(Covid) To think these recommendations are bonkers?

[NoCharnce]

So the government commission into how to memorialise the Covid pandemic has recommended the government implement “A UK-wide day of reflection should be established and held annually.”

Other recommendations include national memorials (10 sites already identified!), oral histories and museums plus additional funding for local authorities to set up their own memorials.

I can’t be the only one who thinks this is nuts and hope the government ignores the recommendations? I genuinely cannot believe people get paid to produce this crap.

I thoroughly agree it was all hugely traumatic. It was made more traumatic than it needed to be because of the insanity we got caught up in.

I look back at it in horror.

I don't think state mandated remembrance will do a thing to help ease that.

@WestwardHo1

"I thoroughly agree it was all hugely traumatic. It was made more traumatic than it needed to be because of the insanity we got caught up in.

I look back at it in horror.

I don't think state mandated remembrance will do a thing to help ease that."

+++

I think a state mandated remembrance would simply make many of us squirm with embarrassment and awkwardness at how easily we all got caught up in the hysteria and blindly followed the guidance even when it was contradictory or made no sense at all.

How many people were very happy to inform on those not following the rules or how any questioning of the guidance was shut down by accusation of being an anti vaxxer or COVID denier.

Nah I think we are better off trying to forget the whole thing and pretend it never happened.

@1dayatatime

Whereas those of us who needed to be careful because we were CEV or had a CEV in our household were referred to as ‘sheep’ - or snobs - or belittled - because we were choosing to follow global scientific consensus opinion in order to protect ourselves/others. In my case desperately waiting for a hospital bed to become available to treat cancer before it became untreatable.

I would personally rather forget that time, but fully understand that those who lost their loved ones to Covid may need a time for reflection.

@WhalePolo thank you for respecting that some would wish for a remembrance.

I can fully understand how others want the whole thing forgotten about.

For me, at the time it felt my loved ones deaths were disregarded by some.

I remember trying to explain to someone that I’d had vulnerable friends die and I didn’t want to take any chances with DC. They actually rolled their eyes and tutted.

Now it seems we’re at risk of forgetting the people who died entirely, the sacrifices to keep us all safe and the enormous effort to find a route to ending restrictions.

I’m not ready to forget loved ones, it all still feels acutely painful - and recent actually - a close family friend died a year ago, a work colleague a month ago…

I mean people are still dying from this it’s horrible.

@Sparklecats

I’m so sorry you’ve lost loved ones.

I also feel that the needs of the vulnerable were disregarded, glossed over or deemed as inconvenient by some. In favour of individualism, personal freedom and wealth. However I do believe it was the minority. The majority took the safety of others seriously.

Our flat is council, DH works for a HA. 'Reassessments' regarding income don't apply to either and never have.

Nobody claims benefits here. You've always had to inform HB/UC of changes in income, not sure why you mentioned that. I'm not sure why you're making things up.

@JerryLovesMargo I live in a major city, maybe things are different here, I don’t know. You could expect differences across the U.K. regions as well.

I am not making things up, imparting what I know about social housing where I am based both from personal experience and that of friends/family. Pretty much all have some sort of UC coming in if they are socially housed.

@JerryLovesMargo

This is exactly the sort of thing those of us who were exempt had to put up with.
I lost count of the times I was called a killer/murderer/disease vector/thick.
By people who claimed to care about the vulnerable, while completely missing the point that many who were exempt were so due to vulnerability/disability.

What annoyed me, though, was how those who apparently couldn't wear a mask (and plenty printed off sunflower lanyards from the internet) weaponised the word 'vulnerable'. Suddenly, they were vulnerable because they weren't wearing a mask - not particularly to the virus, but to public opinion - and bizarrely, the actual vulnerable felt more pushed into isolation.

Of course, this doesn't apply to everyone unable to wear a mask, but there certainly was (and is) a vocal and aggressive element in a particular segment of those who don't wear masks for some reason.

@SaltyOne

I think if anyone was unable to wear a mask and was concerned about the safety of others, they’d support other measures for socially distancing.

However, anti mask wearers tend to also be anti lockdown and anti other interventions to control viral spread.

Which means their motivation is more to do with personal freedom, and putting their individualism above the needs of others.

There is also an oppositional defiance to anything suggested by ‘the government’ - but even if you hate our current government : it was easy to see what global scientific consensus was advising.

Agreed. There seems to be such a narrow focus: how if effects me; it is my choice; my bodily autonomy; the government is doing this to me; can't the government appreciate how this decision affect me/the group I identify with.

Governments across the world made broadly similar decisions. Nothing was personal or aimed with malicious purpose at any particular group. I'm not certain why some persist with these kinds of ideas, as it's divisive and harmful.

@SaltyOne
@WhalePolo

"Agreed. There seems to be such a narrow focus: how if effects me; it is my choice; my bodily autonomy; the government is doing this to me; can't the government appreciate how this decision affect me/the group I identify with.

Governments across the world made broadly similar decisions. Nothing was personal or aimed with malicious purpose at any particular group. I'm not certain why some persist with these kinds of ideas, as it's divisive and harmful."

+++

So firstly on the point of masks you have to weigh up what is cost to individuals in complying with the requirement to wear a mask (some discomfort but otherwise minimal) versus the benefit (which is a reduction in the spread of a predominantly airborne disease). Indeed pre covid, mask wearing was quite common in Asian countries.

On other restrictions it becomes more complicated such as the loss of education to young people that will impact their life chances (and therefore health in later years), the economic damage that will increase relative poverty and therefore health of the country, the missed cancer and cardio diagnosis and resultant deaths.

So you have to weigh up from the societal view as many did at the time point out- do these restrictions whilst reducing deaths in the short term predominantly amongst the elderly result in the longer term a greater number of deaths amongst all ages of society but especially amongst the poor and significant economic damage.

But anyone making this point at the time was shot down as either "covid denier " or "anti vaxx".

What annoyed me, though, was how those who apparently couldn't wear a mask (and plenty printed off sunflower lanyards from the internet) weaponised the word 'vulnerable

Many people couldnt wear a mask so you can shove your "apparently"

And here is a way the word vulnerable was weaponised. People who couldnt give a shit about disabled people and/or the elderly pre Covid were suddenly concerned about them but only in the way that they could use them as a tool or a stick to bully and emotionally blackmail others into following Covid restrictions. And when those some of those same disabled people couldnt wear a mask they were treated appallingly. So happy to use them as a tool when wanting others to follow rulz but back to the default setting of treating them like shit when they couldnt wear a mask.

Oh and its not a good reflection on your higher university education when you say Oh anti lockdowners are all anti vaxxers and Covid deniers. Bullshit. Im anti lockdowns (see what i did there. PLURAL) cos i understand why we had to have the first one. Although it should have been shorter. But i happily had the vaccines.

If you dont understand that one can be against one thing but not against the other then i dont think much of the higher education you had. OR were you just being childish.

@SaltyOne

What annoyed me, though, was how those who apparently couldn't wear a mask (and plenty printed off sunflower lanyards from the internet) weaponised the word 'vulnerable'. Suddenly, they were vulnerable because they weren't wearing a mask - not particularly to the virus, but to public opinion - and bizarrely, theactualvulnerable felt more pushed into isolation.

I agree with this. It was a massive kick in the teeth to the genuinely ECV people to have people apparently unable to wear a mask not showing them any respect, not giving the required social distancing, etc. Common sense would suggest that those not wearing a mask would make some kind of effort to stay away from other people, as they were clearly a threat to the ECV etc. But no, most people wearing sunflower lanyards seemed to think they special and didn't give a toss about potentially vulnerable people they were close to (often unnecessarily close!). So many didn't even respect the 2 metre social distance suggested forcing mask wearing vulnerable people to have to walk away from queues, etc as they wanted to stay away. I strongly suspect a lot of lanyard wearing mask refusers weren't actually "unable" to wear a mask after all, they just didn't want to and probably were covid deniers by the way many of them acted.

So how do explain a PP being spat at when she couldnt wear a mask Im really surprised NOT that there hasnt been more concern about how much Covid people could spread by this disgusting act. Or are little droplets more likely to spread Covid than actual spitting. Please can the more educated among you enlighten me!!

Or is the reason it is being swept under the carpet is because y"all know the real reason Jerry was spat at was because someone was jealous that she had an exemption. Thats the real motive!

@JenniferBooth

Oh and its not a good reflection on your higher university education when you say Oh anti lockdowners are all anti vaxxers and Covid deniers. Bullshit. Im anti lockdowns (see what i did there. PLURAL) cos i understand why we had to have the first one. Although it should have been shorter. But i happily had the vaccines.

If you dont understand that one can be against one thing but not against the other then i dont think much of the higher education you had. OR were you just being childish

Who are you talking to? Are you mixing posters up?

I doubt jealousy was a motive, if the incident happened at all. (Can a person spit through a mask?)

Totally agree.

The person it happened to is on this very thread. Are you accusing them of lying. Bad enough minimizing and belittling the sacrifices people made which will make compliance less likely next time. Accusing people of lying certainly will.

Obviously the person removed their mask to spit at @JerryLovesMargo Dont be deliberately abusive

I strongly suspect a lot of lanyard wearing mask refusers weren't actually "unable" to wear a mask after all

So how were you able to tell the difference.

Oh i get it Its like PIP. Its the new version of "its the cheats who make it harder for the genuine people to claim disability benefits" Except this was the post 2020 Covid version.

Of course spitting on someone is disgusting at any time or for any reason.

Anecdotally, I remember being laughed at as I bought adult nappies - because I was wearing a mask and trying to socially distance in a shop. The group of men were intentionally trying get close to me and breathe on me. I then had to take the nappies to a cancer patient who was CEV.

Someone was making a point earlier about missed cancer diagnosis due to lockdown. From my experience, there was no manpower or resources to treat cancer patients because the local hospital was completely overwhelmed with Covid. Therefore measures taken to control infection spread were needed to take the burden off hospitals so they COULD treat cancer patients.

Whale Well those men were a bunch of arseholes wanting to assert power over a woman.

Which sacrifices are you speaking of? Wearing a mask?

@WhalePolo

"Someone was making a point earlier about missed cancer diagnosis due to lockdown. From my experience, there was no manpower or resources to treat cancer patients because the local hospital was completely overwhelmed with Covid. Therefore measures taken to control infection spread were needed to take the burden off hospitals so they COULD treat cancer patients."

+++

That was me. I don't disagree with you on the above on what happened but it is completely illogical.

For the majority of cases and certainly those below 80 Covid was not a life threatening disease. However for the majority of cases cancer is a life threatening condition.

So the hospitals prioritised the treatment of a less life threatening condition over a more life threatening condition.