For the people who think they've been duped...

[mac12]

I'm not trying to start a bunfight but I'm just curious about this thought process. People who think they've been duped by coronavirus & think lockdowns were a hysterical over-reaction...

• what do you think is going on when countries like China haven't rolled back from their strong stance on this? Do you think it's just to save face? I mean would a country really take a wrecking ball to their economy to save face?
• why have countries like Israel or some US states, which did reopen, decide to start closing down again? Why wouldn't they just crack on and carry on with full reopening if it was so clear that they had been duped & it had all been an overreaction?
• why wouldn't all governments be taking the Sweden line? Our govt isn't averse to the odd U-turn, why wouldn't they do this if they genuinely thought it was safe and they had overreacted?

I'm just wondering why people think governments would persist with this if it was so obviously an overreaction?

[quote AmelieTaylor]@TheDailyCarbuncle.

Do you not understand exponential growth? Or infection?

Clearly you think hundreds of thousands more deaths wouldn't have impacted the economy?

even though, while the NHS did struggle in March/April it wasn't overwhelmed and the Nightingale hospitals went practically unused)

YES BECAUSE WE WENT INTO LOCKDOWN.

🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️🙇🏻‍♀️

Oh I give up. Despite the bloody obvious being pointed out to you, thread after thread, you hang onto the same nonsense & trying to explain anything to you is like trying to hold the damn back with a toothpick.

And anyone thinking we should have done the same as Sweden clearly doesn't understand the numbers either.[/quote]
I'll ask you directly in that case @AmelieTaylor, are deaths from lockdown just an acceptable and necessary side effect?

I'm also curious why people are so concerned about other people getting covid, but they're not concerned about them being stuck in an abusive family, losing their jobs or becoming suicidal?

They are concerned, it's classic rock v hard place. My own MH has been impacted by this, but if many of my older lives ones had died of covid, or I'd seen images of sick people being turned away from a full-to-capacity hospital I doubt I'd have felt better, I'm sure I'd have felt worse.

The fundamental problem is that it was never a choice between lockdown and normality. It was (is) a choice between lockdown/restriction and a different sort of hell.

TheDailyCarbuncle I didn’t say anything about a vaccine.

And yes I agree it is to flatten the curve. This is to not overwhelm the NHS so those who do have other diseases are able to get the treatment they need. If all the hospitals are full or all the staff get sick at the same time then there would be no hope for anyone regardless of whether they are there for something COVID related or not.

We learn about the Black Death and how so many people died because they congregated together so we try not to repeat history. Yes there is still the plague in other countries but it doesn’t spread like COVID has been which is why it is not called a pandemic.
If we knew it was spread by an insect vector then we would be doing things to prevent the transmission from insects, but instead we prevent the transmission from human to human as that is how it is spread.

Lockdown was a massive over reaction and everyone knows it. This killer crazy deadly virus doing the rounds that I do not know a single person that has had it. None of my friends/family/work colleagues also do not know anyone that has had it.

No one would ever say I don’t care about kids getting abused so let’s have a lockdown just for a laugh but the social care workers, police etc need to be able to help these kids without getting sick themselves.

Yes people are still dying from cancer, people are suffering with mental health issues etc but there has also been massive reductions in car accidents, fights, drunk and disorderly behaviour etc which freed up police to deal with other problems.

It’s like saying what’s the point in trying to find a cure for breast cancer because people will just die from prostate cancer.
It’s just about realising how lucky you are and taking care of those more vulnerable than yourself.

My friend sent me this and it made me chuckle as in my experience it is very true that those who don’t know what they’re talking about are the ones who play it down more than those that do.

Not duped exactly, but I don’t feel like we’re being told the full story.
When it first started in China I was doing lots of research and was very anxious, there were images of people dropping down in the street, I kept thinking this will be us soon and it wasn’t...
I also think there needs to be more clarity around severity of cases and that the majority of those who get it will be unwell, but will be fine. Some obviously asymptomatically.
My mum is still convinced that if she got it, she’d end up on a ventilator, despite having no underlying health conditions.
The media has a big part to play in this and has caused a lot of panic and fear.

I also think there’s going to be a mental health epidemic after this (even more so than there is now)

@Sunrise234 we know doctors care about it and to SOME PEOPLE this is a deadly disease. Just not enough to lock up a whole nation

my mum is the same but she reads the daily mail so believes any crap (she stopped eating oranges after they said it would give you cancer).
Chances are you will be absolutely fine and most people won’t die but a big issue is that it is a new virus so it is trying slow the transmission rate whilst we figure out who’s at risk, what long term effects it has, what makes it better or worse etc to help people who are more at risk.

@Jussayingisall so how else do you slow it down when it is transmission by human to human?

Transmitted

You dont. Shield the vulnerable and let the rest get on with it. Hand washing and keeping a distance.

[quote Jussayingisall]@Sunrise234 we know doctors care about it and to SOME PEOPLE this is a deadly disease. Just not enough to lock up a whole nation[/quote]
Are you saying that the medical community, the scientific community, the mathematicians, the epidemiologists, the experts are all wrong? What qualifications do you have to make that judgement?
Lockdown has been hard, children and vulnerable people have suffered along side those who are fit and well. But who will be there to care for them if our hospitals are full and the services dedicated to this task - like social services - are unavailable due to sickness? There already are not enough of these people - so when we shrink the pool (possibly permanently) of healthy and available SW or doctors or nurses or teachers, what then?
Lockdown hasn't been great, but what do you suggest we do to lower the infection rate and keep those people for and well to engage with the vulnerable? What do you suggest they do to keep hospital emissions down to ensure there is space for non covid admissions?

I would also like us to be more like Sweden and continue with social distancing, hand-washing and mask-wearing.

Except these things aren't being enforced and a lot of people are refusing to do them (see the anti mask demonstrations yesterday)

@Jussayingisall

Lockdown was a massive over reaction and everyone knows it. This killer crazy deadly virus doing the rounds that I do not know a single person that has had it. None of my friends/family/work colleagues also do not know anyone that has had it.

Gosh, I don't know anyone with dementia that must mean it's not real then?

You can be concerned about more than one thing. You can be concerned about deaths from covid and deaths from cancer. What is sad, but true, is that we need to make choices that often come down to numbers. If we let the virus run unchecked the numbers would be horrific. The economy is tanking and some people may not come back from that but plenty will. Some people may have permanent damage to their mental health because of lockdown but most won't. Most people, throughout the course of their lives, will be ok.

My mum is still convinced that if she got it, she’d end up on a ventilator, despite having no underlying health conditions.

This is a fair few people I know. Generally under 30, no health issues, yet convinced they would drop dead. Its bizarre. Even with lockdown relaxed, they spend their days going off it with others for daring to go out of the house as its 'so dangerous'

On the other hand, people I know who would come under the high risk category really..seem to be unconcerned, and there is an element of 'something will kill me someday, why worry' about it.

The switcharound is..weirding me out at times!

I'm not saying that but according to you dementors, this is a killer virus that means certain death when it really doesn't. To the person above, the scientific community I am following said there is no proof it grows exponentially. Neil Ferguson isn't the only voice.

@Jussayingisall how do you know who is vulnerable?
Are BAME people included in this? People with asthma? What age is classed as vulnerable just those over 60 or over 80 or under 2s?

How were the government supposed to decide without hardly any knowledge of the virus who is most at risk. They formed a list of those who should shield initially but this changed as they got more information.

@Jussayingisall

I'm not saying that but according to you dementors, this is a killer virus that means certain death when it really doesn't. To the person above, the scientific community I am following said there is no proof it grows exponentially. Neil Ferguson isn't the only voice.

Could you share this scientific community with us? Are they better qualified than the chief medical officer or the professors from UCL and Imperial London, or indeed the renowned institutes world wide? Or are they part of the Trump team?

according to you dementors, this is a killer virus that means certain death

You clearly struggle with nuance. It's not black or white, it's a complex challenge yet you only seem able to categorise people as either agreeing with you or being 'dementors'

@TheDailyCarbuncle

I'm also curious why people are so concerned about other people getting covid, but they're not concerned about them being stuck in an abusive family, losing their jobs or becoming suicidal? Why is there concern about people who get coronavirus but not people who will end up with terminal cancer due to a delayed diagnosis? Why is there concern about children spreading coronavirus but not concern about children stuck at home for months on end with no outside contact? Why is there concern about coronavirus (maybe, potentially) affecting the economy but not about lockdown (absolutely definitely and certainly) totally destroying the economy?

It's the total fixation that I find horrific - it's a zombie-like tunnel vision - it's like a person so terrified of shadows that they can't see they're backing themselves towards a cliff.

Because you are trying to compare apples and oranges.

Yes, lockdown and the recovery after lockdown will no doubt seriously impact many people.

However, not locking down wouldn't have meant those people wouldn't have been impacted.

Not locking down would have meant hospitals were overwhelmed therefore - all cancer treatment stopped, all non Covid treatment stopped, possibly all emergency treatment stopped, all urgent new cancer referrals stopped.

Plus, drs, nurses, care workers, police, social workers, NHS staff, telecom engineers, shop assistants, teachers, fire fighters, paramedics, lorry drivers, gas engineers, parents... would also have got sick at much higher rates.

So, how would not locking down have preserved essential services and protected all of the people you are worried about? Can you explain how?

It's about doing the least harm isn't it? Doing no harm isn't an option

They are equally as qualified and nothing to do with trump. Search yourself I am not Google.

I am not Google.

Indeed.