Costello's tweet re Whitty & lockdown Now retracted *edited by MNHQ at OP's request*

[mac12]

Anyone heard anymore on this? Apparently amid the testing chaos, we’re now thought to be at 38,000 cases a day & CMO wants a 2 week national lockdown
twitter.com/globalhlthtwit/status/1306351773356118022?s=21

I genuinely don't understand why people say that a proper short lockdown wouldn't work (as opposed to a half assed version).

Just imagine for a moment that everyone complied- in theory it would work would it not?

Disclaimer: I fully accept it's not practical and for umpteen reasons people would not comply.

A lockdown would have to be four weeks wouldn’t it? In the first 14 days of lockdown 95% of those infected before lockdown would develop symptoms/become infectious though asymptomatic. But, if we ended lockdown then we just release all the household members who caught Covid from being with their infected nearest and dearest 24/7. We need another 14 days at least for everyone who catches Covid during lockdown to stop being infectious. So 28 days minimum.

If we had a two week proper lockdown then that night do some good. The problem was that we were never in a real lockdown. It was very loose.

I’m not doing another lockdown. I’ll pay the fine.

Where does the figure of 38,000 come from? They stats say a 10th of that.

@Worriedmum999

I think it’s needed. Get cases down to a level that track and trace can handle again, give the new labs time to kick into gear

What, you mean the very things they were supposed to be preparing during the first lockdown? As if this government is going to achieve anything in another lockdown other than a coinciding reduction in case numbers, which will rise again as soon we re-ease restrictions, which they will then find someone to blame for (again). Repeat.

It is impossible to have a complete lockdown. Millions of people need to work to ensure that -
A. The lights, heating and water stay on.
B. You don’t starve.
C. To protect you from fires and illegal acts.
D. To provide healthcare.
That is just a simple list, literally ten million people need to work away from the home, to enable you to remain at home.

@WFHpain Like Spain you mean? Fat lot of good their hard lockdown did them. The countries that are faring better at this stage are those that had the loosest lockdowns 6 months ago

To be fair, it doesn't matter what you think and if you moan about it. If the government decided to impose a real and strict lockdown, you would just have to get on with it. Other countries have proven it's not that difficult to enforce.

Of course 100% of the population cannot stay locked up at home that's not a lockdown is about.

That said, this country cannot afford any of that nonsense anymore. Offering free test to any Dick and Harry because they coughed once is the nail on the financial coffin.

It won't happen. Not because a couple of MN would be miffed about it, but because the economy cannot support it. Even if we were selling the crown jewels we are screwed.

Well, fuck him. I'll take the fine. Not doing that shit anymore.

Why do we need a national lock down?
Our area extremely low rates of infections....seriously stop lumping everyone together....only lock down the problem areas

New Zealand had one of the earliest strictest lockdowns and has had only 25 deaths. Lockdowns do work, but they have to be done properly and kept in place until infections are almost eliminated.

I hope that once we are through this lessons will be learned for the next pandemic.

@HeIenaDove

Well the first lockdown was supposed to be for 3 weeks. Ended up being 4 months. So they will say 2 weeks and the general public will hear 3 months. Fool me once shame on you , fool me twice shame on me!

No it wasnt. It was announced as being reviewed after 3 weeks, presumably because if they had said "It will probably be at least 3 months" there would have been a lot lower level of compliance. But when it was reviewed, and the numbers where being released, everyone was already used to it so there was less resistance.

They introduced lockdown in exactly the right way imo. Small managable chunks so no one was thinking "how the hell will we get through months of this?"

Seriously whats will the idiots who want a 'proper lock down....we did one in our area....just because other areas cannot get it sorted...don't punish all if us..

@movingonup20 delivery food to the vulnyamd let the rest of us live! you had me for a minute with your comment about vulnerable children in lockdown , I thought you cared about others.
Many vulnerable people have jobs and children in school, and you know want to live too!

All a lock down does in a country with a free border is delay infections for a while....doesn't stop it because the moment someone enters the country off you go again....
No national lock down

Too many people don't care anymore.

I rather think that people are finding the prevention - applied to almost everybody in the country - far worse than the actual virus, tragic though it is for the minuscule percentage of the population who do get it and then die or suffer greatly from it (and their families). Businesses collapsing, across-the-board job losses, families unable to feed their kids, people losing their homes, children missing out on months of school, abused/neglected children and victims of DV trapped in with their abusers and struggling to access the support they desperately need, disabled/chronically ill and deaf people and those communicating with them victimised by frothers abusing them for not being able to wear masks and thus feeling isolated in their own communities.

Hypothermia kills a whole load of vulnerable old folk every Winter - many because they simply can't afford to heat their homes and eat - but the government doesn't seem to care enough to do anything about that.

There comes a point where you just have to accept that life is not risk-free and start living it as best you can.

It'll never work as there's too many pillocks who think they are more important and know better than the scientists.

@NewAutumnName

All a lock down does in a country with a free border is delay infections for a while....doesn't stop it because the moment someone enters the country off you go again.... No national lock down

Correct, you have to require anyone entering the country to quarantine. That's part of doing a proper lockdown, but if you do it properly it brings infections right down to a manageable level.

They were never brought down far enough in the UK and the border wasn't managed properly. A real mistake because as an island it's much easier to protect the border.

@movingonup20
You say''' ' Lockdown care homes, pay those of working age who are very vulnerable sufficient to stay at home if they can't work from home, delivery food to the vulnyamd let the rest of us live!' '' '' ''

That's your answer is it!?
The vulnerable stay locked away forever?

They cannot do a national lockdown when they've not done local lockdowns . Wales are taking a much better approach than England.

Chris Whitty? I want to know what Jon Claude Van-Tam's view is.

[quote ChristmasSnowball]@movingonup20
You say''' ' Lockdown care homes, pay those of working age who are very vulnerable sufficient to stay at home if they can't work from home, delivery food to the vulnyamd let the rest of us live!' '' '' ''

That's your answer is it!?
The vulnerable stay locked away forever?[/quote]
I share your incandescence. Bit cheeky of some to say “I don’t want to lockdown lightly for a short while so those at risk must do so much more harshly for much longer”.

I think it’s called discrimination.

As the saying goes, judge a society by how it treats its most vulnerable.

Lockdowns do work but only if they are full on proper lockdowns and people that comply. Lets face it - there are many people in the UK who think lockdown doesn't apply to them so it would never work.
Personally, I would be be ok with another lockdown - maybe over Christmas/New Year when most folk are at home. How about 26th December to 23rd Jan.

The tracing system now won’t cope with the actual number of infections. It’s possible given the lack of testing we are actually closer to 38,000 than the reported figures.

We need to do something to enable our useless Gov to get on top of the situation. If we don’t do anything it’s going to be an even bigger mess and no the economy won’t recover unless infections are brought down. Thinking it will is not reality I’m afraid.

Don’t reply talking about Sweden it’s not how it seems.

I rather think that people are finding the prevention - applied to almost everybody in the country - far worse than the actual virus

That is true, but also reveals a misunderstanding on their part. They are comparing prevention with the virus itself, and not with the effects of exponential growth of the virus to a natural peak, which is what the restrictions are actually aiming to prevent.