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.

I thought it was a very interesting article and certainly gives food for thought. I have never really given much thought to the number of deaths each year but this has made me think.

I honestly now don't know what to think.

Also it's not just the old and vunerable. There are young healthy people dying in Italy!!!!

www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-italian-doctors-warn-covid-19-can-make-young-people-seriously-ill-11961000

I'm sorry you're finding it hard, but you're wrong and I'd rather you keep your cretinous, ill-informed opinions to yourself, rather than spouting them on a public forum.

If you're not terrified, you haven't understood.

In 3-4 weeks time we will look back and wish we had done more. It’s that simple.

I don't think there is a good supply of tests. Which is why they aren't widely testing.

Inbelievable

Unbelievable, obviously 😁

We should not be allowing governments to use this as a way to take away our freedom
Are you for real?

@Dongdingdong If you read more than just the headings of articles, you would get the full facts. 477 is the median figure where they caught flu, developed complications and died from flu. Flu can contribute to a death and goes towards the figures as 'flu death' but these are in people who are literally at deaths door already from cancer, heart disease and other serious medical conditions. Flu was written as the reason for death on averagely 477 peoples death certificates from 2011-2018. In all other cases, the figures you are quoting, other reasons were given for their death and it wasn't recorded as flu

But you'll be taking other peoples freedom away if you become part of a chain if infections which ends up killing someone.

The government have done everything they can to avoid "taking away your freedom". For too long, they simply gave advice and expected people to act in a socially responsible manner. Too many people wouldn't need the advice of social distancing and the 'stay home' message. Now is the time for them to impose lockdown and this is supported by many people in society who are sick of seeing the 'me me me' brigade (or the thick brigade) refuse to curb their unnecessary leisure trips to help limit this virus. I as a healthcare worker am sick of people taking not a blind bit of notice to the governments advice and requests and be happy to facilitate the spread of this virus knowing that if they do get ill, or cause vulnerable people to get seriously ill, us nurses and doctors will have no choice but to put our health on the line to treat them.

Disagree. The government will be forced to lockdown because the public won't obey the suggestions.

In the news they had Brighton beach packed. And in Australia Bondi beach.

The government will be forced to. Because people are stupid and selfish.

joyfulexpat You are missing the point. We all know it's too late to alter our course of action now. So less of the 'OK don't self-isolate'.

The issue is whether it would have been better to support the vulnerable in self-isolating (and, in doing so, allowing herd-immunity to establish itself in the rest of the population); rather than destroying our economy, and also, by the way, in not acquiring that herd immunity leaving the vulnerable in the same position next time around.

Those who are advocating lockdown now, what thought is given to how long for and what happens after? It may halt the virus now but what will happen when people start coming out of their houses in a few months' time with no immunity? There could well be a huge surge of people getting the virus all at once and the NHS won't be able to cope.

You can't just lockdown without a plan for afterwards.

Nb everyone. If you find you're in agreement with Peter Hitchens, on any subject, it's definitely time for a rethink.

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?
Please tell me how the vulnerable can aggressively isolate in the real world?
My daughter is in the vulnerable category. Have you read the guidance on shielding?
Its woefully inadequate to protect those who are vulnerable.
They should self isolate but those who live with them don't need to and she just take extra precautions. How does that work for people who need to work and live with a vulnerable child?

So my husband goes to work with hundreds of people who do not see this as a big deal and are not doing anything to reduce the risk of spreading it. No much how long my daughter stays home the risk that she will catch it within her own home is there.

Anyone who thinks the vulnerable can be aggressively isolated without a full lock down need to take a serious look around at the people they know who fall into this category and realise that the people they love cannot keep themselves safe without a much bigger response by our government

It would be interesting to find out how folk with opinions similar to the OP view the whole 'antivax' debate.

No one can identify who all the vulnerable people are. My healthy, fit friend with no underlying conditions ended up on a ventilator in ICU. She was lucky, and is recovering well.

It's this lock up the elderly and vulnerable attitude that is leading others to think they're invincible and that the rules don't apply to them.

My DH is high risk so we're staying at home. I will miss my daily walk if we go into lockdown but I think it's the right thing to do. People just don't seem to grasp the threat.

Those who are advocating lockdown now, what thought is given to how long for and what happens after? It may halt the virus now but what will happen when people start coming out of their houses in a few months' time with no immunity? There could well be a huge surge of people getting the virus all at once and the NHS won't be able to cope.

I can't speak for others but as someone who has a good understanding of immunology, epidemiology and virology I can say i would like to see the evidence of this. There is currently no scientific evidence anywhere that shows this will happen. None.

Take a look at the scientific information on other epidemic. It's all out there for everyone to see and to make informed opinions. Look at infections like SARS which is the closest thing to what we are facing with coronavirus. There was concern that it would have a second wave. In reality all cases were traced, treated and dealt with. There hasn't been a single case of SARS anywhere in the world since 2004.

I’m starting to think survival of the fittest - if you’re too dumb to watch the news and take this seriously I have no sympathy.

The problem with that is that they're still putting everyone else at risk in that we will have to venture out to replenish food stocks and so on at least occasionally, and stupid people getting themselves sick in large numbers will mean overwhelmed hospitals.

@Joyfulnhs thank you, that's quite reassuring. Didn't Spanish Flu have 3 waves over several years?

Once again, we are where we are.

I read the article as suggesting we wouldn't be where we are if we'd taken the course of action he suggests: that the old and vulnerable had been made to self-isolate from the very start, rather than destroying our economy to protect them; and, bear in mind, as I've already stated, from my own experience, our X-ray waiting room was full of the elderly up until we stopped them last Thursday, awaiting non-urgent X-rays as they weren't going to be 'snowflakes' and stay home, oh no.

But which Tory government was going to impose a lock-down on its own chief supporters? Especially those wealthy, thus often fitter and healthier ones who would be the first to demand their right to do as they damn well pleased.

I agree that we now have to carry on down this course of action, all social distancing, shutting down our economy, self-isolating, as we can't rewind; and that it would be irresponsible, and may yet become illegal- to not do this now.

But it doesn't mean it was unequivocally the best course of action.

What's the latest situation in China? I've heard that things are settling down and cases are reducing post lockdown?

@Miljea it has been established now that so called herd immunity would have crippled the country and the NHS. Not just one scientific body either who has concluded that. The DM article wasn't written in a 'with hindsight' way either and that's why I say it's irresponsible.

I think we were absolutely fucked as soon as containment failed. Lockdown comes with a massive social cost, but so does letting the virus run it's course.
The only other option is for people to follow the 'advice' to the letter on a voluntary basis, while shielding the vulnerable to the best of our ability. Unfortunately too many people are socially irresponsible or just plain stupid. And this doesn't just apply to Brits, it's happening around the world.

I agree with you OP. Also as long as people have to go to supermarkets.....

Should have quarantined everyone coming into the country band that should only be people coming home.

Cutting off normal life is going to leave a higher rate of suicide than deaths from the pandemic.