Why are we not allowed to be adults?

[Mumlove5]

Throughout these forced restrictions, this is what has been the most troubling for me. SAGE has written that citizens should be treated as “rational actors”. We as people have been allowed to take personal risk during past pandemics. My grandfather and other family members became very ill during the 1968 pandemic. In the end, all survived thankfully. However, everyone went on with their lives and took common sense precautions. They were treated as adults. What has happened?

unherd.com/2020/06/was-the-two-metre-rule-one-big-lie/?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups%5B0%5D=18743&tl_period_type=3

In a pandemic, as new understanding emerges by the day, clarity is even more important. As early as February, scientific advice to the government about how to handle the Covid-19 pandemic included the importance of being clear and definitive, coherent and consistent, not only to improve compliance with helpful actions, but to discourage pointless or counterproductive ones.

But this is no excuse for dishonesty about the basis for official advice or rules. Where the scientific basis for policies was uncertain, it would have been far better to say that the science was uncertain, but the government had made a decision for these reasons: erring on the side of caution until more was known, or recognising that human life is about more than medical health.

When the WHO switched its advice to one metre, what was the rationale for sticking with two? Fear of looking indecisive? Lack of faith in British people to know what a metre looks like? In mid-March, the UK’s scientific advisory group, SAGE, was invoking behavioural science to argue that the public is mostly rational and altruistic in a crisis:

“The behavioural science points to openly explaining to the public where the greatest risks lie and what individuals can do to reduce their own risk … Greater transparency will help people understand personal risk and enable personal agency, send useful signals about risk in general and build public trust. Citizens should be treated as rational actors, capable of taking decisions for themselves and managing personal risk.”

Of all the expert advice given to the government, it’s a pity this paragraph has been so often ignored.

Mac I can offer you deluded and smug too, if you'd like!

Because as a rational and selfish adult my priority is my children, myself, my immediate family, my friends and extended family.... and that’s about it. I wouldn’t voluntarily do what we’ve had to do over the last few months because, to be blunt, I’m as concerned about the elderly in care homes, random people I don’t know with conditions that require shielding etc as I am about children living without clean water in parts of Africa, or trafficked children in Asia or Americans having to live under Donald Trump. Which is to say, I care in an abstract way, I’d donate £20 to a charity about it but I won’t fundamentally alter my lifestyle over it. But since government has a mandate to consider all society (in theory anyway) and ensure services like the NHS are available (though I think they’re doing a poor job of that) they have to overrule my selfishness. Part of being in society, which I simultaneously dislike immensely and enjoy the benefits of (like having healthcare and schools).

We are being treated like adults. Adults in a situation where our democratically elected representatives need to make decisions about how we will act as a group. Not as children but as a group. Because the alternative, as seen in Italy and in our care homes, was a holocaust.

Unfortunately history shows that you cannot assume people will act in a perfectly rational way, in the public interest, on a dime. That's why we have people to lead in natural disasters and for such complicated manoeuvres as crossing the road. I present queuing in front of a 'queue' sign as an example of the great British public behaving like adults in a group, working together.

I’m perplexed why now Free Will has been taken away, especially given the fact that this pandemic is at the bottom of the list of pandemics.*

1. Free will was taken away because when they advised the population nicely to keep a distance, not travel and practice hygiene too many people acted like a stubborn toddler and refused to listen.
2. The lockdown has made this pandemic much smaller than it otherwise would have been, so it helped. Look at how "well" Brazil and the US are doing, it's out of control there. Saying that lockdown wasn't necessary because not much deaths is the same as saying a cancer patient didn't need chemo after all because it made them better!

We/they knew this virus is skewed towards the elderly and those with co-morbidities

Which is 30-40% of the population.

Because in 1968 people knew they weren't immortal.

But now enough people are wildly excited about living through a disaster movie scenario that they actively want to harm themselves and other people by embracing the most damaging lockdown measures imaginable.

And we have a populist government happy to give them what they wanted.

Because despite all the warnings people still didnt act responsibly (and it's not just this country) and look at how bad it got.
I also know a number of people who are angry at the government for not telling them to isolate sooner!

Imagine what would have happened if there had been no instructions? The NHS would not have coped and it would be an absolute disaster. At least this way enough of us are alive and well to create posts like this.

I know smart people who despite all the risks still went out and lived their lives day to day until they were told not to.

Also it's not everyone's fault. They need to make money, feed their families etc and unless government tells certain employees to stop or work from home, they wont.

Interesting link @Mumlove5 - a website that doesn't say who's publishing it, who's funding it but wants us all to believe them over the named scientists we can Google.

If you can see who's funding it, the chances are it's nobody acting in good faith.

Because the decisions we make impact on others. If you want an example look to the USA who in most states are doing just that (masks mandatory on public transport but everything is open) it's a disaster there because numbers are exponentially growing

I mean, if this looks to you like someone taking an analytical and considered approach to all the evidence, you probably want to get off YouTube and crack a book

@Mumlove5

9000 people going to "raves". Ah - just seen the flaw - not "adults"

Pandemics are managed by politicians which is why CV has been managed like this. They want their core voters to continue voting for them after the pandemic is over.

If CV affected young rather than old I'm very sure that the young would have been quarantined while the elderly would have been free to live their lives and keep the economy going. Lockdown lifting has strangely not focused on the least risky group - children.

Releasing lockdown based on age would be very unpopular with their voters but should have been a consideration imo considering the recession that's on its way.

You've forgotten that it wasn't common practice to sue people in the past. If we weren't given data and advice like 1m is X times riskier than 2m etc then they risk future lawsuits. CV is mild for many but I can't help but worry for the people with lung damage and breathing issues months after contracting the virus.

Lockdown was to protect the NHS. The NHS is run with taxpayer money and politicians want to continue underfunding it. I suspect it's cheaper to lockdown than provide funds for an overwhelmed NHS

We don't behave rationally.
We don't estimate distances, or change habits easily.

Look at the shops as it is - even when we were (and still are in Wales) told to stay 2m away, it isn't being adhered too. People think they are 2m away when really they are a lot less. Or they think that it doesn't apply to them because they are wearing a mask. Or they just think that it's all blown out of all proportion and they won't get it, so don't need to take care.

When I saw that on March 19 th that the government declared the UK government no longer considers Covid-19 to be a “high consequence infectious disease..and then a week to ten days later, bumped it back up again
It seemed like something very fishy was going on.

I then took everything they said with a pinch of salt
Made my own risk assessments and we lived our lives as normally as possible
Going out most days, drives out, anything to protect our sanity.

I’ve been more worried about the lack of dentists after two teeth crumbled and the toothache from hell, which kept me awake most nights than any Covid Related.

If I’ve tread on anyone’s toes for not treating it with huge reverence..so be it
I bet the world wide death toll at the rigid sanctions we’ve endured far outstrips the covid toll.
Elderly, disabled and vulnerable..thrown under a bus Marked lonely and isolated
Our two great nations and neighbours, thrown under a bus called point scoring
People having urgent healthcare treatment....thrown under the bus marked cancelled
People with ,metal health problems and those that didn’t think they had health problems...thrown under the grin and bear it bus
Children..yes let me get started on children..thrown under the bus marked welcome to the shitshow
People who are generally in excellent health...can you make you way to the station marked control...we have special measures for you.

I mean who the fuck wants to go to pubs By order of a time slot, give your details to the pub, who can keep them for three weeks

So much for data protection then.

Signing off
Mickey Mouse
Dystopia
Formerly Planet Earth

Data protection?

So dismissive you can focus on data protection... What kind of pubs do you use?

Ours have been feeding people using the medium of Facebook... Don't think the ICO has been contacted yet!

As for the rest, I am sure we can all add our own stories... 2 women diagnosed with breast cancer, tested, treated, operations undertaken, results back, 1 booked for further treatment... during lockdown.

Numerous kids picked up by 'the system' given support, MH care, fed and schooled ... Paid for by the government during lockdown

Lots of vulnerable adults identified by family members many miles away
Fed, medicines delivered, various communication options given...paid for by the government, during lockdown.

And lots of other stuff. I only know about it because I work/volunteer in a community charity. Or maybe because I live quite rurally and we are a bit more connected to our neighbours. I don't know. But the isolation and desolation I read of here as being the norm isn't my experience... in an area of high socio economic deprivation.and shockingly low adult literacy levels.

Its very simple. Because a very large number of people can't be trusted to act like adults. Many people will only follow rules if someone polices them. They 'know better' than the experts, which is, of course, absolute rubbish. Or they read random tweets or other social media opinions and confuse them with facts. Often, this is because their own liberty is curtailed in some way, and they seek out convenient opposing views to excuse their rule-breaking.

The government may not be making all the right decisions (in our 'opinion'). But they have access to much better advice than we do, and I certainly trust them more than a random bunch of ill-informed members of the public!

COVID has made this all the clearer.

Personally I think the definition of adult has become obscured by the culture of the individual and the engineered need for self-gratification.....

In the context of the virus I have followed the guidelines / rules for the alleged greater good and because it was relatively easy for me - others have more complicated lives and some of the guidance has seemed a bit contradictory. For example, personally relevant as my DP is a body piercer, the opening of hairdressers and pubs but not tattoo and piercing parlours where (in most cases) the practitioners are scrupulous about cross contamination for fear of forfeiting their licenses in normal times seems a bit bonkers.

I'm not in favour of a Nanny state by any means but the chaos currently going on in my home town on the beach has caused roads to be closed and law enforcement is being run ragged trying to police it.

I'd rather chew my own arms off than go to the beach on a sunny day anyway, but each to their own - but in this situation the sardines being played on every square inch of sand along the coast seems to suggest people are happy to play Covid roulette even though we're still dealing with a bunch of unknowns.

I do think the government is indulging in a bit of finger crossing for the sake of the economy, but until another month has gone by we won't know whether the benefits are outweighed by a second wave. But then alot of people are suffering due to economic fall out.....

To be honest I haven't a clue any more - but I'm not getting up close and personal with the maddening crowds myself any time soon.....

Because some people will always reinterpret rules to suit themselves.
I always remember my Health Visitor talking about weaning. She said it has to say 6 months because a large number of parents will then do it at 4 months. If you said it was okay at 4 months, then they would do it at 2 months.
We can’t follow the rules, we always have to try and bend them to suit ourselves

I’m perplexed why now Free Will has been taken away

You have never had Free-Will! Apart from a self-sufficient hermit, ALL humans live in social groups where an individual's needs are balanced against the benefits of the group. Otherwise, you could drive as fast as you like, kill people, destroy property, live wherever you want, steal, and a whole number of other anti-social activities. Which, of course, you can't do. Your individual freedoms have been temporarily restricted for the benefit of the group. That's the flip side of being part of the group.

I think they did treat us like adults because a lot was guidance.

They've also said although opening we trust you to be sensible and consider what you are doing.

I honestly think now the government is damned if they do and damned if they don't.

They made mistakes. Care homes for a start. But they thought what they were doing (agreeing to meet costs) was right. Because they wouldn't accept they got it wrong it caused distrust.

Same with PPE.

Too much propaganda language.

What SAGE said was right. They needed to be clear open and honest. Not blustery and cheerleading is through this.

SAGE only ever expected a 80% compliance. The guidance and resultant effects relied on that.
You'll always get people who see a Covid germ on every inch of pavement beyond their front door at one end of the scale and those who think it's a mild flu on the other. Added to that you have those who don't even think it exists.

You'll always have differing opinions on how well it's been handled.

You'll get people who dissect the semantics of what's said and those who will work out message for themselves.

Those who when something is announced will ask "what about the other 700 things you didn't say"

Those who think a message is clear and those who say it makes no sense.

Those who have to continue working at risk and those who don't.

Those who compare to other counties and those who don't. We can't follow other countries as demographics and density etc will vary.

The biggest thing that's pissed me off if the "world beating - world leading" constant boasts. That actually never materialised but made their mates rich.

I think most people
Just wanted a system that worked - and one that other countries have/had would be fine.

@Lemmylemming

So you don't care for traffic children who get sent to pumps and prostituted? As long as you give money towards it?

@Jaxhog
You have the free will to drive fast. Kill others. But if you do you suffer the consequences. The right to do those things ARENT taken away from you. You could go out tomorrow. But we don't because of the consequence. Some do so. We aren't physically stopped from doing so

The question of free will is a huge debate.

I don’t care in the sense that I’m not willing to throw away my entire lifestyle, my children’s education and my family’s financial security to prevent it, no. Otherwise I would have presumably already sold everything I had, given the proceeds to charities preventing it and spent my time working to fundraise or volunteer with those charities. It’s not that I think it’s acceptable, quite obviously it isn’t, it’s just far enough removed from my life I don’t really think of it as my problem. If I’m asked for money by a relevant charity I might give some, I might sign a petition, but I’m not turning my whole life upside down over it. I think that’s actually true for most people.

To be clear if I came across a child who I had suspicions about or thought was being abused I would of course act and alert the relevant authorities. At that point it obviously would be my issue.