To think that Mumsnet should clamp down on the scaremongering threads?

[callmeadoctor]

Thats it really, you come on Mumsnet and anxiety levels are ramped up. Surely thats not safe?

Today I’ve seen predictions for 500000 dead; no cure ever; no vaccine ever; self isolation for 2 years; rioting on the streets; looting; and finally a demand for a coup to get rid of Boris Johnson.

I have to admit this is starting to fuck with my head and I don't feel confident that there is an end in sight to social distancing or pubs/restaurants/theatres closed and so on.

But I missed BJ's press conference so I'm off to google.

You forgot killing all pets so the vets can treat humans. It's crazy there.

Someone really wrote that? Not that I'm too surprised tbh, being a veteran of a few dog bunfights threads.

Yep, they did. It's almost like they are trying to find ways to outdo themselves with their ridiculous and, in a lot of cases, offensive comments.

Thankfully no one I know in real life is behaving like this!

Keep calm and carry on (self isolating)

Other thread OP has been completely jumped on, much taunting.... but 60% still think they are not being unreasonable regarding scaremongering. Quietly, a lot of people feel we should stay calm, listen only to verified facts, and work on creating some sort of healthy, balanced, sane life while this rages on. The loudest voices are shouting about face masks. Suggest limiting how much of this crap you read, and focussing on good stuff you can control, whilst following the guidelines.

This is awful, I’ve just come back to this thread, and another one I’m on. People attacking and abusing to defend their scaremongering , because it’s a “fucking pandemic” don’t you know.

It’s just really sad.

Hate the scaremongering threads,reported one the other day,got a reply from MN saying it’s good to get our thoughts out!!!So it was staying.

There are many of us who feel we don't have to be offensive and hysterical to try to prove how much we know or care about C19. It's good to see a few people popping up in the offensive hysterical threads being sensible!

Yesterday 07:57
@MarginalGain

It flattens the curve, the area under the curve remains the same. The same number of people will become infected, and very close to the same number will die. It will just take longer. We don't have enough ventilators, ICU beds or staff to make flattening the curve very helpful, and it's too late to change that unfortunately. And there is no realistic prospect of flattening the curve enough to delay the bulk of the deaths long enough for a vaccine to be available. And the devastation to GDP will kill more people than the small number who curve flattening will allow access to ventilators.

I agree with this, which is why I think this exercise is largely pointless.

Although rather worryingly Mumsnet has deleted my original post (in italics above). Mumsnet, if you do want to censor do it properly! At least two posters have quoted my post, so the remarks can still be read.

I think we have to remember that MN attracts trolls and that they get worse when the schools are off.

Personally I think every 'I'm a doctor/nurse' post/thread revealing an unverifiable story should be deleted.

There were posters in denial about the seriousness of the pandemic. I think they're in the minority now.

It's not factual threads that are upsetting people imo. It's the deliberately unverifiable horror stories from the 'frontline'. I think MN should have a standard policy to delete them. If someone has a genuine story to tell they can contact the media and the media can fact check their story and their identity.

Although rather worryingly Mumsnet has deleted my original post (in italics above). Mumsnet, if you do want to censor do it properly! At least two posters have quoted my post, so the remarks can still be read.

Really? Why, MN?

Possibly it was deleted for being a scaremongering post with absolutely no evidence behind it?

Chris Mason @chrismasonbbc
This from @BBCNormanS on the emergency new laws being rushed through today...

Emergency powers need to be renewed every 6 months rather than being merely for 2 years.

Dippy I already posted yesterday the obvious potential for error in the current model, it is fallible with lots of assumptions regarding human behaviour and delivery of various ambitious private/public sector projects (and has no doubt been tempered with a hefty dose of 'keeping the public calm').

It is sensible to continue to question the possible outcomes.

I try to keep off that board now, although still get drawn to threads in "trending". I was heartened a couple of days ago about the news of the availability of private beds, staff and ventilators - it reassured me that there are real efforts being made at high level. I should have been brave enough to start a thread about it, but knew I'd be shouted down.

Yes, why was Goaty's post removed? It's not scaremongering -- the social and economic impact of lockdown will also kill people, and flattening the curve doesn't necessarily mean fewer people will die in total (the hope is it will because the health system will be less overwhelmed at any one time but we just don't know yet).

That doesn't mean we shouldn't shut down anyway but we need to be open about the costs. If we sell this idea that everything will be fine if people stay home, people are going to be very unnerved when unintended consequences emerge.

I’m surprised at the deletion as well.

This reminds me a bit of when AIDS first started, only it was thought to only affect the gay community then.
I would LOVE MN to put up notices on sections to remind posters that there is a CV section and to please go there

This reminds me a bit of when AIDS first started, only it was thought to only affect the gay community then.

And it was quite easy not to catch it.

If we had a public information campaign as good as the AIDS one then there might be less idiots going to the pub and the beach. They were terrifyingly effective.

If we had a public information campaign as good as the AIDS one then there might be less idiots going to the pub and the beach. They were terrifyingly effective.

AIDS had a 100% death rate, theoretically at least, so no. It will never be that terrifying.

AIDS had a 100% death rate, theoretically at least, so no. It will never be that terrifying.

Yes, but it was nowhere near as infectious! Once we knew about it it was comparatively extremely easy to avoid catching.

Yes, but it was nowhere near as infectious! Once we knew about it it was comparatively extremely easy to avoid catching.

Of course that's true, but covid19 (like influenza) will not capture the public's imagination the way that AIDS or Ebola or smallpox or even cancer does. It is simply not scary enough for the vast majority of those who will get it.

I don’t think that’s true. You can see mass behaviour already. Not the right changes but people are mobilised. (To shop unfortunately). Someone good could cut through and do better with a campaign.

I don’t think that’s true. You can see mass behaviour already. Not the right changes but people are mobilised. (To shop unfortunately). Someone good could cut through and do better with a campaign.

Yes, they're reacting to the threat of lockdown and disrupted supply chains, not the disease itself.