I'm finding the reaction to covid utterly bizarre

[TheDailyCarbuncle]

If anyone had told me that healthy, fit people would willingly put their livelihoods at risk and deny their children an education for months on end, that they would send the country into recession putting healthcare, education and public services at risk for years and years to come to avoid getting a disease that had a very very small chance of killing them I wouldn't have believed it. If you'd said people would be afraid to talk to their healthy siblings I wouldn't have believed it.

I had measles in the 1980s as small child - the vaccination programme where I lived was slow to get off the ground - and it nearly killed me. In 1980 2.6 million people worldwide died of measles, a very large proportion of them children. No one ever considered a lockdown, it was never even suggested.

I think all the analysis of this situation in the coming years won't be about the pandemic, but about the contagion of fear that made people so terrified of something that wasn't a real threat to them that they created huge, long-lasting, in some cases devastating problems for themselves, problems that were nothing to do with their virus and everything to do with their reaction to the virus.

And let me say that people losing their jobs, closing their businesses, missing out on medical appointments and treatments, being isolated and alone and experiencing serious mental health issues, just to name a few things, is not an 'inconvenience.'

The NHS wasn’t overwhelmed because many people were left at home when earlier admittance might have in some cases saved their lives. Either because they died once they eventually got to hospital or they died at home.

In any case OP, you are entitled to your view and are very assured in the way you express yourself, but many of us will look to scientists and competent governments for our advice, not a random person on the Internet who rides roughshod over others’ opinions, knowledge and experiences.

So sorry for your loss @Jaxhog

The NHS “coped” because they pretty much shut everything else down - that’s not coping, that’s over capacity.
Coping would be keeping on top of cancer treatments, appointments, keeping on top of caring for mental health patients.
As it is many people’s health has been jeopardised because the NHS coping mechanism was to focus solely on covid19.

We’re also not through this either. Second waves tend to be bigger, especially in countries who are not at a stage of having things under control.

Social distancing, never mind lockdown, will bring the country to its knees. How are we realistically supposed to do it in public places and keep the economy afloat? What is the scientific evidence for the 2m rule? Isn't it close sustained contact, particularly in home, healthcare and care home settings that's the real risk?

@7days as I said a few times I would base my response on the actual data that is now available, not on the model that is still informing our response, the model that is not accurate.

I would base my response on the knowledge (not the guess, the clear knowledge) that lockdown puts people in danger.

I would base my response on the fact that a very small proportion of people who get covid die, therefore, killing other people with lockdown is not a sensible response.

Come now Daily are you really playing 'issues bingo' ? Because your tendency to cynically use 'causes' like gobal health issues, DV and child abuse is ringing hollow.
If you were concerned about any of those issues then you would be on very different threads on here. Plus, your concern wouldn't have suddenly appeared to bolster your political argument. Then, there's the fact that your argument actually doesn't address the issues related to poverty, related to the working class being on the front line, related to how different ethnicities are at risk, or how women will bear the burden of this push to ignore risks.
Were you at the rally today? Or is it just 'other people' that you want to ignore the risks and return to their 'jobs'?

The 2m rule is total nonsense. It was just pulled out of thin air as a way of reminding people not to stand in each other's faces. Now it's treated as if getting closer than 2m is certain death. It boggles me how little people are able to use basic thinking to figure out if their reactions are sensible.

I also add that if you care about other people you should care a whole fucking lot about the children for whom school was their only respite from a horrific family situation.

Desperately clutching at straws there. What about the children horrifically bullied at school? Children do suicide because of bullying. For many, the holidays and weekends are their only respite.

Yes there are also other issues @TheMagiciansMewTwo. I'm really not sure what your point is? That I'm not allowed to talk about the issues I'm worried about for some reason?

I'm lost @Timekeeper1. Because children are bullied at school, the fact that school is the only respite from abuse for some children is irrelevant?

Daily my point is that your sincerity needs work. Were you at the rally?

The 2 metre rule was following studies early on which showed that droplets can hang around in the air and travel 4-6 feet.
I remember reading about this shortly after the WHO announced that human to human transmission was unlikely

In some studies it was found to travel further, but these were in a lab so it was felt that in day to day situations the virus travelling more than 6 feet was unlikely.

@TheDailyCarbuncle I have reported your message, as it was uncalled for. I hope no-one YOU know dies from Coronavirus.

The fact that being home is respite for children who are bullied (which is abuse) at school is as relevant as drawing a long bow about children abused at home, is my point. Both can be argued.

@TheDailyCarbuncle - very interesting thread, and hats off to you taking on all the naysayers, all at once.
I think hospitals would not have coped, as I believe they have done, had it been that a&e and planned ops had still been available - we did react in a knee-jerk way, but it's not good enough for some of the pps on MN - we apparently locked down too late, which is utter tripe! We apparently haven't done well at all out of this, even though we've done 2.5m tests and there was a WORLDWIDE ppe shortage (save for those countries like Germany, who had a home-based company (not having sold it!!) to make ppe from the word go), there is also the FACT that deaths ARE being attributed to covid (CoD) even when no symptoms were present - I tend to find Boris-haters think we've done badly and vice versa. What I do know is, I don't think it's changed me personally, I always washed my hands after returning home from ANYWHERE, my son also does this by habit - and with a little self-care, expecting CARE homes to CARE and take responsibility for their HIGH PAYING patients, I think we could've had the same outcome without lockdown, but the thing is, we'll never really know for sure. One thing is certain, doesn't matter WHO was in power in ANY country thoughout all of this, I've seen the magnitude of hate and blame pointed in their direction, in Mexico, in Sweden, in Italy, in Spain and here in the UK - we're blinkered - take a look around, no-one has a crystal ball, no-one is God. Stop the blame, it's a part of the problem with lockdown imo: the awful blame and negativity, it sucks.

I would base my response on the fact that a very small proportion of people who get covid die, therefore, killing other people with lockdown is not a sensible response.

Quote your evidence.

That very small proportion is well over 30,000 unnecessary deaths. Unnecessary. Avoidable.

This is a more recent article about distancing and how far particles can travel.

It raises the question of tiny aerosolise particles being able to travel up to 20 feet, but whether or not this could transmit the disease is as yet unknown (because novel virus, not enough research yet blah blah blah).

Suggesting to people that the 2m rule is ridiculous and plucked out of nowhere is dangerous.

That's what governments around the world are doing op

What do you think all those 5 step plans, roadmaps for easing lockdowns are for?

It is sensible to ease things slowly, while monitoring the situation.

If you have data to show more people are killed by lockdown then by the virus, then let's see it - using our current information, of course.
The same for any other metric, then youd have to compare the increase in domestic violence vs the decrease in street violence say, and see balance those numbers against each other.

And so on......

I get it, I'm bored and lonely, worried about my mum and my job. But throwing my rattle out of the pram wont help

Jaxhog

@TheDailyCarbuncle I have reported your message, as it was uncalled for. I hope no-one YOU know dies from Coronavirus.

They sent you a DM?

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/health/coronavirus-six-feet.amp.html

Article here ^

we apparently locked down too late, which is utter tripe!

So over 30,000 deaths were going to happen anyway? Lockdown earlier would not have reduced the deaths?

Lockdown / social distancing earlier = less deaths = less time in lockdown = less economic impact.

How many times... herd immunity is not a strategy. It’s a disaster.

@Mischance, so so sorry for your loss

Jaxhog I'm sorry things are difficult for you, but you were the one who posted an emotional message, it's not surprising you got one in return.

OP a lot of people IME just don't understand the issue of viral load, which doesn't help with the worry.

@StayinginSummer
The virus was present in October in China. OCTOBER.