue
We all fall down

The robin on the steeple
Is singing to the people
A tissue, a tissue
We all…

 

From the plague which was a ‘culture’ changing event.

 

This may also become a culture changing event, maybe viruses such as this become a more regular thing. 

Perhaps something as simple as the ‘regular handshake’ will now slip out of favour. In 100’s of years time school kids will learn about the Covid-19 and how that changed the way Westerners greet each other.

[AlexRich]

It is what Europe and the US should have done from the beginning. As soon as this virus exploded in Wuhan the appropriate agencies should have sprung into action ... fail to plan, plan to fail. 

[richard_smith237]

7 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

It is what Europe and the US should have done from the beginning. As soon as this virus exploded in Wuhan the appropriate agencies should have sprung into action ... fail to plan, plan to fail. 

There was evidence at the time (apparently) to believe that this virus would peak at 6 weeks without the need for such extreme and economically crippling measures. At the time, with the belief that the virus would peak at 6 weeks the knock on impact of isolation measures would have been seen to be more damaging to the public than the virus itself. 

Once more was known about this virus, particularly its rate of spread without any indications of a reduction in its rate of spread measures were fairly quickly put into place. 

Obviously with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight this is too slow for some. But, factor in what would happened should many western countries close down their borders and insist on isolation measures before they had the media and public onside - there would have been nationwide rioting, protests against human rights violations by all the princesses who didn’t want their freedoms removed.

Only the experts were believing how potentially threatening this virus was back then and no one wanted to believe them, it was easier to pull the wool over our own eyes, at the time (6 weeks ago), many of us were thinking the news reports were all just media hype and sensationalism, in fact, quite a lot of people still believe this. 

 

 

 

[gk10002000]

Evolution and natural selection sucks sometimes.  But the people that survive will pass on their strength and resistance to the next generation thus strengthening the herd.  Despite humans cognitive awareness, ability to make and use tools, change their environment, etc.., we are still biological creatures. 

 

  One thing this virus will point out is the over crowding and space issues that can really do us harm and make diseases more easily transmitted.  This is nothing new.  But maybe some social or urban changes will come about that could be helpful in the future.  I doubt it because people are not getting less numerous

[Tug]

The Who is right mass testing isolating the sick and carriers work up a vaccine less lip service from the government and more action 

[Boomer6969]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

The Washington post has by far the best explanation of how ‘lockdown works’ and why it will be successful. 

It outlines that the goal is not to stop the spread of Covid-19 as that’s pretty much impossible, people / a virus will always slip through the gaps, but the goal is to slow the spread so that health care is not overwhelmed and people don’t due unnecessary because facilities are overloaded.

Slowing down the spread rate allows more time to study the virus and provides an opportunity for those who do contract the virus later to receive more focused treatment. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/world/corona-simulator/

 

 

The uncontrolled "Exponential curve" is exactly what will happen in Thailand. By shutting down (somewhat) Bangkok, and not banning domestic travel, they have spread the infection to the provinces. Brace for 15 to 20 Million cases by end of May. Sadly hundreds of thousand will die.

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, Airalee said:

What about that inexpensive antimalerial I’ve been reading about....hydroxychloroquine.  Or is that not profitable enough for big pharma?  

They're looking at it. But after initially reporting favorably on it, the Chinese have now somewhat backed off. But it's definitely getting a lot of attention from the scientific community. 

[Curt1591]

Here's Nanjing's solution. So far, so good.

 

 

[geriatrickid]

4 hours ago, Airalee said:

What about that inexpensive antimalerial I’ve been reading about....hydroxychloroquine.  Or is that not profitable enough for big pharma?  

How about no clinical evidence to support its effectiveness?

The drug has been generic for decades. Big pharma has nothing to do with this.

 

[Airalee]

9 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

How about no clinical evidence to support its effectiveness?

The drug has been generic for decades. Big pharma has nothing to do with this.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/therapeutic-options.html

[bristolboy]

15 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

How about no clinical evidence to support its effectiveness?

The drug has been generic for decades. Big pharma has nothing to do with this.

 

4 minutes ago, Airalee said:

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/therapeutic-options.html

I assume you linked to this page in support of the geriatrickid. There are no controlled clinical studies completed that demonstrate the effectiveness of these 2 drugs. Trials are currently under way.

[Airalee]

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I assume you linked to this page in support of the geriatrickid. There are no controlled clinical studies completed that demonstrate the effectiveness of these 2 drugs. Trials are currently under way.

I linked to it because it is something that seems to have gotten some traction recently and has shown in-vitro efficacy.  My original comment was only in order to ask why there was no mention of it in the article.  Wouldn’t it make more sense to continue on with trials especially when it has been said that a vaccine is a year or more out?  

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, Airalee said:

I linked to it because it is something that seems to have gotten some traction recently and has shown in-vitro efficacy.  My original comment was only in order to ask why there was no mention of it in the article.  Wouldn’t it make more sense to continue on with trials especially when it has been said that a vaccine is a year or more out?  

They are continuing with trials. The article says so.

[Airalee]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

They are continuing with trials. The article says so.

The article (not the cdc paper I linked to) says nothing about Chloroquine.  It states that there is a trial for one vaccine (amongst others under development) and that it is at least a year out.

 

If you (or a loved one) was currently on a ventilator, would you say “No thanks...I’ll wait for the vaccine” or would you take your chances with Chloroquine?

 

I stand by my statement.

[bristolboy]

6 minutes ago, Airalee said:

The article (not the cdc paper I linked to) says nothing about Chloroquine.  It states that there is a trial for one vaccine (amongst others under development) and that it is at least a year out.

 

If you (or a loved one) was currently on a ventilator, would you say “No thanks...I’ll wait for the vaccine” or would you take your chances with Chloroquine?

 

I stand by my statement.

"Hydroxychloroquine is currently under investigation in clinical trials for pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and treatment of patients with mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19. In the United States, several clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection are planned or will be enrolling soon."

  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/therapeutic-options.html

Edited March 23, 2020 by bristolboy

[Airalee]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Hydroxychloroquine is currently under investigation in clinical trials for pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and treatment of patients with mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19. In the United States, several clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection are planned or will be enrolling soon.  

That isn’t from the article.  That is from the CDC paper that I linked to.  If you want to quote directly from what I linked to, you should post the link for others to be able to see where you got it.  You might also want to post the fact that it has already been shown to be effective in-vitro and was also found to be effective in China. 
My original comment was based on the article in post #1 from Reuters.

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, Airalee said:

That isn’t from the article.  That is from the CDC paper that I linked to.  If you want to quote directly from what I linked to, you should post the link for others to be able to see where you got it.  You might also want to post the fact that it has already been shown to be effective in-vitro and was also found to be effective in China. 
My original comment was based on the article in post #1 from Reuters.

Immediately after I posted it i saw that I forgot to include a link and now there is one. Or is your problem that my link is to the CDC so not as authoritative as Reuters?

[Airalee]

Just now, bristolboy said:

Immediately after I posted it i saw that I forgot to include a link and now there is one. Or is your problem that my link is to the CDC so not as authoritative as Reuters?

My link was to the CDC.  You were linking to the same thing.  Are you purposefully being obtuse?  If you go back to my original comment, you will see that I was questioning the Reuters article and wondering why there was no mention of chloroquine.

[Proboscis]

5 hours ago, Airalee said:

What about that inexpensive antimalerial I’ve been reading about....hydroxychloroquine.  Or is that not profitable enough for big pharma?  

To establish whether it is suitable requires a major piece of research - already ongoing. You don't want to put something out there that turns out to be a waste of time and maybe gives certain people side-effects.

[Airalee]

1 minute ago, Proboscis said:

To establish whether it is suitable requires a major piece of research - already ongoing. You don't want to put something out there that turns out to be a waste of time and maybe gives certain people side-effects.

If I’m on a ventilator, I will take my chances.

[NanLaew]

17 minutes ago, Airalee said:

19 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Immediately after I posted it i saw that I forgot to include a link and now there is one. Or is your problem that my link is to the CDC so not as authoritative as Reuters?

My link was to the CDC.  You were linking to the same thing.  Are you purposefully being obtuse?  If you go back to my original comment, you will see that I was questioning the Reuters article and wondering why there was no mention of chloroquine.

Because it could induce a whole lot of the less worldly to start clutching at straws? Trump, an early protagonist of this useless speculation has even stopped talking about it.

[Logosone]

“What we really need to focus on is finding those who are sick, those who have the virus, and isolate them, find their contacts and isolate them,” Mike Ryan said in an interview on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.

 

EXACTLY! Isolating the healthy and non-carriers from the healthy will accomplish exactly zero. They need to test and identify the sick and isolate THEM!

 

But of course easier to sit on their political backsides and do nothing. After they were unable to isolate their countries governments are now passing on the responsibility for isolation to the individual, threatening them with 25,000 Euro fines and prison if they fail to do what governments could not do, self-isolate.

 

Isolation of the healthy and non-carriers from the healthy will accomplish nothing, they need to isolate the sick and carriers and isolate THEM!

 

 

Edited March 23, 2020 by Logosone

[SCOTT FITZGERSLD]

it seems to me like a bunch of control freaks from the WHO has 

declared war on "the virus" and they will do anything in their power - and gosh

they do have the power - to get this virus and destroy it, even if the

price is destruction of the global and national economy and throwing tens of millions

into hard poverty and unemployment, which can be no less deadly than this "virus".

 

so what to do? how do you win over this virus?

you don't. simply need to admit that you can't beat this virus.

might be easy for the common sense person to admit, but very

hard for those WHO laboratory graduate to see. that is what happans 

when you give a bunch of medical sceintists too much power over...how to run

the world basically. south america is completely shut down. hundreads of millions

of people are literally sitting at home now, for undefined period, scared to death 

from "the virus" and not sure if they will have anything to eat within a week or two.

is it really worth it? killing the world economy just to kill this virus? 

a virus that kills only 3-4% of those infected? and will propably disapear after few weeks

because it will lose it's spinning power? i don't think so.

so what do i suggest?

simply' let the people go, go back to work and go on with their lives, and those

infected will have to be sent to quarantines places or to die at home, not in hospitals

so they won't danger the health system. it is not less moral than letting hundreads of millions

of people fall into poverty and acctual starvation, not to mention the violent crimes

and psychological problems that will rise from weeks at home, in fear from "the virus" !

idiots WHO crooks, go home and stay there !

that come from !!

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, SCOTT FITZGERSLD said:

 

so what to do? how do you win over this virus?

you don't. simply need to admit that you can't beat this virus.

 

No, you can beat this virus. What they should do is to test and identify the carriers and the sick, and isolate them. Isolating the healthy and non-carriers from the healthy will accomplish nothing.

 

If they test and identify and isolate the sick and carriers then the virus will be beaten.

 

Of course the governments have failed in isolating their countries when that would still have worked, now they are failing in identifying and testing the carriers and sick. Isolating the healthy and non-carriers from the healthy will accomplish nothing.

 

But isolating the sick and carriers, after they've been identified, that will defeat the virus.

[bristolboy]

32 minutes ago, Logosone said:

“What we really need to focus on is finding those who are sick, those who have the virus, and isolate them, find their contacts and isolate them,” Mike Ryan said in an interview on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.

 

EXACTLY! Isolating the healthy and non-carriers from the healthy will accomplish exactly zero. They need to test and identify the sick and isolate THEM!

 

But of course easier to sit on their political backsides and do nothing. After they were unable to isolate their countries governments are now passing on the responsibility for isolation to the individual, threatening them with 25,000 Euro fines and prison if they fail to do what governments could not do, self-isolate.

 

Isolation of the healthy and non-carriers from the healthy will accomplish nothing, they need to isolate the sick and carriers and isolate THEM!

 

 

So many faults with this. Here's a big one: How do you know who the non-symptomatic carriers are if you don't have enough tests?