Wow,look at the actual numbers on worldometer at the moment ..

[Layladylay234]

Current levels of infection: 7,007,039
Number of mild infections: 6,946,649 (99%)
Number of serious/critical cases: 60,390 (1%)

Do these numbers make anyone else think,what the fuck are we doing damaging the economy,our children's future and mental health for figures like this?

And the crazy thing is,it's 1% of people in a critical condition,

How many ITU beds, plus drs and nurses capable of running ITU beds do we have? Do you think it's enough to treat the 1% who would need them or are you proposing rationing? If so, what's your criteria?

Yes, but I think we still need to be cautious to manage our way through this.

We also have to remember some folks are genuinely struggling to cope mentally and are panicked, they are wiping down their shopping, won’t see anyone, don’t want to leave their homes unless necessary, don’t want to send their kids to school, don’t want to go to work, and want things shut down again.

Yes. Lockdown is likely the biggest overreaction in human history. But some people just love the drama and play along with it.

Yes. I feel like policy makers and governments are acting like it’s Ebola or plague which kill between one in two and one in four people. It’s just not that serious and I don’t believe with reduced restrictions it would have been a very different picture - it likely would have burnt itself out quickly and more immunity would have been achieved. The big thing for me is at what point will authorities accept we have a new mildly dangerous disease in the population and that we can’t restrict normal activities or destroy the economy indefinitely? Is it 10 hospitalisations a week? 5? 50? Because right now it just feels like they’re aiming for zero which is just ridiculously unrealistic.

Whatever they are doing to reduce mortality may be definitively working (even counting deaths is a slightly different way) but we do not know yet enough about the virus to asume the worst is over.

OP, you haven't factored LongCovid in there. Your category of "mild infection" covers a substantial number of people (currently estimated at 10% of total infections) who will still be ill 6 months from first infection and may have sustained permanent and irreversible damage.

The category of "mild infections" includes people like my colleague who was recently rushed into hospital with a suspected heart attack (turned out to be Covid-related damage). Or my other colleague, young and previously healthy, who after falling ill in late March cannot stand for long enough to make a mean without ending up in bed the next day, and whose blood pressure is still fluctuating wildly. Neither of these two were hospitalised for their initial illness. Both still have breathing problems due to scarring of the lungs.

"Mild infection" can mean a person who has mild flu-like symptoms for a week and is then fine. Or it could be any of the above.

In some ways I agree, but on the other hand we are dealing with shit data so aren't getting the full picture. There is a lot of embellishing the truth and I agree with others that numbers are low due to lockdown, so we will never know the full extent of the virus.

Some things should never have shut down and a lot of people are suffering through indirect consequences of lockdown. I'm not sure why non-essential shops couldn't have opened with measures in place, or some form of schooling was provided on a rotational basis. The pandemic preparation and subsequent leadership through this has been piss poor at best and guidelines have been confusing and illogical. Now we are happy for let people to sit in a cafe in an enclosed space breathing over everything and using cups/cutlery and presuming it has been washed properly, but yet we are not able to have gatherings of more than six outside now 🤷 It's not really any wonder people have stopped taking things seriously. I get we are trying to keep the economy going while keeping people safe, but it is sending people mixed messages.

The government did so little at the start before we actually knew the mortality rate and any long term health effects.

How can anyone have known the long-term health effects when the research into the long-term post-viral reactions, linked to autoimmune and other chronic conditions in some cases, is fairly young and incredibly incomplete? There is so much we don't know about the complexities of the human body, anyone who says they know the long-term risks with any certainty is talking shit.

The worldometer numbers aren't strong enough to base any decisions on, let alone an emotional reaction like described in the OP. It sucks all around for so many reasons, there are so many horribly situations going on (as there were before all this), neither the COVID will doom us all or the lockdown has doomed us all types have a monopoly on that and the problems to come will be a mix. We were already looking at a clusterfuck with industry changes, population bulge issues that we will have to go through, Brexit and other political workings, and much more before this, can't blame it all on COVID and the government's wonky reaction.

And seriously, Sweden in COVID is the new Finland in education, cherry-picked to death.

Strange how people like the op are never able, or willing, to explore what the picture would look like we're the UK to treat this "just like the flu" isn't it?

Should have added that both the colleagues in previous post were taken ill in March- in other words, the heart trouble affecting my first colleague was close on 6 months after she first fell ill.

I can answer that. Your question is a strawman. I don't for a minute think abandoning all measures is sensible or viable. We can mitigate some risk by continuing to observe hygiene, SD where its possible and convenient etc. But most of all, the most vulnerable can be protected while the rest of us get back to a nearly normal life.

It isn't a choice between do everything and do nothing. It's a choice between strangle our way of life or take a pragmatic view of risk.

Current levels of infection: 7,007,039
Number of mild infections: 6,946,649 (99%)
Number of serious/critical cases: 60,390 (1%)
Do these numbers make anyone else think,what the fuck are we doing damaging the economy,our children's future and mental health for figures like this?

This the mentality of those who put up a pool fence and then piss and moan that no-one's drowned so the pool fence was not needed.

You all can't be trusted to go in groups bigger than 6 outside and socially distance,you're fucking the lot of us. So now, we're going to go back on what we said.

This is called evaluation of the evidence and making decisions based on it. It might not work as projected and have to be modified.

Absolutely yes

Yes I completely agree op, but with the caveat and it is an important one:

The stats we see currently are for the first wave, we have no idea what the outcome of the second wave will be. Understanding that second waves, are usually, not always much worse.

We can really only reach a conclusion of overreaction in spring of next year - and even then, no government in the world is going to ignore a spiralling out of control virus that is killing tens of thousands of people, it would be pure negligence at every level.

I agree with the previous lockdown measures, and the benefit of hindsight will enable to us to see if we did too much or too little. Either way we have lost nearly 60,000 much loved people in this country, and I don't think we should ignore the suffering and pain of long term covid survivors either.

@Tootletum

I would also love to know why I have to accept the removal of my rights and freedoms for something that's about as fatal as flu. The latest legislation to be passed (with zero parliamentary scrutiny or debate on the public record) as a statutory instrument under the covid legislation is the extension of the period you can be held in custody without charge to 80 days. Maybe someone can explain to me why I should accept this - I didn't accept it when Tony Blair tried it under the terrorism legislation, and in those days we actually had a free press that reported on the parliamentary debates extensively. I am more shocked by the fact that no one cares about any of this stuff, and all just keep saying it's for our own protection. Yes, that's what Viktor Orban said when he dissolved parliament and ruled by decree indefinitely earlier this year. Does that not worry ANYONE??

Also, this!! Why is there no debate about these measures?! Why is the press not making noises about if the removal of civil liberties is worth the very low risk of illness/death? Why are there not people protesting about this? I definitely feel I’m at the point now I would join protests against lockdown if they happened.

@GetThatHelmetOn

Whatever they are doing to reduce mortality may be definitively working (even counting deaths is a slightly different way) but we do not know yet enough about the virus to asume the worst is over.

But the govt has said many times that we are over the peak

@EDSGFC

Can the posters who agree with op please explain how they envisage the country, and the world for that matter, functioning were restrictions to be abandoned?

I'm really sorry for the posters who lost loved ones and weren't able to mourn properly but what do you think would happen if no restrictions were in place and the cases were rising uncontrollably? Every service in the country would be affected so it wouldn't mean you had limited numbers at a funeral, no cars and so on, you wouldn't have a funeral at all because undertakers and crematorium staff would be ill.

Hospitals would be hit two fold by large numbers of sick patients plus large numbers of sick staff. Schools would close due to staff absence, essential services such as national grid and BT would suffer due to staff absence, food shops and the supply chain would be impacted...

How is that preferable to what we have now? Plus you'd have the fall out from hundreds of thousands of people facing a long recovery. I'm waiting to see a respiratory consultant for a non Covid problem - they are snowed under treating post Covid infection patients and the service is struggling.

Please explain how your way would work

Sorry, my post above was in response to this one

Yes absolutely agree OP.

What I find really hard to understand is that some countries leave people to get on with it if they don’t have insurances etc... under normal circumstances.

The governments don’t come in and help everyone regardless. If you’re poor and you can’t afford the healthcare etc... then sadly you’ll end up dying of cancer for example.

In other words, they’re not that bothered about saving lives at all cost in other circumstances.

At least here, you get the same treatment regardless of whether you’re rich or poor. So preserving life no matter what cost is generally paramount here.

@MorrisZapp

I can answer that. Your question is a strawman. I don't for a minute think abandoning all measures is sensible or viable. We can mitigate some risk by continuing to observe hygiene, SD where its possible and convenient etc. But most of all, the most vulnerable can be protected while the rest of us get back to a nearly normal life.

It isn't a choice between do everything and do nothing. It's a choice between strangle our way of life or take a pragmatic view of risk.

A) who are you classifying as the most vulnerable that warrant protection? How do you propose protecting them?

B) are you proposing that they live in solitary confinement, unable to buy groceries, have maintenance done on their homes, not receive an education if they are children or the children of a protected person, not able to access healthcare because hospitals won't be safe?

C) even with the most vulnerable protected a lot of people will still be ill enough with Covid to require hospital care - how will you accommodate that?

D) how will essential services be maintained when large numbers of workers are off sick, even if they get away with being ill for only two weeks? How will services cope if significant number of employees are off sick for much longer as they recover?

Yes!

Would someone be able to provide any evidence that you can now be held in custody for 80 days?

I have to say I didn’t agree with lockdown but I do believe in coming out slowly, schools are going back, more and more people are going into work, out to restaurants, numbers were going to go up, it’s good deaths are low and young people are getting it as there does seem to be some immunity, we need to be cautious though as illnesses before Covid get worse over the winter months, add on Covid and it could be a disaster. I’m keeping my fingers crossed winter won’t be to bad but we don’t know at the moment.

Yes

No.