I was pondering a point today!
I wonder if the reason we are still seeing and seeing more and more very large groups of young people was perhaps the original messaging.
It was always old people and underlying health conditions. That's true statistically despite there being a risk to others it is still small and from what I can gather no larger to those than the anomalies of deaths by flu. Perhaps that's why we get "it's just flu" idiotic comments.
I wonder if the messaging needed to be stronger with regards transmission and the outward transmission to parents and then older people. Or maybe less real emphasis on it not really affecting the young?
I don't know, and maybe it wouldn't change it - but it still sticks in my mind those very early briefings of old and underlying conditions and shielding and clinically vulnerable.
Yes, that's a large group. But when they say 2mil and it's a population of 67 mil people it paints an image in some minds of it really being such a small number of people.
Does anyone get what I mean? Do you agree? What's your thoughts?
I'm enjoying this thread. Lots if great discussions coming out despite it being started for a fundamental cock up!