Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Do people think it’s over now?

371 replies

SpookyNoise · 21/06/2020 13:59

I’m surprised at how many people seem to think the lockdown is over and there is no threat from the virus. I’ve had a friend ask us over for dinner in their house, and my son has had a friend ask him over to play. We declined both invites, obviously. Has anyone else got friends who think it’s all over?

OP posts:
Inkpaperstars · 21/06/2020 20:18

I believe in democracy. If you want to go out and are willing to risk infection - go for it. If you are scared of the virus - don't.

I am not sure if those two sentences are meant to be connected. Democracy in this country includes voting for a party you think or hope will handle these crises as well as possible. You could have a referendum I guess, but the general public are completely ill equipped to make a decision and the situation is constantly changing.

It's back to this bizarre choice of either have no fear and go out as normal or stay in completely. I think I covered that upthread.

What we have thankfully enshrined as human rights and freedoms, which are actually privileges, are not going to exist while a virus like Covid grows exponentially within a population. You cannot preserve them without taking action, and the action requires restrictions on rights and freedoms. Getting the balance is very difficult and I expect lots of mistakes have been made.

If we had responded quickly and appropriately in the UK we need not have had such a long or difficult journey. Equally we could perhaps have had more sophisticated testing and tracking or adapted schooling in place by now. If the relevant people had responded differently in the beginning of all this we would probably never have had an epidemic, certainly not a pandemic.

I don't think that we are aiming for eradication. It's always a dream goal but only Smallpox has ever been eradicated. I don't even think they are aiming for near elimination in the UK. They know there will be cases, and I think are just aiming to keep a dangerous level of growth at bay until the vaccine they are hoping for or a major breakthrough in treatment. Not just to save lives but to prevent long term disability. Why we are finding so hard to do that at this date in part goes back to the mishandling of the initial outbreak here. Things are changing though, we are not just on complete lockdown. I am fairly sure we'd agree on many ways it could be done better.

As for what will end up costing the most lives after ten years? Factoring in the mishandling we have seen and will continue to see, I honestly don't know. I guess we will perhaps never know. But we will need to factor in that reaching a natural peak would not have just caused deaths from COVID, it would have caused deaths from economic and social collapse and the absence of any healthcare. Again we won't know exactly what predictions were right. No one has risked finding out.

Inkpaperstars · 21/06/2020 20:19

Sorry, that first sentence was meant to be a quote!

Tigger001 · 21/06/2020 20:43

I sadly think a lot of people are treating this as if it's over, it's not. The risk may have (temporarily) reduced, but if we all don't do our bit to minimise the spread, of course it will grow again.

The risk, for us, is just not worth it, you can't say you are confident you or your family don't have it, you have no idea until it's too late and it's (potentially) been passed on.

We are still being very careful and won't be out shopping, going to the pub or anything else for a while yet,

IcedPurple · 21/06/2020 20:47

The risk, for us, is just not worth it, you can't say you are confident you or your family don't have it, you have no idea until it's too late and it's (potentially) been passed on

Given that community transmission has been very low for some time and that fewer than 2000 people, out of a population of nearly 70 million, contract the disease each day, then unless you have good reason to believe otherwise you can in fact be fairly confident you do not have Covid.

Tigger001 · 21/06/2020 20:50

Given that community transmission has been very low for some time and that fewer than 2000 people, out of a population of nearly 70 million, contract the disease each day, then unless you have good reason to believe otherwise you can in fact be fairly confident you do not have Covid.

So the new cases arising, they are passing it on deliberately?

IcedPurple · 21/06/2020 20:53

So the new cases arising, they are passing it on deliberately?

Yes - they're going around licking door handles and coughing in people's faces in the queue for Tesco's.

astiwilldo · 21/06/2020 20:53

BeijingBikini

“I am also of the assumption that if you're out shopping in Primark, you're not that bothered“

Not true . Some people can’t afford to continue to shop for their growing kid’s clothes at expensive online outlets. My daughter can save at least 40% buying for her baby at Primark which means she can pay her other bills. She has no other viable choice. It means she can’t see her vulnerable dad.
Not recognising that is a fact of life for thousands of people also pretty entitled. Obviously not a tough choice you’ve had to make.

Tigger001 · 21/06/2020 20:54

Yes - they're going around licking door handles and coughing in people's faces in the queue for Tesco's.

No they are confident they don't have it, and then it gets passed on.

IcedPurple · 21/06/2020 20:58

No they are confident they don't have it, and then it gets passed on

Most of the transmission these days is in hospitals and care homes. Community transmission is very low and has been for some time. The chances of catching the virus in Tesco's or on the street are very slim.

But by all means continue to stay at home if that's what you prefer. Others will make different risk assessments.

jasjas1973 · 21/06/2020 21:09

Lockdown was to bolster NHS capacity and buy the government time, why the hell is it now 3 months later with the aim of eradication

I don't see the aim is now eradication at all, we still have around 5k daily infections! and we are easing restrictions pretty quickly now.

People have had enough and want to get back to their former lives.

StripeyBananas · 21/06/2020 21:13

@userxx

Or are you planning on not getting medical care if you so get ill?

Why would you get medical care? The people I know who've had it didn't receive medical care they just sat it out like we all do with viruses 🤷‍♂️

Well, quite a few people have been hospitalised with it....
TheGreatWave · 21/06/2020 21:23

I don't see the aim is now eradication at all, we still have around 5k daily infections! and we are easing restrictions pretty quickly now

New daily cases are around 1250.

BeijingBikini · 21/06/2020 21:24

But we will need to factor in that reaching a natural peak would not have just caused deaths from COVID, it would have caused deaths from economic and social collapse and the absence of any healthcare

I don't think so. Look at Sweden - their economy has dipped about 6% but nothing like our 20%. They didn't have social or economic collapse, far from it, and neither did the other countries that didn't do lockdown - like Belarus. It has been shocked that actually the handwashing/social distancing had already brought the R down a considerable level. And during lockdown there basically was no healthcare, Covid patients couldn't get admitted until they were going blue, and all routine operations and screenings were cancelled, as well as a lot of urgent treatment. So we've done the economic collapse ourselves, while the NHS might have had "capacity" on paper but at the cost cancelling everything else.

Recessions, poverty and unemployment cost many lives; there are several papers with estimates of how many hundreds of thousands of deaths were caused by underfunding the NHS, or having a not good enough cancer service. There is also a lot of evidence for the increase in deaths for every percentage of unemployment. I think it was calculated that if the economy dropped 6% or more, then lockdown would cost more lives than Covid.

BeijingBikini · 21/06/2020 21:24

*it has been shown

jasjas1973 · 21/06/2020 21:26

ONS say 5k, but confirmed via testing is around 1300,

TheMurk · 21/06/2020 21:28

I feel quite sad for the people who are going to be left behind by this lockdown because the media did its job and they are paralysed by fear.

Life is so short. Get out there and live.

StripeyBananas · 21/06/2020 21:30

I don't think so. Look at Sweden - their economy has dipped about 6% but nothing like our 20%. They didn't have social or economic collapse, far from it, and neither did the other countries that didn't do lockdown - like Belarus

No, but they are being responsible and thinking of others and society as a whole. A completely different attitude.

BeijingBikini · 21/06/2020 21:35

Actually, the UK was pretty responsible - the media may have fooled some with their pictures of how "everyone" was crowding at the beach, but actually lockdown had 90% compliance when they had only expected 75%. The main spread was due to government incompetence with preparing for a pandemic, the spread in hospitals, and sending elderly patients back to care homes. The odd beach gathering did very little in terms of spreading anything.

ferntwist · 21/06/2020 21:39

I’m with you OP. We’re still following all the rules but it feels like shortly after the Dominic Cummings row and then with the protests it all crumbled.

jasjas1973 · 21/06/2020 21:43

Good and bad.

covid19.joinzoe.com/post/covid-cases-uk

Tigger001 · 21/06/2020 21:49

Most of the transmission these days is in hospitals and care homes. Community transmission is very low and has been for some time. The chances of catching the virus in Tesco's or on the street are very slim.

But by all means continue to stay at home if that's what you prefer. Others will make different risk assessments.

I understand that but we just work on the basis that the more people you mix with current you are raising that risk and it is still a risk, we just don't want to put our families or anyone else's through that unnecessarily, but as you say everyone is different with a different attitude to it.

SmiledWithTheRisingSun · 21/06/2020 21:55

Check out this visual demonstration of why covid is so concerning compared to other diseases around the world ... 😳

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/2634167/?fbclid=IwAR2M50t1T9FAF4LqKbdU10sMGOxfra1GXWKVMZCHpxg9Y5Kv7cT1y2clFq0

ferntwist · 21/06/2020 22:01

That’s a frightening graph.

InsaneInTheViralMembrane · 21/06/2020 22:11

There are 400,000 people in my NHS authority. Yesterday 1 person tested positive. My risk analysis allows me to say I’d lick every doorknob in the village and be quietly confident I wouldn’t get it.

But even if I did... my MH feels in the brink and being admitted to hospital FORTY miles away would be a fucking holiday and someone else could make the decisions for a few days.

FizzFan · 21/06/2020 22:26

We are still following the rules and don’t plan breaking them but I don’t blame people taking a different stance. There’s only so long any government can expect people to give a shit about infecting random people they don’t know with a virus that most people will be fine if they get anyway. I get we can’t go back to pre lockdown normal yet but I think it’s time to start lifting restrictions and shielding the vulnerable. It’s shit for the vulnerable but the alternative is it just being shit for everyone. The aim was and is to prevent exponential growth and overwhelming the NHS, not to prevent every single person who might die getting the virus. If it wasn’t for the exponential growth government and probably most of the rest of us wouldn’t give 2 fucks about the virus.