It's just an overreaction.

[madcow88]

Now don't get me wrong I followed the rules to the letter and still am doing as I don't want to break the law.

However I think it's all a massive overreaction and I don't want to sit by and allow my children's generation to be destroyed.

Their education is totally fucked, they will not get to have the same social experiences as we did as young people.

Why is everyone happily sitting by and allowing our government to restrict our lives over a virus that kills 0.01% of people. Whilst 1000s of people are dying every day due to the lack of treatment and social interactions.

I really just do not feel comfortable with all the laws on our freedom being changed so dramatically over a virus if truth be told is not as deadly as they would like us to be believed.

Don't get me wrong I have sympathy for those people who lost their lives and for the people who will lose their lives in the future but no more than for the people who die of flu and other viruses each year.

The sexual health doesn’t translate fully granted but even when choosing a partner you’re putting a lot of trust in what someone says when deciding what level of precaution to take which is why it’s encouraged to really think about it before you decide.

From the COVID perspective it’s a lot more difficult to risk assess. For instance you may choose to meet with a vulnerable member of family because you’ve risk assessed your contacts as minimal and you yourself aren’t ill. Covid precautions in general public don’t allow for those details. I can’t get on the bus and survey everyone about their movements and state of health before I choose to continue my journey. If there are nationwide restrictions I can have a degree of confidence that it’s safer to carry on and get to work. Lifting restrictions and allowing people to use their own judgement removes that element and means everyone’s personal risk assessment shows an increased risk (the consequence of that has an economical impact greater than managed restrictions).

Viral suppression to keep the NHS on life support until Valances’ herd immunity figure is reached could take 20 years.

The economy is suffering, we need a functioning economy to pay for that same NHS we are trying to save.

British public are seemingly too flaky overall to adhere sufficiently to lockdowns & comply with Track & Trace efforts, furthermore, can we keep our borders tight enough for long enough to do a ‘New Zealand’? People seem to arrive on cross channel dinghies easy enough (no, not making any point about immigration here, just stating facts about the porous nature of our borders)

There are no guarantees as it stands of a vaccine with sufficient efficacy. If we get one fab, but what if not?

How long are people prepared to live like this?

But you just wouldn't get on the bus then, if your concern was that great?

These days it's pretty obvious which of our contacts are being sensible and who isn't - we all see everyone's movements on social media, or just through hear say.

It's easier for me to say as to be honest my lifestyle is pretty straightforward with a small circle as I have two small DC under 5, and both DH and I are WFH. I don't use public transport anyway, and don't go out much other than parks, walks etc, all of which are covid friendly activities anyway, and if I do it tends to be with a small circle of friends. I know which friends in my wider circle to keep a distance from from what they post on social media/say they've been up to.

@walksen

"Almost one million people have already lost their job with many more to follow

If that doesn’t worry then you’ll be in for a rude awakening soon enough"

Recessions are not a new thing. It's not the first or last recession in our lifetime. And unemployment has been much higher at times.

The government found 450 BN for the financial crisis and they'll come up with something to replace furlough, and the economy will bounce back strongly.

You are making out it's the end of the world..last month you were posting "it's all over".

This is not a recession, the economy is in a deeper depression than ever before in living memory.

And I didn’t @tempnamechange98765. I’ve worked throughout but only started using public transport again when masks became mandatory (with the obligatory disclaimer of for those who can wear them).

Long term that wouldn’t have been sustainable (my partner had to rejig his work commitments to act as chauffeur for myself and dd) so it would have come to a point I would have had to make the decision to either leave my job or increase my families exposure. National requirements meant that my risk assessment changed and that decision wasn’t necessary.

I’m only one person but I don’t think I’m unusual in my outlook (we went past enough empty buses over the weeks) and economically speaking that would have been another straw added to the camels back. Public transport doesn’t survive if no one is using it and me giving up work would have impacted our childminders income etc.

We dont have to rely on a vaccine - Bozo is a clown, not a scientist. New treatments will be developed and in time this will be just something we can live with. If there are no effective treatments or vaccine in the next 6 months it will be getting warmer again and the virus does not do well in summer, restrictions can be relaxed. By the time we get to next winter there will be more significant levels of immunity, more treatments, more ways to kill off the virus indoors (uvc light is promising), probably a vaccine or 6.

Whitty has better things to do than respond to people who should know better. He was not lying.

Brazil's deaths are now 139,065, America is 202,000+ and rising.

The success of the economy depends on successful people - like me - going out to spend money. I wont do that while Covid deniers and "I'm tired of all this" people are not following restrictions. So if you want the economy back to a healthy state stop whining and grow up.

I completely disagree with so many people going back to work, I think where possible EVERYONE should WFH. I know this isn't always possible in some professions, but I'm sure there's hundreds of people working out of home who could do it at home.

Agree about the impact on public transport too, but lockdown restrictions aren't helping it either.

I’m with you on the WFH - it’s to my eternal frustration that I work for the NHS in an entirely computer based role (I don’t even have a phone on my desk and my manager emails me from the office next door in normal times) and all suggestions of working from home have been squashed without conversation. My office is open plan and in true NHS fashion has been crammed with as many people as humanely possible (40+ on my floor).

It’s ridiculous.

Yep MIL is in an admin NHS role, there's been no SD in her office. I don't see why she couldn't have done her role from home!

Send my solidarity to your MIL! If any organisation was going to take this seriously you’d think it would be the NHS wouldn’t you?!?

@cbt944 it’s on worldometer

@tempnamechange98765

If everyone were as sensible as you seem to be then we probably wouldn’t need any restrictions, but unfortunately they’re not.

It’s like all sorts of things in life. If everyone responsibly maintained their cars, we wouldn’t need a mandatory MOT every year, but many people wouldn’t, so we do.

But Derbygerbil as mean as this sounds - more fool them? If they catch it then so be it. Chances are it's not going to be the vulnerable people who are taking risks anyway!

@tempnamechange98765

But Derbygerbil as mean as this sounds - more fool them? If they catch it then so be it. Chances are it's not going to be the vulnerable people who are taking risks anyway!

Bit difficult not to take the risks when working in a hospital or school. Which is where many of The Vulnerable work.

Do they though? I don't understand why you'd work in a hospital if generally you're clinically vulnerable, there's a lot more risks other than COVID.

Teaching I know is a bit more of a grey area, but again would you really?

The majority of over 70's are retired surely?
If you have a major heart condition surely you shouldn't be working in a hospital surrounded by sick people? Pneumonia, MRSA etc.

We know from the shape of the daily deaths vs time curve in U.K. & elsewhere that there is a force which caused the rapidly expanding pandemic in March to slow down & then to continue spreading at an ever decreasing rate, having already begun to decline before lockdown.

I have to say, this part of it is interesting.

Not being a ButSweden ( ) but it seems all countries followed the same line, regardless of measures. That levels were starting to chill before lockdown..kind of makes me think that they wuld have fallen regardless by that stage? Sweden followed the same curve.

I don't read stuff on media about this tbh, nor do I watch YT on the topic. But the curve seemingly naturally starting to fall..has always been a strange one. That numbers fell dramatically in the days/week following lockdown, again seem to say the loweiring wasnt actually due to lockdown as, IIRC numbers dont show for about a fortnight? So saying numbers fell from lockdown day, says that things were changing appprox a fortnight earlier?

Was also why I was slightly peed off when people started blaming schools for rising infections, on the day schools reopened. The scientists seem to think it takes weeks to see the effects, this was the reason they said lockdown must be at least a few weeks at the start so that we could see if it was 'working'.

Thats not to say I think lockdown was not needed though, or that am not fllowing the rules though.

Have to point out though, that althought I agree with that part, I do not think the scientists involved are 'lying'. The bolded bit was what interested me.

@tempnamechange98765

Do they though? I don't understand why you'd work in a hospital if generally you're clinically vulnerable, there's a lot more risks other than COVID.

Teaching I know is a bit more of a grey area, but again would you really?

The majority of over 70's are retired surely?
If you have a major heart condition surely you shouldn't be working in a hospital surrounded by sick people? Pneumonia, MRSA etc.

The rules have changed due to covid though.

One year ago having diabetes, hypertension or being BAME or obese didn’t put you at a greatly increased risk that couldn’t be mitigated to some extent (flu vaccines etc). Even taking a course of steroids for something like a crohn’s flare puts you in the vulnerable category.

Peoples lives haven’t been set up with this particular scenario in mind and a high percentage of these people will be of working age.

@tempnamechange98765

Do they though? I don't understand why you'd work in a hospital if generally you're clinically vulnerable, there's a lot more risks other than COVID.

Teaching I know is a bit more of a grey area, but again would you really?

The majority of over 70's are retired surely?
If you have a major heart condition surely you shouldn't be working in a hospital surrounded by sick people? Pneumonia, MRSA etc.

Does this really need to be explained? Hospital staff are not some insular group of people. They are human beings who are susceptible to all manner of illness and disease. Diabetes, Arthritis, Crohn's, Kidney disease, heart disease, high blood pressure, asthma etc etc. Some may start their career in 100% health and others were managing and living with their condition before choosing a career in the health profession. Do you honestly think the NHS is made up of only fit and health people?

@tempnamechange98765

Do they though? I don't understand why you'd work in a hospital if generally you're clinically vulnerable, there's a lot more risks other than COVID.

Teaching I know is a bit more of a grey area, but again would you really?

The majority of over 70's are retired surely?
If you have a major heart condition surely you shouldn't be working in a hospital surrounded by sick people? Pneumonia, MRSA etc.

Lots of diabetics work in hospitals. Including many not yet diagnosed. It's a very common condition. Lots of overweight staff too.

Of course it's arguable everyone is vulnerable. Certainly to the risk of long-term disability from Long Covid.

There are also many autoimmune conditions that are treated with immunosuppressants, allowing the sufferer to lead as full a life as anyone. Flu jabs, pneumonia jabs etc given to help keep them safe. The majority of the time you wouldn't have a clue the person sat next to you has Crohn's, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Lupus, Sarcoidosis, but right now they fall into the ECV or CV category due to their meds. These are people of all ages, races, sizes and professions.

Of course I don't. Asthma - well the jury is out on whether that even makes you vulnerable to COVID (more than anyone else I mean). I'm asthmatic so have looked into it.

Being overweight sadly puts you more at risk of everything - isn't it now a leading cause of cancer, more than smoking? I'm not intending to fat shame because obesity is an eating disorder. But if you are obese, COVID is just one risk to you, and I don't suppose it's the greatest risk either.

I'm not saying all conditions that make you more vulnerable to COVID make you vulnerable to other conditions. But taking into account what I've said above, that whittles the group right down.

Not being a ButSweden ( hmm ) but it seems all countries followed the same line, regardless of measures

In Sweden and other countries that didn't impose lockdowns the curve lasted longer and went higher than similar countries with lockdown.

Even without specific measures, people react to the increasing cases by staying more at home and distancing. The measures imposed by governments are not the only that populations follow. People can make decisions for themselves and to be careful regardless.
It's not the case that life went on exactly as previously in those countries.

I'd much rather be one of Sweden's neighbours than Sweden.

Its rates (cases per 100,000 and deaths per 100,000) are higher than Norway and Finland, also Germany, Italy, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia (and have been for several weeks)

@Lweji

Not being a ButSweden ( hmm ) but it seems all countries followed the same line, regardless of measures

In Sweden and other countries that didn't impose lockdowns the curve lasted longer and went higher than similar countries with lockdown.

Even without specific measures, people react to the increasing cases by staying more at home and distancing. The measures imposed by governments are not the only that populations follow. People can make decisions for themselves and to be careful regardless.
It's not the case that life went on exactly as previously in those countries.

Yes in the week or so befor the March lockdown, London was much quieter with offices making arrangements for staff to work from home and in schools absence was high. People behaviour was changing before the official lockdown. Just thinking about St Patrick's weekend. Many pubs/clubs cancelled their celebrations before the official government lockdown.