Covid. Permanent suppression or truly learning to live with it?

[GaolBhoAlba]

Interested to see where people are at, as we go into our third year of the suppression approach.

Its taken a while, but most have accepted that coronavirus is here to stay, and that restrictions serve only to suppress (they cant/wont eradicate). We hear the theory (and the phrase) 'learning to live' with it, but in practice we're nowhere near to learning to live with it. Indeed, we're still behaving as though we can eradicate it via repeated 'short term' suppression. Current thinking is as it was in March 2020 ie that if we suppress it for 'just a bit longer' it'll go away. It wont. Clearly we cant continue swinging between 'living with it' and 'suppressing it' - the uncertainty of a continued stop/start for business, education (planning life in general!) etc isnt feasible as a long term strategy; we need to decide one way or another.

So... are you in favour of accepting that our current way of living must become permanent and (obviously this list is not exhaustive) masks, distancing, limits on mixing, one way systems etc are how we must live now. Funding to support business/furlough is made permanent and we all pay extra to support same (because I suppose the alternative is hospitality businesses just close? Become part of the bygone era). Remote learning in schools is a fixture (and that will be based, not on illness, but on isolation rules) every time there is a peak (and funding will need to be, I dont know, redirected from schools to parents in order to allow this). WFH is made permanent and, again, funding redirected to allow same.
Or... are you in favour of truly 'learning to live' with it, relying on vaccine to do the heavy lifting (thus not counting cases and accepting, as with flu, hospitalisations and deaths), scrapping track and trace, scrapping isolation (thus allowing asymptomatic people - including teachers and NHS staff to live/go to work normally) and essentially returning to life as it was in 2019.

YABU - in favour of permanent suppression.
YANBU - in favour of truly learning to live with it.

@Natty13

I don't think anything tbh apart from that they are very selfish. Im so so used to it now. Lots of them will of course likely be fine if they catch it. Some will feel unwell and maybe get long covid, some will get very sick and end up on ICU or pass it on to family members who end up on life support/dead. I feel zero sympathy for them when that happens. And that scares me because I've looked after all kinds of people including criminals and always felt sorry on some level when they are unwell. I can't care about people who don't care about others. You don't know that the person beside you on the bus or the person you share an office with isn't immunpsuppressed or CEV? What about their freedoms to live without risk of dying?

Most of us talk pretty openly about this at work. We are so sick of it.

This attitude among health professionals scares me. It’s not the first time I’ve heard it either.

Covid is highly infectious. It’s easy to catch and pass on, and not even know you have it.

Are children “selfish” for going to school and coming home with it and passing it on to a family member who is then seriously ill? What about an autistic or deaf child who isn’t able to wear a mask in school? Are key workers “selfish” for going to work and inadvertently exposing someone? The entire world can’t stop, even in lockdown many of us still needed to do our jobs. I hate this attitude of blaming people who get Covid or pass it on because they mustn’t have been “careful enough”. We’re in a bloody pandemic. People WILL get this illness even if they take precautions - a friend of mine shielded for months and then got it the first time she went out in the summer. Fortunately she was only mildly unwell, but we wouldn’t possibly ever know who “gave” it to her - and that person was just living their life, like everybody else, and trying to have a modicum of normality just like my friend was. She actually got the disease and was CEV and she can manage to not blame anybody else for it.

It’s about how many deaths (due to covid and other things) - and how much withdrawal of health services - voters will tolerate to get other benefits / reduce other costs (eg economic harm, high prices, education harm)

Well, yes, the same as all the other deaths we tolerate. Think how many lives we’d save by banning alcohol and cars and mandating healthy eating and exercise! And yet, we tolerate all those deaths…

The additional complication with covid post-vaccines is that ‘restrictions’ (or ‘mitigations’ or ‘protections’ or whatever we’re calling them these days) won’t prevent infections caused by the virus, just delay them to another time. Which makes sense when we’re waiting for vaccines, and makes sense if there’s an immediate prospect of an overwhelmed health system. But outside those situations, the cost would be high for a benefit close to zero.

Yes, it’s about timing of deaths vs NHS capacity.

UK health and social care have low capacity relative to other European countries with similar wealth.

Sorry, not timing of deaths, timing of numbers of people needing hospital and intensive care.

If, as is likely, key NHS staff leave, are temporarily off sick with covid or other things or are too unwell (with any condition, eg anxiety, depression) to continue to work, clearly that will further lessen capacity.

@GaolBhoAlba

The original question was, who wants to live with covid, vs permanent restrictions? My answer is that I’d rather live with it. That’s my prerogative.

Amen.

89% - pretty conclusive. Its been (on the whole 😂) an interesting read.

I haven't read the whole thread but relieved - and surprised - to see the % results.

Dole I feel the same way and think it’s a shame but hope it’s short lived.

We are in a period of high growth and I was still relieved to see news reports on no new restrictions expected this week atm. When numbers decline there will be a strong push against any restrictions- and other changes re testing will start to happen. Initially this was Spring re testing iirc

BTW if it was your loved one I would bet money you'd be posting it everywhere as much as you could in your horror at them lying blue, bloated and suffocating to death from a "cold". 99.9% of people with your opinions do if it happens to someone you love. Never mind when it happens to strangers though right

Well you clearly don't give a fat rats crack about the families of those that have died seeing as you have posted the horrific way they died (including my mum), so thanks for that. Tell me have you ever said to a bereaved person due to a car accident, "well their heart was ripped away and the amount of blood they lost was enormous"?

@TimBoothseyes

BTW if it was your loved one I would bet money you'd be posting it everywhere as much as you could in your horror at them lying blue, bloated and suffocating to death from a "cold". 99.9% of people with your opinions do if it happens to someone you love. Never mind when it happens to strangers though right

Well you clearly don't give a fat rats crack about the families of those that have died seeing as you have posted the horrific way they died (including my mum), so thanks for that. Tell me have you ever said to a bereaved person due to a car accident, "well their heart was ripped away and the amount of blood they lost was enormous"?

I’m sorry for your loss

And agree with your point re an hcp posting like this.

CDC have ditched end of isolation PCR tests as they can’t distinguish between the two.

Except that isn't what happened.
One thing that happened recently was a voluntary recall, which has nothing to do with being unable to distinguish between covid and the flu: www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/pcr-test-recall-can-the-test-tell-the-difference-between-covid-19-and-the-flu

The CDC updated their guidance on isolation periods recently, but end of isolation PCR testing hasn't been a widespread thing for well over a year -- you can see it here in the JUly 2020 update that reads "A test-based strategy is no longer recommended to determine when to discontinue home isolation, except in certain circumstances."

@PineappleMojito I completely agree with you. It scares me too ( but doesn’t surprise) because it is a first account of the existence of prejudice within our health service which affects the care of different groups in different ways.

@TimBoothseyes

BTW if it was your loved one I would bet money you'd be posting it everywhere as much as you could in your horror at them lying blue, bloated and suffocating to death from a "cold". 99.9% of people with your opinions do if it happens to someone you love. Never mind when it happens to strangers though right

Well you clearly don't give a fat rats crack about the families of those that have died seeing as you have posted the horrific way they died (including my mum), so thanks for that. Tell me have you ever said to a bereaved person due to a car accident, "well their heart was ripped away and the amount of blood they lost was enormous"?

Im so sorry.

I asked, last night, for the graphic depictions shes posted to be removed.

There's always going to be some restrictions, or conditions, or do we want the care homes etc opened up for everyone to enter again?
I like that two weeks ago dentists have been threatened with fines. I believe that GP's and walk ins shouldn't be demanding PCRs.
I'm CEV, I couldn't shield. I've been sent a PCR to use if I have symptoms, which many vulnerable people have. We will get instant access to the latest medication, sent to us if we test positive. Things like that should continue.
So there needs to be some measures in place for another year. We need to plan for each winter and have services better funded because our issues are partly because of a lack of funding, as said by Chris Whitty, but ignored in the press.

@HikingforScenery I do hear of it in non health professionals too, this attitude has sadly affected a lot of people and it’s very damaging. In mental health world I have to work with the damage it causes too, when people are blamed by others around them including hcps for causing someone else’s illness or death. It’s horrible. Nobody would ever have said such things if, for example, a grandmother caught a respiratory virus off a child in the pre-Covid times. I think it’s good to act with caution and care - maybe don’t take a young child to see someone vulnerable if they have a respiratory virus, or don’t go into work and soldier on, and maybe it’s made us all think a little more about that, but then to extend that into blaming individuals is just horrible and inhumane.

or do we want the care homes etc opened up for everyone to enter again?

Yes, because residents in care homes need to have visitors and see their families. Those are their homes, they should have as much right to being part of a family and a community as the rest of us.

Visiting restrictions justified for short emergency situations (and this was the case pre-covid too because of what other infectious diseases can do in care homes), but have been massively damaging to happiness and health and shouldn’t be kept in place forever as if covid is the only thing that matters to people.

@Ponoka7

There's always going to be some restrictions, or conditions, or do we want the care homes etc opened up for everyone to enter again? I like that two weeks ago dentists have been threatened with fines. I believe that GP's and walk ins shouldn't be demanding PCRs. I'm CEV, I couldn't shield. I've been sent a PCR to use if I have symptoms, which many vulnerable people have. We will get instant access to the latest medication, sent to us if we test positive. Things like that should continue. So there needs to be some measures in place for another year. We need to plan for each winter and have services better funded because our issues are partly because of a lack of funding, as said by Chris Whitty, but ignored in the press.

We're still living the legacy of the government message back in 2020 that "we're all at risk" (as though equally) when, in reality, some were (and remain) at far more risk than others. They still dont have a plan to adequately protect the more vulnerable. Theyre referring to restrictions as 'protections' now whilst still applying the same approach to everyone. Far more could (and still should) be invested in genuine protections for the most vulnerable.

@GoldenOmber, I agree with visitors, but there's ways to manage that so other residents are protected. Outdoor rooms could be made, for whole extended family visiting with school children, rather than just everyone in the lounge. If we could do it for pubs, we can do for residential care. There's a difference in residents, not all will have the same vulnerability. LFTs can be used. We've always asked people not to visit if they are unwell, we are now dealing with an asymptomatic serious (for them) flu.

I totally agree that the message should be that we were never equally at risk. There should have been more transparency about who was dying. I've had hospital appointments three times since it started and although I was considered at risk, my consultant (one whose been on the BBC) has said that they've only lost two very elderly patients linked to Covid which is what they would every winter. Which reassured me and spurred me on to take more care of health. However there should also have been more time spent explaining about stopping varients.

The initial pressure was high so the most immediate measure was to keep people apart

This meant using messages around being ‘safe’ backed up by idea of high risk

I agree this should change pretty quickly when not needed for compliance.

I look forward to lower media focus and better view on risk

OP you present two very contrasting alternatives. I'm not in favour of either. Adapting long term with things such as face coverings on public transport, testing in hospitals/care homes, for example, I'd be happy with. Working from home part or even most of the time where it is possible should be long term I think, not just for Covid reasons but to reduce traffic levels and carbon footprints.

I'd like a competent government most of all, regardless of the party.

Tell me have you ever said to a bereaved person due to a car accident, "well their heart was ripped away and the amount of blood they lost was enormous"?

Well for one I've never spoken to a bereaved relative of one of my patients woth anything but genuine compassion so comparing what I write online about my personal opinions to how I treat actual people in my care is a bit pointless.

FYI If we were discussing car accidents on a thread I would in fact write something like that if someone had killed a person they love by drink/drug/dangerous driving. The attitude of "why should I change my life in any way whstsoever because of a cold, I will be fine if I catch it" and "why should I get everyone to wear a seatbelt/I'm fine to drive mum home after 6 pints" are comparable to me. We all know there's a chance these things could end in something terrible, however small and of you choose to take that risk rather than, say, get a vaccine or wear a mask then thsts on you. Sorry. This post asked for opinions and that's mine.

I am very sorry about your mum. All I can say it that me andy colleagues will do whatever it takes and prioritise as much as we can to make sure people are comfortable and peaceful at the end. There are unfortunately people who refuse all medications/oxygen/comfort measures because they and their family think its all nonsense right to the end and die in distress but this is at their choice and (thank God) the minority. There's nothing any of us can do to fight that and having to watch it over and over/respect their choice affects you. We are human too, you know?

Well I don't think anyone's going to advocate for a continual surpression - obviously we were well beyond 'Zero covid' by April 2020 in the UK and I think the intial responses of the last few years were totally justified if usually several weeks too late. The limitations of surpression seem to be showing in NZ and Australia now perhaps.

I was just thinking this morning that the government is desperately angling for no more lockdowns of any kind during this wave so they can claim a 'lockdown-free year' (and contrast this with places that didn't) in 2022.

I think masks will stick around and even if not mandated I can see some people sticking with them in crowded, enclosed situations, especially in winter.

I also expect we'll calm down a bit about the vaccinations as in we'll get down to maybe one a year for most people and perhaps two for the more vulnerable. I really hope this year we'll vaccinate the rest of the world as that's super important now.

Bro and I were just talking about travel restrictions and wondering if more countries (at least well-vaccinated ones) might ease up on it - because it seems now that unless you have managed to totally surpress any form of COVID in your country, is it really worth losing so much tourism when any new variants will have probably got in before you are aware of them?

There's nothing any of us can do to fight that and having to watch it over and over/respect their choice affects you

And posting about it knowing that there may be people reading it who are still grieving and now have that image in their head (again, thanks for that), made you feel what? Because it sure as Hell wasn't compassion.

Aside from the fact that elderly and disabled lives do matter, as the scientific and medical experts say, everybody is indeed at risk. Long Covid is a real thing. Denial won't change that fact.

As for the "oh they're old, ready to die anyway" eugenics ageist shit. Ok then, if there's no need to take any mitigations whatsoever once over, what do you want to say, 60? 65? 70?, anyway whatever age you pick, let's legalise all risky activities for the elderly. Including currently illegal drugs. Oh - and we really must think of a different message for the anti smoking crew. Because "it shortens your life" no longer works when , if you live longer, you're told it's well past time for you to pop off... albeit in a much more unpleasant manner than the compassionate option denied in the UK of assisted suicide.

Btw there's a difference between low risk versus no risk.

The vast majority of approx 600-1000 UK HCP dead from Covid were under 75.

It absolutely is compassion. When nothing else is getting through, Natty's blunt truth might just manage to spare one family from going through unnecessary premature Covid bereavement.

It's certainly not compassion to give false hope and enable potentially deadly denial.

It's a relatively common phenomenon. Families who've lost a loved one in a terrible and/or unnecessary manner, don't shy away from the brutal truth. See the mothers who've lost children to knife crime. Their campaigns do not pussyfoot around. Photos and and graphic descriptions of the bloody reality.

Spelling it out in contrast to dangerous denial comes from a place of immense compassion.

If anything, then this whole pandemic should have taught us that biggest difference in outcome is underlying health. I look forward to our government focusing on this as the next step and improving the outcomes for everyone.