Lockdown is not the answer

[NellyGrace]

We have a vulnerable family member and have been isolating for 9 days. This is unsustainable. It will drive us mad.

Whilst it was just the vulnerable we could cope as we could still go out to walk. We have no garden.

If the crazy want to carry on mixing. Let them. The vulnerable can hide if they choose.

Test like South Korea and isolate the pockets of disease.

We should not be allowing governments to use this as a way to take away our freedom.

There's no harm in lamenting but it takes one person to bring it home. There was a New Jersey family in the news where they had all met up for a family dinner and 3 of them ended up dead. The guilt would crumble a person. This isolation is relatively short lived, so hang in there or isolate the vulnerable plus a carer.

This is exactly why we need lockdown, because people are selfish

This

Lockdown is the ONLY answer. The quicker the better IMO.

The flights are coming in on a regular basis, these people then travel to their destination by taxi, coach, bus etc.
How can we talk about lockdown but allow this to carry on.

If we let the crazy people keep socialising if they want to. Then they all pass it round each other some get really sick and it's the nhs staff who pay the price. Cause they have got to step in and help them catch it themselves. Pass it on to their families. Everyone has to do their part and social distance themselves. So the spread slows allowing the nhs to deal with it in manageable numbers and not have to fire fight. The crazies socially interacting will take away your hospital bed if u need it because u caught it doing your weekly shop or doing your vital work role.

Well, I did read the whole article.

To my eyes, it is basically asking whether prolonging the lives of the elderly, the vast majority with pre-existing conditions; and the lives of younger people with pre-existing conditions, a percentage of those conditions being brought on by poor life choices- is worth the cost, the destruction of our economies.

He points out the normal annual death toll that yes, tbf, is something few of us ponder. Everyone does have to die of something.

He asks us to consider 'cause and effect' ( my take on that is whether the aggressive lock downs are working to halt the spread, or prolonging it down the track); he reminds us of the fuck-ups of how Foot and Mouth was dealt with; how we were all going to die of SARS, bird flu, etc.

I would entirely like to 100% agree with everyone that the course our government is taking is the right one. But I am not entirely sure.

Vulnerable husband and self been in semi-isolation for 2 weeks (semi due to child still at school) now in full isolation. I will only go out to the shops to get essentials when it becomes necessary, the risk is just too high. I do not want my husband to die.

It won't be easy for anyone but we must do it for however long it takes, it is the only answer until they develop a vaccine.

You will not go 'mad', you will cope, try talking to each other, have a movie night, pick a box set to watch, play games, use your brains to learn something new like a language (hopefully you will be able to use it when this all clears up) or sort through your paperwork, clean the rooms..... there is always something you can do.

STAY INSIDE

Boo boo I’m booooored. Me entertaining myself is much more important than spreading a virus and literally risking lives of NHS staff.

Me! me! Meeeeee! Everyone can fuck off if I’m not hapeeee.

Oh do one

You should be more aware than anybody how important this is. the longer people socialise the longer this is going to go on. that has been made quite clear.

the government are begging people to make the right choices and being ignored so yeah very Draconian measures may be required but they shouldn’t be

I've already been in isolation for 8 days. Of course it's doable.

Remember, that all the 'just one little trip' will add up to a massive wave of infections that will kill people. Come on people, if we all make the sacrifice to restrict our social interactions we won't end up like Italy, and our nearest and dearest won't end up dead.

And, as an aside, ironically it is rags like the DM who wildly encourage their readers to vote Tory; it is the Tories who has run down the NHS to such an extent that NHS workers are catching, and occasionally dying of Coronavirus because they do not have access to the correct PPE.

That is why they're contracting it.

Before anyone says that it's alright for me to say it- I am a frontline, Corona-facing HPC now using sometimes inadequate PPE.

But I'm still not sure that destroying our economies for what will amount to as a percentage, a few people will ultimately be judged as a price worth paying, nationally or globally.

Before you say 'but what if it was your grannie?' I would say that a government has to act for the ultimate good of the many, the greater.

In a couple of days Italy will have been in 'proper' lockdown (not as strict as China, though) for 2 weeks and we'll be able to see whether it has a significant impact.

The footage on the news yesterday from an Italian hospital was quite harrowing; yes, everybody dies of something but this is a pretty horrible way to go. I'd put up with a lot to stop people, including the hospital staff, going through that.

Could this be the end of the snowflake generation? I guess we have to wait and see.

Oh, silvery, you have to leap in with your silly little goady statements, don't you?

Why not give us your analysis of the DM article, like I did, where I have pondered that despite it being published in that vile rag, the DM, the author does make some interesting points.

@Miljea you are a frontline hcp. Surely then you understand the basics. The virus is highly contagious, there is no cure, those critically ill will of course require hospital care. If there is no lockdown/isolation as it stands millions of people will require hospital care which is not possible. if the UK had done large scale testing and contact tracing early maybe just maybe they could have isolated and contained but it is too late now. The survival rates are dependent on hospital care so I don't see your point at all.

oh and as you have stereotyped the DM readers so will I. They are overly invested in their savings/pensions/second homes/overseas travel!

Listen: www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0877mb2

Abelino I agree, it's not an easy way to go, like lung cancer isn't, as everyone will be aware. But, in the same way that fate doesn't cause our governments to ban smoking, does destroying our economies justify this?

Personally, I think 'aggressively' isolating the elderly and vulnerable - and supporting them in doing so with some of the Magic Money Tree offerings raining down now- would have been a more economically sensible course of action, along with serious funding of a vaccine.

I say 'aggressively' because I know that until we forced them to stop, as asking didn't work- the X-ray waiting rooms of our NHS was full of 70+ age group, sitting side by side, clutching their Rheumatology big toe X-ray requests, defying the 'snowflakes'.

However, I know that there'd be no sense of urgency to produce that vaccine as it 'protects' the economically less productive; whereas we know flu can disproportionately affect the economically active, hence the annual flu jab.

I know we are way too late to do that now, so we are where we are.

If the crazy want to carry on mixing. Let them. The vulnerable can hide if they choose.

And then the vulnerable who may need serious medical care and ventilation won't be able to get it because the number of people needing ventilation, because the 'crazy' continued to mix, will be so high there won't be enough critical care beds ventilators or medically trained staff.

If we continue as we are the amount of people who will need hospital treatment at one time will be over and above our ability to provide that treatment.

@YappityYapYap Your figures on the UK death rate for flu are way out. From Full Fact:

Public Health England estimates that on average 17,000 people have died from the flu in England annually between 2014/15 and 2018/19. However, the yearly deaths vary widely from a high of 28,330 in 2014/15 to a low of 1,692 in 2018/19.

mrehoho yes, I do understand the 'basics'.

I have also said that I know why we are where we are, but I, like Hitchens, loathe tho I am to be in some agreement with him, think the total shut down approach, knowing what we now do, will ultimately harm more than it saves, in the long run, once The Bill comes in.

It is academic, I know, at this point.

We are where we are.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=tQD4B_hmdvo&feature=youtu.be

Pls listen to LBC interview with Dr Jack in full.

Joyfulnhs but if the vulnerable had aggressively self-isolated, and were supported in doing so, they would be less likely to need ICU and ventilators, wouldn't they?

Ok england, don't lock down. And when you are piling bodies and looking for sympathy. Don't look to all the countries that warned you to lockdown from the beginning.

In a couple of days Italy will have been in 'proper' lockdown (not as strict as China, though) for 2 weeks and we'll be able to see whether it has a significant impact.

It’ll be very interesting to see. If it hasn’t made a significant impact then who knows what’s going on.