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

[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?

Also tired of people making their "own" risk assessments when we are still vaccinating 60+ here.

@mumwalk

Sticking to the rules/guidance because I really want this to end quicker than it will if we all break/bend rules to suit ourselves.

For the umpteenth time rule "breaking" hasn't been a significant driver in cases escalating. People are catching it predominately at work or in health and social care settings. The lockdowns DON'T work as people still need to go to work and be cared for. However it would seem that the British public love a lockdown, especially on here. The lockdowns especially the most recent one are causing serious harms. I'm not anti vaxer, anti mask or anti being careful. I've had my vaccination. It's not "minor tweaks" to some people's lives, the abolition of society as we know it is going to have serious repercussions.

Because I've seen what Covid has done to the patients on my ward and honestly dont know how I or DS (also Covid ward nurse) would cope with a third wave.
That said I understand those meeting up due to mental health needs.

We do the rules + and always have.

Because when it all goes to shit again I don't want to any of the responsibility for that on my shoulders.

I want to be clear in my own mind that I as an ordinary person I did absolutely everything I could not to cause this.

@kellehi so do you not accept that people mixing indoors ie in private homes increases the risk of covid spreading?

For the umpteenth time rule "breaking" hasn't been a significant driver in cases escalating.

It might be if everybody did it.

We can't eradicate or hide from a virus.

@Nuitsdesetoiles For the umpteenth time rule "breaking" hasn't been a significant driver in cases escalating. People are catching it predominately at work or in health and social care settings. The lockdowns DON'T work as people still need to go to work and be cared for.

I said that on a previous page, but was shot down... In before 'you just use unsubstantiated vagueness. I actually can't even be arsed to go through each opinion that you present as fact there but you have said nothing that isn't made up or just plain wrong.'

Oops, I see I am too late

Because I've always had a very strong moral compass. I want my children to have the same.

[quote sausagedogststandupandtakeover]@kellehi so do you not accept that people mixing indoors ie in private homes increases the risk of covid spreading? [/quote]
Do you not accept that leaving your house under any circumstances increases the risk of covid spreading?

@changi

For the umpteenth time rule "breaking" hasn't been a significant driver in cases escalating.

It might be if everybody did it.

But that's just it. It's speculation isn't it? Everyone I know has been careful, no one I know has adhered to the rules by the letter. The only people I know who've caught it caught it from work (healthcare). Rates here in an area of a big city very low.

@Ninawest100

We can't eradicate or hide from a virus.

Tell that to New Zealand.

@PrincessNutNuts - Tell that to New Zealand.

Who will not be able to have anyone in, vaccines or no.

This is because the vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing covid and nor is it 100% effective at preventing transmission.

So no point in vaccine passport if there is any chance that a vaccinated person might be able to spread covid

@kellehi you didn't answer my question.
Any social contact increases the risk of spread. But I'm asking specifically about indoor mixing in private homes so prolonged contact in a small space.

Tell that to New Zealand

The country that’s closed its borders. How’s that sustainable?

Ah, so you are claiming that the primary cause of covid deaths in the country was not the NHS shovelling Covid positive 'bed blockers' into care homes, nor NHS hospital acquired Covid, nor even 'Granny stayed at home, didn't meet any other person but somehow she got Covid' (actually died of old age and put down as probably covid by a doctor who didn't even see her)... no the majority of Covid deaths are as a direct result of 'people who break the rules'?

You've got a cheek telling other people they're using straw men @kellehi. I tell you what the main cause of Covid deaths is. Covid. Creating rules is an attempt to control Covid. Keeping them is an attempt to control Covid.

I don't know if anything you say about the NHS is true but you haven't given me any reason to think it is. Nor have you given me any reason to think that the covid rules that are created have had no effect despite trying to argue that. As I said, unsubstantiated vagueness.

[quote sausagedogststandupandtakeover]@kellehi you didn't answer my question.
Any social contact increases the risk of spread. But I'm asking specifically about indoor mixing in private homes so prolonged contact in a small space. [/quote]
Then you've answered your own question, haven't you?

@ThePlantsitter

Ah, so you are claiming that the primary cause of covid deaths in the country was not the NHS shovelling Covid positive 'bed blockers' into care homes, nor NHS hospital acquired Covid, nor even 'Granny stayed at home, didn't meet any other person but somehow she got Covid' (actually died of old age and put down as probably covid by a doctor who didn't even see her)... no the majority of Covid deaths are as a direct result of 'people who break the rules'?

You've got a cheek telling other people they're using straw men @kellehi. I tell you what the main cause of Covid deaths is. Covid. Creating rules is an attempt to control Covid. Keeping them is an attempt to control Covid.

I don't know if anything you say about the NHS is true but you haven't given me any reason to think it is. Nor have you given me any reason to think that the covid rules that are created have had no effect despite trying to argue that. As I said, unsubstantiated vagueness.

What's the strawman here?

@kellehi ok I see you're just one of those people who likes to be difficult.
Research has shown that prolonged contact inside is a significantly higher risk than mixing outside. Hence we have the laws that we have.
But you carry in being awkward for the sake of it.

[quote sausagedogststandupandtakeover]@kellehi ok I see you're just one of those people who likes to be difficult.
Research has shown that prolonged contact inside is a significantly higher risk than mixing outside. Hence we have the laws that we have.
But you carry in being awkward for the sake of it. [/quote]
There are many activities that people like to participate in whilst they go about their daily lives that have an element of risk of death or serious injury. Even things as mundane as having a bath compared to having a shower.

The question is not whether activity X carries more of a risk of death than not doing activity X, but whether that risk is substantial, or that risk outweighs the benefits compared to the quality of life gained...

There have been 35 pages of 'unsubstantiated vagueness' and yet nobody has provided anything quantitative on the numbers of infections that occur whilst meeting in private homes, however there is ample media on the following:

• The NHS placing untested covid positive patients into care homes, resulting in a huge number of deaths

• The NHS infecting huge numbers of patients shortly after being admitted to hospital for treatment of non-covid conditions...

• A number of examples of factories, warehouses, etc which got in the media because someone superspread Covid amongst the workers

That is because there is nothing quantitative to look at except the media reporting of these. You would have expected the government to do cost/benefit studies on the cost to the quality of life versus benefit of staying home alone. But they didn't do any of those. They just assumed simplistically, as you do, that when you stay home, then you reduce the spread of covid...

Perhaps in an ideal world, where I implied above, where absolutely everyone doesn't go out, then it might work. But life isn't like that. It is not physically possible to stay home and not go out.

People need to go out. They need to go to work in supermarkets. They need hospital treatment. They need to take the dog to the toilet. Many reasons...

Nahhhhh... you don't care about those. Those are all 'allowed activities' under 'THE LAW'. Doing those things can't possibly be the substantial cause of the spread of covid. It must be because of bad people. Bad people who have spent the whole year alone and under house arrest, begging for some semblance of human contact.

You are somehow desperate to prove that the major driver of Covid deaths is all about people breaking 'the rulez'. Yep, millions of people have been told they should not meet other people indoors and we are expected to believe that one or two people meeting indoors together is the major driver of Covid granny deaths, and not the actions of the NHS which are shortly to be unravelled in an upcoming enquiry for all to see.

Any setting where there is people runs the risk of catching and passing on covid.

By cutting down contact this DOES stop the spread......,

Good question @RaspberryCoulis I've been wondering this too.

I can see that the majority here believe that 1. Lockdown is effective and

1. The benefits of lockdown outweigh the harms.

I think that probably broadly reflects the mumsnet demographic. If you've seen your industry decimated, your colleagues losing everything and face huge uncertainty over their future, you may have a different perspective.

Someone may cleverly pop up to say "better uncertain than dead " but of course most people are going to completely recover from covid so this really isnt a useful comment.

@GabriellaMontez

Good question *@RaspberryCoulis* I've been wondering this too.

I can see that the majority here believe that 1. Lockdown is effective and

1. The benefits of lockdown outweigh the harms.

I think that probably broadly reflects the mumsnet demographic. If you've seen your industry decimated, your colleagues losing everything and face huge uncertainty over their future, you may have a different perspective.

Someone may cleverly pop up to say "better uncertain than dead " but of course most people are going to completely recover from covid so this really isnt a useful comment.

Individuals not following the rules doesn’t help my sector it hampers it as it slows down the plan to open up.

The question of whether lockdown should have happened at all is different to the system we have, which does use them.

@kellehi completely agree. And there are punitive harsh practices going on in healthcare under the guise of "we can't because of covid", women not having partners at scans or in the first stages of labour, telephone CAMHS appointments (waste of time), patients on in patient mental health units unnecessarily having a full set of physical obs done everyday therefore increasing their fear and paranoia... Completely pointless and damaging. Same patients on in patient units and secure units being denied visits with their family. It's punitive, it's harmful is wrong and we need to stop just meekly accepting it all. There's an army of healthcare professionals out there who agree but they've been threatened into silence!!

@GabriellaMontez

Good question *@RaspberryCoulis* I've been wondering this too.

I can see that the majority here believe that 1. Lockdown is effective and

1. The benefits of lockdown outweigh the harms.

I think that probably broadly reflects the mumsnet demographic. If you've seen your industry decimated, your colleagues losing everything and face huge uncertainty over their future, you may have a different perspective.

Someone may cleverly pop up to say "better uncertain than dead " but of course most people are going to completely recover from covid so this really isnt a useful comment.

Unless of course they don't, like many people's relatives, including mine.

Idiotic comment.