people, please, stay home if you can

[Lua]

Most places that have eased lockdown measures, are seeing an increase in the number of cases. So there is no way around it (at least in the short-term), live a "normal life" and increase the risk for everyone (there are no "personal risk" in a pandemic).

I see a lot of people in mumsnet saying that we suffer too much to save the lives of 80 year olds. While I find this cold assessment horrible on its own, there are so many case of under 60s suffering badly. This is a harrowing picture of 63 year old woman:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jun/25/from-cold-to-coma-to-homecoming-one-womans-100-days-of-coronavirus

Sure, the risk is low. Sure, we deal with risks all the time. But we also try to mitigate risks all the time. We use seat belts, and we look before we cross the road, we use helmets, etc There are many reasons why someone needs to go into work, and those are understandable. But do people "need" to go to raves, beaches, cinemas? do we really need to go into shops and buy a new summer outfit?

Life needs to be different, and we need to find new ways to make our economy tick. Lots of opportunities in new fields. Lets support each other and look for new ways to make the world go around.

Considering 80% of the population will get it mildly I don’t think it would bring the country to a stand still, even if there was a million deaths out of a population of 65 million, we would still be able to carry on. The NHS has learnt a lot about the illness, they don’t need as many ventilators as thay thought as it is not the best treatment. Keeping 50 million of the population locked away has a much more devastating affect on the economy.

Do you think that the government are not trying to strike a balance then? They aren't throwing everything open all at once, there are strict rules for hospitality and I know my friends who run a pub are madly prepping for them so they remain compliant

Mild means not hospitalised. It can still mean 2 months off work

@eeeyoresmiles and @Hearhoovesthinkzebras I completely agree with you.

@NothingIsWrong

It's not a zero sum game. If the economy tanks there will be no healthcare either. Schools / shops / pubs etc - all play their part in allowing people to go to work and to allow businesses to pay taxes to fund the NHS. It's not as simple as a straight choice between people and the economy, they are firmly intertwined.

Yes, they are. That works both ways. You can't save the economy by letting infection rates go up. The economy cannot function properly with high levels of covid disease, even if most of us won't die. The only way to save the economy is for us all to work together on keeping infections low, while simultaneously trying to do our jobs, spend money and so on. It's a tightrope. If we give up in the infection control part, we'll give ourselves a few weeks of apparent normality but then we'll end up back where we were in March again with everything grinding to a halt. If we give up on the economy part, we're also fucked. We have to do both.

It can. As can many other diseases. I had 15 months off sick with work related anxiety. And before that 6 weeks with swine flu. We didn't shut the country down for that one, despite the dire predictions.

My dad got a urine infection. Developed sepsis and died.

People die of many many things, between 1300 and 1600 every day depending on the time of year.

Treatments are improving all the time, we know significantly more about this illness than we did and a number of vaccines are well advance.

What level of infections and deaths would you like to see before we are very carefully allowed to go for a drink or a meal, spend money we have earnt on having a life? Not dying isn't the same as living.

Yes, and "stay home unless it's vital you go out" is not a balance.

@midgebabe there is still a big percentage of asymptotic cases I think it’s 40% when medical staff were tested, then you have people who feel unwell for a couple of days and then fine, so yes we could still carry on.

@Alex50

Considering 80% of the population will get it mildly I don’t think it would bring the country to a stand still, even if there was a million deaths out of a population of 65 million, we would still be able to carry on. The NHS has learnt a lot about the illness, they don’t need as many ventilators as thay thought as it is not the best treatment. Keeping 50 million of the population locked away has a much more devastating affect on the economy.

But mildly can still mean very ill and long term health implications. All it means is that you weren't admitted to hospital.

I have a friend who had it mildly. It's now nine weeks on and she still can't walk up a flight of stairs, is very breathless on any exertion, isn't back at work and sleeps for hours during the day. She had it "mildly".

As for only a million deaths - only????

How many people will have been very ill, possibly requiring hospital treatment, to have a million deaths? We've currently had roughly 50,000 deaths and that nigh on brought the NHS to its knees. You're suggesting a death toll twenty times greater would be manageable are you? So twenty times the infections we've just had would be manageable?

@Alex50 there is a study in Lombardy where they followed people who were identified through contact tracing and then tested positive. It was a large sample of people and 70% of under 60s remained asymptomatic. I am not saying the real rate is 70%,but like you say, a huge chunk of people dont even know they have it. I got myself tested this week as I had a headache and a bad throat. My friend is a nurse and she told me to get tested as many of her colleagues have tested positive with minor symptoms like this. Of course not everyone is so lucky...I might not be so lucky if I get it. But enough people suffer so mildly or not at all that we really need to rebuild.

@NothingIsWrong

Do you think that the government are not trying to strike a balance then? They aren't throwing everything open all at once, there are strict rules for hospitality and I know my friends who run a pub are madly prepping for them so they remain compliant

Government are trying, though I think they are ignoring the scientists much more now in an effort to kick start the economy.

But the public aren't striking a balance. Social distancing is pretty much non existent from what I'm hearing and seeing, the crowds at the beaches and the sentiments expressed on here show that a lot of people now consider this to be over and resent any restrictions on their desire to do as they please. Even things that could enable everyone to return to z more normal life but safely such as wearing masks or the track and trace app are being rejected.

This virus can't be beaten by obstinacy and blooded mindedness.

People baying about dementia deaths have clearly never been in a care home. Frankly any death Covid or otherwise is a merciful release from advanced dementia which is something horrendous to witness.

Saving a person who is doubly incontinent, terrified, doesn’t know their family or even their own name is not more important than children being able to go to school.

Absolute personal experience here as opposed to idiots who think that care homes are some sort of fun retirement community full of active residents.

@Alex50

Considering 80% of the population will get it mildly I don’t think it would bring the country to a stand still, even if there was a million deaths out of a population of 65 million, we would still be able to carry on. The NHS has learnt a lot about the illness, they don’t need as many ventilators as thay thought as it is not the best treatment. Keeping 50 million of the population locked away has a much more devastating affect on the economy.

Unfortunately I think you're underestimating the disease there. The hospitalisation rate is high even without ventilation. About 1 in 10 cases go on for many weeks. It's not just the final death rate that's important, it's how we get there, and how society manages to function while lots of people are ill. Then there are the long term complications some people will have. Just letting the disease spread won't work, unfortunately, at least until treatments improve even more.

I’m not saying we should do it but people won’t do lockdown again, if people aren’t going to work and school they start going to beaches or having parties, they’re spreading it anyway and causing havoc for police, our social structure starts to break down, which is much more frightening than the virus. Furlough is finishing soon, people have to go back to work or won’t be able to pay their bills. So yes a million is a big number but it will be bigger if our society breaks down which is starting to happen.

But that involves people being sensible and responsible which it seems many Brits aren't capable of right now.

But most people are sensible. No one wants to get ill, or wants their loved ones to get ill.

Most people generally stick to the rules they are given, even if they don't much like them. We can't base everything on the fact that some people aren't sensible. We don't close all the roads because some people are dangerous drivers.

I went into the Big City near me shopping last weekend. Clothes, a few bits and pieces that I needed. All the shops were enforcing SD, there were one way signs on the footpaths, and in the big shopping centre it was a like a live action version of Pac Man with spots showing the 2m.

I would say 80-90% were obeying everything, carefully. The government models on a certain percentage not complying, they don't expect and wouldn't get 100% compliance.

I'm sorry if you feel unsafe, but it didn't feel unsafe at all when I was out, the vast majority of people are taking care. I've been out working since the start of this, I have at no point seen anyone deliberately flouting the rules, and I am out and about for work, not in an office.

The scientists advising have a very narrow focus - The Science (whatever that is, there are many opinions and a lack of solid data right now). The government has a duty to wider society - maintain the economy, educate children, prevent civil unrest. Easing restrictions has to start happening or the damage from other strands is going to make it HARDER to fight corona, not easier

isabelle exactly.
Each and every time we drive we know we could kill ourselves, our passengers, other drivers.
That’s what sending a ton of metal onto a road is.
And most people do what they can to mitigate the risks.
Seatbelts, sensible speed, not drinking.

What level of infections and deaths would you like to see before we are very carefully allowed to go for a drink or a meal, spend money we have earnt on having a life? Not dying isn't the same as living.

We are being allowed to do those things, the point is we need to do them incredibly safely even though it's boring and hard work and we're fed up. Not scoff at people who say it's still worth limiting social interaction if we can.

I think we'd be safer if we had fewer infections before doing this, yes, but that's not the thing that will make the biggest difference. What will make the biggest difference is people trying to be careful and taking infection control seriously, rather than dismissing infection control as some kind of luxury we can't afford any more.

Like I said, I've been out and about almost as normal (except not in my office) for this whole time. My children have been in school. So many people are being very careful. Everyone I meet. The media is showing those who aren't, but they are a tiny tiny proportion of the whole country.

We need to get a happy medium, to get everything going again. Staying at home for the majority of our population is not an option going forward i’m afraid, it’s not going to happen. It will never be 100% safe until there is a vaccine so we will all have to self assess what is safe for our individual circumstances.

@eeeyoresmiles

What level of infections and deaths would you like to see before we are very carefully allowed to go for a drink or a meal, spend money we have earnt on having a life? Not dying isn't the same as living.

We are being allowed to do those things, the point is we need to do them incredibly safely even though it's boring and hard work and we're fed up. Not scoff at people who say it's still worth limiting social interaction if we can.

I think we'd be safer if we had fewer infections before doing this, yes, but that's not the thing that will make the biggest difference. What will make the biggest difference is people trying to be careful and taking infection control seriously, rather than dismissing infection control as some kind of luxury we can't afford any more.

I'm all in favour of regular handwashing, masks, avoiding large and rowdy crowds and such. But the idea of doing things 'incredibly safely' gives me the horrors tbh because what seems to lie behind it is the idea that you should wind yourself up trying to avoid a totally invisible and unpredictable risk, to the detriment of so many other aspects of your life. It seems to have massively clouded people's judgement to the extent that they can't see that managing one risk while massively increasing other risks doesn't make sense. There's extreme tunnel vision going on.

@NothingIsWrong

Like I said, I've been out and about almost as normal (except not in my office) for this whole time. My children have been in school. So many people are being very careful. Everyone I meet. The media is showing those who aren't, but they are a tiny tiny proportion of the whole country.

Don't you worry when you read posts on here where people say they've had enough and they're not going to be careful any more? I can't count the number of people in real life and on here who've said they've experienced social distancing in supermarkets breaking down. Then you've got those saying well vulnerable people should just stay indoors rather than expecting other people to make efforts not to spread the disease. And people who think only their personal risk of death matters and who genuinely don't see a problem with the disease spreading widely amongst less vulnerable people.

I really wish I shared your confidence that most people are still going to be careful, because right now it doesn't seem like that at all, and I'm not just basing that on Bournemouth etc. That's why I feel the need to argue the case for continuing to be careful - I don't think it's just a few who aren't doing this, the risk right now is of far more people giving up.

Do you think that the government are not trying to strike a balance then? They aren't throwing everything open all at once, there are strict rules for hospitality and I know my friends who run a pub are madly prepping for them so they remain compliant

The Govt are, unfortunately the yobs, chavs and feckless people aren't. The latter group are just taking the piss and ignoring the sensible precautions they were asked to take to enable services etc to be re-opened.

What will make the biggest difference is people trying to be careful and taking infection control seriously, rather than dismissing infection control as some kind of luxury we can't afford any more.

Try telling that to drunken chavs, yobs and feckless who just don't give a shit about anyone else as long as they have a good time.

So what’s the answer we sit at home and hide, worrying about what everyone else is doing? I can’t live my life like that, I will stick to the guidelines the government have laid out. I will carry on my life as normal as possible, if I get symptoms I will get a test and isolate for 14 days. You can’t control what other people do and you can’t live your life worrying about whether they are following the rules or not.