To lockdown those people is probably complex. Maybe a preferable option is to put in legislation to protect people who want it. I think we all know of people who despite being at risk are determined to carry on regardless, maybe that should be their choice. For those that are high risk and increase that risk by having to use public transport/frontline jobs with high exposure etc offer them financial protection from being forced into work
The whole problem with a virus is that if someone takes a risk it's not just themselves alone that are party to their own risk. Person One insists despite being higher risk they would prefer to go about their business normally. Thus leaving Person One at risk not only to themselves but infecting others within their own family, friends but also strangers unless of course possible Herd Immunity is the target!
With a lockdown if everyone in the country (an unrealistic proposal of course) shielded for say a month then technically if you go by the science the virus would be possibly be eradicated within that month. If it can't spread it dies from what I would assume. As I say an unrealistic proposal because society needs food, water and power etc so the reason as to why the virus wasn't eradicated was due to I suspect possibly five main groups. 1. Key Workers and their families (along with patients, children in schools etc those that were cared by for them or were in contact with them). 2. General public and their families going about accepted business. (shopping, exercise etc). 3. Care Homes. 4. Returning travellers from abroad. 5. Those that flouted the rules. No blame attached to individuals bar number 5 although the Government certainly must take the blame for 3 to 5 as they could have done something about it.
In my opinion asymptomatic spread is possibly a contributory factor to spread in the community so the Governments "advice" saying not to go into work etc or to self isolate if you have symptoms whilst obvious does nothing to prevent the possibility of transmission which is in the form of asymptomatic spread.
However one form of transmission has not been discussed in much detail bar the odd rumour circulating and that is how long someone could potentially spread the virus "after recovering" from it. After all we have all been in a scenario that we go back to work after a dose of flu or norovirus after our symptoms have cleared up, but is it possible that maybe certain people could be infectious sometime "after recovering"? Is it also possible that immunity is possibly short lived in some people because we continue to read about people possibly picking up the virus again after they have already had it so could it suggest that Covid possibly mutates more regularly than some other viruses?
Asymptomatic spread possibilities.
https://thorax.bmj.com/content/75/8/621
Possible reinfection.
https://expressdigest.com/israeli-doctor-is-diagnosed-with-coronavirus-twice/
Last edited: