Page 20 | If you're still sticking to ALL the rules/guidance - why?

ddl1 · 27/03/2021 16:18

The rules are easy to follow and no big deal. It’s just a tiny bit of life to be mildly inconvenienced for the good of society.

I am strongly in favour of following the rules, but to be realistic, it's a lot more than being 'mildly inconvenienced' for many. People who've lost their jobs or at best a significant amount of their income; who have become completely isolated; who have been unable to visit sick relatives before they died, often alone; who have been trapped with abusers; etc etc; have experienced much more than 'mild inconvenience'.

I am one of the luckier ones in many ways, but it's been very damaging to my own mental health, especially before I knew there would be a vaccine.

Dismissing the genuine problems that most have had as a result of lockdown and restrictions makes it more difficult, not less, to encourage compliance for the sake of society and of the future.

Quaagars · 27/03/2021 16:19

I'm still sticking to them
because

I'm law abiding
If we all acted like complete dicks and did whatever the hell we wanted, we'll never get out of this bloody mess and I want to be out of lockdown asap, ta.

kellehi · 27/03/2021 16:27

On the front page of tomorrow's Telegraph has a headline 'Over 70's to get booster jabs from September'

That's after 'all we have to do is vaccinate the vulnerable everybody and we'll let you get back to normal. But yeah, as long as you all keep on 'following the rules', it'll be over soon enough.

MarshaBradyo · 27/03/2021 16:29

@ddl1

The rules are easy to follow and no big deal. It’s just a tiny bit of life to be mildly inconvenienced for the good of society.

I am strongly in favour of following the rules, but to be realistic, it's a lot more than being 'mildly inconvenienced' for many. People who've lost their jobs or at best a significant amount of their income; who have become completely isolated; who have been unable to visit sick relatives before they died, often alone; who have been trapped with abusers; etc etc; have experienced much more than 'mild inconvenience'.

I am one of the luckier ones in many ways, but it's been very damaging to my own mental health, especially before I knew there would be a vaccine.

Dismissing the genuine problems that most have had as a result of lockdown and restrictions makes it more difficult, not less, to encourage compliance for the sake of society and of the future.

I follow them too but I agree in no way are they a ‘mild inconvenience’. For some, not by a long shot.

en0la · 27/03/2021 16:31

[quote mn81987]@en0la fear not I certainly won't be bothering you for sympathy 🤣. And as I said before, zero fucks given if you think I'm selfish!
I'm sure Monday you will be meeting up with people again, why is today different? 🤣🤔[/quote]
On Monday I will be at work just like every other week day so yes, I will be seeing people. Outside of work, no I won't be.

ArseInTheCoOpWindow · 27/03/2021 16:35

Just been in a local supermarket. One in one out. Everyone queuing up socially distanced.

So most people near me are sticking to it.

irregularegular · 27/03/2021 16:38

I'm not 100% following the rules (eg recently had friend for cup of tea in garden, which is not allowed rather than park bench, which would be allowed). But very close - that's about as far as my transgressions go. A bit because I just don't want to break the law, but mostly because I don't want to be responsible for spreading Covid and, by and large, am willing to accept the guidance regarding what risks are worth taking when. I'm not personally afraid of Covid at all. It's not in my nature to be anxious about these things.

espressotogo · 27/03/2021 16:39

Op, in the real world most people are like you. They're not going crazy but, at this stage, they are bending the rules and are not hysterical like most of MN.
Most of the things I would like to do like go to the pub or the gym I can't do yet but I am glad that my kids are now back at school and that my son is back at football training - where I get to mix with all the other parents outdoors (much more than 1 other) which is great and very much within the rules - although no doubt considered dangerous by many on here.

For those calling the OP thick and claiming that they listen to the scientists who are qualified to make these judgements - you do realise that there are many other scientists who are equally as qualified and eminent as Chris Whitty et al who do not agree with the measures in place and are of the opinion that lockdowns cause more harm than good ? Just because these people are not on SAGE it doesn't make their opinions any less valid. Also, there is growing evidence that tougher lockdowns vs no actual lockdown doesn't seem to make much difference to the trajectory of the virus. So, while we think that logically lockdowns must work because they prevent social contact, we don't know that they are as effective as we think in preventing transmission - especially when a large % of the cases stemmed from hospitals and care homes.

The vaccine IS the silver bullet and we have now vaccinated much more than the small % (and it is small in context of the population) of people that are likely to die or get seriously ill from it - the first dose gives a high level of protection - and it is this that is the most likely cause of death rates reducing not lockdown. The government can't bang on about its highly successful vaccine roll out but not expect people to question why we are still locked down !

poppycat10 · 27/03/2021 16:40

For me the rules are mostly a mild inconvenience. Not so much when you have lost your job or are furloughed on insufficient money or can't get medical and dental treatment you need because of "roolz".

ThePlantsitter · 27/03/2021 16:54

@espressotogo

Op, in the real world most people are like you. They're not going crazy but, at this stage, they are bending the rules and are not hysterical like most of MN. Most of the things I would like to do like go to the pub or the gym I can't do yet but I am glad that my kids are now back at school and that my son is back at football training - where I get to mix with all the other parents outdoors (much more than 1 other) which is great and very much within the rules - although no doubt considered dangerous by many on here.

For those calling the OP thick and claiming that they listen to the scientists who are qualified to make these judgements - you do realise that there are many other scientists who are equally as qualified and eminent as Chris Whitty et al who do not agree with the measures in place and are of the opinion that lockdowns cause more harm than good ? Just because these people are not on SAGE it doesn't make their opinions any less valid. Also, there is growing evidence that tougher lockdowns vs no actual lockdown doesn't seem to make much difference to the trajectory of the virus. So, while we think that logically lockdowns must work because they prevent social contact, we don't know that they are as effective as we think in preventing transmission - especially when a large % of the cases stemmed from hospitals and care homes.

The vaccine IS the silver bullet and we have now vaccinated much more than the small % (and it is small in context of the population) of people that are likely to die or get seriously ill from it - the first dose gives a high level of protection - and it is this that is the most likely cause of death rates reducing not lockdown. The government can't bang on about its highly successful vaccine roll out but not expect people to question why we are still locked down !

We choose to live in a society where the government makes the decisions about which scientists to believe. The country chose this current govt and still would if the polls are anything to go by. I think that's nuts but it's the way it is. I understand wanting to object to the rules or campaign against them - but what I DON'T agree with is a slow dissolution of the regulations because individuals make decisions based on... what? "Common sense", whatever that is? Convenience? What they want to be the case? Because I don't think in the majority of cases it's scientific knowledge or judgement. And I believe we are much stronger and effective if we all do the same thing when it comes to handling transmissible disease.

Coasterfan · 27/03/2021 17:02

I m following the rules by default as nothing I want to do is open! The kids see their friends at school so they don’t need to go to their houses or have them round here. I don’t have many friends and I can meet them outside from Monday so I can’t even see any rules to break really!! All I want to do is go to Alton Towers!!

SmileEachDay · 27/03/2021 17:03

what I DON'T agree with is a slow dissolution of the regulations because individuals make decisions based on... what? "Common sense", whatever that is? Convenience? What they want to be the case? Because I don't think in the majority of cases it's scientific knowledge or judgement

Exactly this.

Can you imagine if surgeons in operating theatres decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment? What would happen to infection control?

RootyT00t · 27/03/2021 17:07

@RaspberryCoulis

Will start by saying I am not sticking to the covid rules any more. Obviously I can't go places which aren't open. But we have had people in the house, kids are going out with friends probably in larger numbers than are permitted, we're crossing local authority boundaries which is supposedly illegal in Scotland. Why? Because we've been in lockdown for a year, cases here are very low, and some things are more important than Covid.

But on every thread there are people claiming that they are sticking rigidly to every single rule and guideline, never breaking ANY rule. They would probably say I was a selfish covid-denier who was hellbent on murdering their granny.

So if you're sticking to all the guidelines and rules, without fail - why? People who are clinically extremely vulnerable (officially) I can understand in part if they're not vaccinated. But the rest of you? Is it because you're scared of Covid, or scared of your neighbours, or scared of breaking the law by mistake?

Im going to assume you're being genuine, and just a bit dim and self absorbed.

We aren't doing these things because we aren't selfish and have a responsibility.

If everyone got in their car now and did what's important to THEM imagine the consequences.

If you want me to be tough? My wee gran is stuck in a care home with no visitors, my vulnerable pupils have been locked up for months and my relative died because of people like you.

I don't know what's worse. You doing it, or being so bloody smug.

kellehi · 27/03/2021 17:08

@SmileEachDay

what I DON'T agree with is a slow dissolution of the regulations because individuals make decisions based on... what? "Common sense", whatever that is? Convenience? What they want to be the case? Because I don't think in the majority of cases it's scientific knowledge or judgement

Exactly this.

Can you imagine if surgeons in operating theatres decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment? What would happen to infection control?

Nice strawman you have created there.

espressotogo · 27/03/2021 17:13

Can you imagine if surgeons in operating theatres decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment? What would happen to infection control?

As a large number of people who didn't have covid caught it in a hospital setting I would suggest that there is a problem with infection control ?

SmileEachDay · 27/03/2021 17:18

Nice strawman you have created there

It’s not - it’s an analogy. People would rightfully be outraged. But some people seem completely comfortable with making individual decisions about infection control 🤷🏻‍♀️

RootyT00t · 27/03/2021 17:24

@SmileEachDay

Nice strawman you have created there

It’s not - it’s an analogy. People would rightfully be outraged. But some people seem completely comfortable with making individual decisions about infection control 🤷🏻‍♀️

Agreed

kellehi · 27/03/2021 17:27

@SmileEachDay

Nice strawman you have created there

It’s not - it’s an analogy. People would rightfully be outraged. But some people seem completely comfortable with making individual decisions about infection control 🤷🏻‍♀️

No, it is a strawman.

Because NOBODY is suggesting that 'surgeons in operating theatres [have] decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment.'

If you wanted to create analogies, you could start with the 'scientists' saying that masks are not required at all, then suddenly without explanation they are, then move on to the WHO recommendations that lockdowns and movement restrictions are absolutely not the way to go, and then look at places like Florida which do not seem to have any upswing in cases/deaths compared to more restrictive states...

Radio4Rocks · 27/03/2021 17:29

Our family has kept to the rules because we aren't selfish cunts.

Simple as that.

SmileEachDay · 27/03/2021 17:29

No, it is a strawman

Because NOBODY is suggesting that 'surgeons in operating theatres [have] decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment

I know. That’s why it’s an analogy.

XenoBitch · 27/03/2021 17:30

@SmileEachDay

what I DON'T agree with is a slow dissolution of the regulations because individuals make decisions based on... what? "Common sense", whatever that is? Convenience? What they want to be the case? Because I don't think in the majority of cases it's scientific knowledge or judgement

Exactly this.

Can you imagine if surgeons in operating theatres decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment? What would happen to infection control?

Surgeons don't use sterilising machines, They have nothing to do with them. They also go into their career knowing that there are standards regarding infection control and aseptic technique.

Comparing this to lockdown rules does not work. We did not enter 2020 thinking that in a few short months, it would have been against the law to see our own family.

RootyT00t · 27/03/2021 17:30

This obsession with 'but nobody said that' drives me crackers.

People can use whatever analogies they like.

BlackbirdOtto · 27/03/2021 17:31

I know people meeting everyday with three or four other families - the children are already meeting at school so they think it’s fine. They are meeting inside homes and in parks and gardens. They are not following the rules because they can only think of themselves and they are young and quote “want to get back to normal”.
I’m very sorry your parents died and it must be very hard. You can meet one other person for a walk , so meet your sister.
But sorry the Covid rules are to protect society as a whole.
I know young children who have lost a previously healthy parent to Covid and a relative with long Covid whose life has changed. So maybe get some perspective and think of the bigger picture.
I personally have kept to the rules to protect others not for myself .

kellehi · 27/03/2021 17:32

@SmileEachDay

No, it is a strawman

Because NOBODY is suggesting that 'surgeons in operating theatres [have] decided they couldn’t be arsed with gloves or sterilising equipment

I know. That’s why it’s an analogy.

Wikipedia says: "A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To ‘set up a straw man’ or ‘set up a straw-man argument’ is to create a position that is easy to refute, then attribute that position to the opponent. A straw-man argument can be a successful rhetorical technique (that is, it may succeed in persuading people) but it is in fact a misleading fallacy, because the opponent's actual argument has not been refuted. ... It is occasionally called a straw dog fallacy, scarecrow argument, or wooden dummy argument." / "One can set up a straw man in the following ways: 1) Present a misrepresentation of the opponent's position, refute it, and pretend that the opponent's actual position has been refuted. 2) Quote an opponent's words out of context — i.e., choose quotations that are not representative of the opponent's actual intentions. 3) Present someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, refute that person's arguments, and pretend that every upholder of that position, and thus the position itself, has been defeated. 4) Invent a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs that are criticized, and pretend that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical. 5) Oversimplify a person's argument into a simple analogy, which can then be attacked."

PrincessNutNuts · 27/03/2021 17:33

@Fridget

This too will pass. There is light at the end of the tunnel. We've just got to hang in there

I believe a large part of the problem is that people have lost faith in that.

I blame the government bullshlt messaging for that.

People believe them when they say 3 weeks/12weeks/Summer/Christmas/when the vulnerable have had some vaccine/June 21st.

Their false optimism just leads to disappointment over and over again