To be depressed that lockdown would happen again tomorrow if there was another new disease

[Pavementworrier]

We talk about all the things that are worse "since the pandemic"but government prep is based on all the same mad nonsense that caused the worsening

Grim

@Pavementworrier because you were the darkness. Get some sense of civic responsibility and do not get your info from your "feed". Look up what the epidemiologists actually do. I have two friends qualified in this area and they adhered to every 'guide' line. Here, no problem with compliance (that I was aware of) UK, Chris Whitty - literally hounded in the street.

So who is going to run the schools?

Why would key workers who have underlying conditions which compromise their immunity be treated any differently from those being advised to stay indoors because they have compromised immunity ? Either you’re compromised and more at risk, or you’re not.

Do you have evidence of how many children are affected for life from having to stay at home with their family most of the time for a few months? And what model are you using for projecting lifetime effects, given the pandemic only ended a few years ago?

Compared with counter evidence, e.g. the number of children who would have died or been affected for life if they (or their parents/siblings) were unable to access urgent medical treatment (for any injury, ailment or disability) if hospitals became overwhelmed?

Also, is your evidence on after-affects because of lockdowns per se or because some (or perhaps most) people have struggled to return to the intense and demanding lives they lived pre-lockdowns, having got used to a gentler, less scheduled pace of life with fewer demands? Have you also factored in the mental health affects on children who were instilled with fear by parents during the pandemic?

As PPs have already said, it was only the privileged who experienced the safety of lockdowns. Thousands of people (healthcare staff, cleaners, delivering workers, transport workers, supermarket workers) did carry on with their lives just as they used to, working outside of the home, with their children continuing to attend school. In many cases they died from COVID or had their health (including mental health) severely compromised by its impact. Some had to continue because otherwise they had no money for rent or food (e.g. people with No Recourse to Public Funds). So they worked even when infectious.

Exactly they can't change the rules just becsuse some of " the vulnerable " are essential workers
So if everyone with say type1 diabetes is clased as ' "vulnerable " they get to stay homes regardless of whether they work in a office or are a consultant on ICU.

Some of us got no time off. Worked in a community pharmacy and we were working overtime and extra days to just keep up. By the end, we were pretty much on our knees.

I had one lady scream at me that I would be held responsible for killing children because I could only sell her one bottle of calpol and she had 3 kids. It was the last bottle we had.

People queued around the block to pick up the blue and white boxes of testing kits.

And we had our regular customers, the old and infirm, still coming in (every day) to pick up some dettol or toothpaste... risking their lives for an ounce of human interaction.

It was bloody madness.

I’m so sorry. It’s an awful thing to contemplate.

I know two sets of children who lost a mother in her 40s. Usually healthy women: no underlying health conditions. Their male partners ignored restrictions and were generally cavalier about preventing infection, even when one woman was very weak due to recovering from a v serious (non COVID) infection. They’re now lone fathers.

Sadly, I think you are correct.

That’s awful, so sorry.

I'm guessing the people who'd rebel against a lockdown did not lose relatives or have family with long covid.

Have you been following the inquiry? Lots of people needlessly died (I lost a friend) because we locked down too late. Meanwhile NHS staff had to struggle with lack of resources, because of poor preparation by government.

@EdithBond Yep. Middle class people stayed at home, while working class people brought them things. And the wealthy elite (Boris Johnson and his rich cronies) carried on as usual, or better than usual.

We had the worst possible government, at the worst possible time, and some of us were distracted by this: we were on edge, thinking "what dumb shit is Johnson going to do next, kill our cats?" Because we had a childish psychopath for a prime minister, and the way that he and his merry men kept toying with our minds, some of us were much more worried about what the government might do, instead of what the virus might do.

Just suppose somebody more staid and sensible had been in power instead. We might have had a much more stringent lockdown, which might (repeat, might) have been over more quickly. I doubt if we would have had the same level of gaslighting and fearmongering that we did: I think the fearmongering was possibly an action carried out of pure panic, and to me, that was much more foolish than lockdown itself, or even Partygate, and has bred a whole generation of sceptics and conspiracy theorists, who will never trust government again.

When they did lock down, Saint Boris and his merry men realised they had done too little, too late, so they threw all caution to the winds (by "caution", I mean caution about the way they communicated), declared internally "pure panic emergency", and went all out to frighten the public as much as they could, to appear to do something: lock down now (too late), give the magic money tree an extra-vigorous shake, throw billions of pounds at lockdown and fearmongering, and think later. A few weeks later, things were clearly not as bad as they had anticipated, but they were desperate to save face, and had to double down on the message that it was absolutely deadly, so everything had to stop until we "eliminate the virus"; then they discovered that was impossible, so we had the damaging lockdowns lasting months and months and months.

Some of us noticed all this far more than we did the effects of the virus, and others had the double whammy of being affected by the virus, and our lives, businesses, and mental health totally razed to the ground. The effects of the virus could have been lessened, but the side-effects of months and months of lockdown were preventable.

As one who's made the point about privilege, also worth highlighting that for those who did stay at home, being safe because of this was by no means a universal experience. We locked people in with their abusers too, as well as with loved ones who were not abusive but couldn't cope with the change in routine and took it out on their caregivers. It took more than merely being able to stay at home to be safe.

I was in Taiwan when Covid started. Everyone was wearing masks on public transport when the first case occured. Places like churches voluntarily stopped services. The result was they did not need a lockdown though did have other restrictions.

I flew back to UK and no one on the tube was wearing a mask. It then became innevitable that UK needed an extra long lockdown.

But still, from this thread, it sounds like no one will have learnt for next time.

Did anyone claim that flu/RSV had magically disappeared as COVID levels increased?

I'm not sure what the rules were in Germany - in the UK people with suspected COVID were strongly discouraged from visiting their GP surgery which would obviously affect this study, the Zoe study of random participants would be a better measure.

Ultimately where considering pandemic management the important question is not, "of circulating respiratory illnesses, what % are covid?" it's "how many more people with covid can our health system take?"

But you seem pretty deep in conspiracy theory so I doubt you want to think too hard about what your 'evidence' actually says.

You illustrate perfectly my initial point - people will ignore 100% hard lab based science in favour of any ideas crammed into their heads by media.

Though you went even further and called science a conspiracy theory 😂

What, and they were allowed to live there just like that? If so they were fortunate, not everyone would be in that position.

People should really stop denying the obvious.

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00787-021-01856-w.pdf

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(25)00317-5/fulltext

etc

I agree with this

Yes it was damaging, and agree with on @Netcurtainnelly, I recall doctors trying to raise the risks of abuse but it was squashed.

You don't know the position of the PP though, they may well be able to get in their van and leave.

I'm a neuroscientists and I watched in horror as I knew the damage to younger generations would be irreparable. Restrictions on gross motor development in babies and toddlers inevitably leads to cognitive delay, and that development requires wider space and cannot happen indoors.

And this is just one aspect of multifaceted damage done to children.

I’m not in anyway denying that lockdown has consequences, but how exactly does lockdown completely explain the increased levels of developmental delay in children born after lockdown ended in that data?

The age range is up to 30 months in 2023 so depending on the assessment time born in 2020-2021, still in lockdown. Gestation affects development too - pregnant women having spent 9 months in lockdowns with reduced movement, oxygen, overwork, stress etc.

Do you think it's fascist/totalitarian to stop people harming others at the expense of their own liberty?