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.

@TableFlowerss

I agree OP. As if lock downs help.... yeah in the short term, but it just delays the virus. All very well and good if we had a definite assurance that there will be a vaccine, but what if there is never a vaccine? Then what? Everyone has to live like this forever more?

Well if there isn’t a vaccine and we are incapable of controlling it through testing and tracing and quarantining like China then we’ll probably have to accept massive damage, a lot of deaths, and even more of a hit to the economy than we’re seeing at present.

But given there probably will be a vaccine and it probably won’t be all that long, why would we inflict all that on ourselves needlessly?

@gypsywater
No plan. They weren't overwhelmed before and the nightingale hospitals were barely used. My sis is an a&e consultant in a major teaching hospital - they were all bored.

Seems there are still some people who think that lockdown will get rid of the virus. It didn’t last time and it won’t this time or any other time. All it does (at best) is kick the problem down the road a bit - which is not an inherently bad idea, but it is not a cure.

Coronavirus is not going away so we need to find the right balance between (to put it simply) staying in and going out. Most of those arguing against further restrictions (like me) are doing so because we believe that they are disproportionate to the scale of the problem we face. We are worried that the impositions being placed upon are causing. and will cause, major problems for the health and well being of the whole of society and will result in huge negative impacts on the economy and the social and cultural lives of many millions.

And sadly the government has lost support of the people and offers us no leadership, no plan and no hope.

Either way, those of us that survive this mess will never forget it.

Good luck everyone. I’m out.

@janeyloves
Any possible link between the Nightingales not being used and the national lockdown?!
And ICUs weren't overrun? Please.

Seems there are still some people who think that lockdown will get rid of the virus. It didn’t last time and it won’t this time or any other time. All it does (at best) is kick the problem down the road a bit - which is not an inherently bad idea, but it is not a cure.

No of course lockdown doesn't get rid of the virus. Lockdown gives a country time to put in public health infrastructure to deal with the virus, once the virus is already getting out of control. Public health infrastructure like maybe a functioning test and trace system. Then you release lockdown and control the virus with that instead.

@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.

I don't think anyone is happily sitting doing anything op but I think that we need to be realistic about it, this virus can't just rip through our population without it causing catastrophic economic damage and more importanty unnecessary deaths not to mention long term covid effects. I do think that the dfe need to pull together a viable online programme that targets pupils from underprivileged backgrounds and schools in areas of high deprivation. These are the young people that will will be disproportionately affected and not just by education but by being more likely to suffer a loss of someone close to them to covid or indeed the from the economic fall out. We know that people classed as BAME are at higher risk of Covid too, does that not matter to you ?

@Fatted

It's not a popular opinion on here op, but I do agree with you. Lockdown is not a long term solution. Because the virus will still be there when lock down finishes. Which is what we are seeing now!

The government are there to make the decisions to protect the majority. Not every one, the majority. Unfortunately, this means making decisions that will inevitably involve hurting/damaging some sections of society to protect the majority. There will always be a decision to make that involves deciding who lives and who dies. Not everyone can be saved and it is ridiculous and naive to assume every single person can be saved from covid.

So you think that our Tory government are inflicting needless damage on business because they're too soft-hearted about letting people die? That they just can't bring themselves to use policies that would mean letting some people die?

Does that make sense to you? Does that match their previous behaviour, in which they have shown they give a fuck about nobody but themselves and are all too happy to inflict death and poverty on lots of poor people? Does Boris Johnson seem like an overly selfless soul who just cares too much about the welfare of people other than himself?

@gypsywater
You won't convince me that anything else is required. The death rate is less than 1%, so 99% of us will be just fine. Look at the statistics.
You don't hide away each winter and there are many other virulent pathogens that kill every winter.

@janeyloves I didnt expect you to change your mind, sadly.

You won't convince me that anything else is required. The death rate is less than 1%, so 99% of us will be just fine

You mean 99% of us will be alive

There are a whole range of other shitty outcomes, plus the misery of simply being ill for weeks/months in some cases

You won't convince me that anything else is required. The death rate is less than 1%, so 99% of us will be just fine. Look at the statistics.

No, we won't. Because if we have an overwhelmed health system then:

1. people who do have Covid but would otherwise have recovered, will not all recover because they won't get the treatment they need;
2. some people who do not have Covid but need treatment for other things (cancer, road accidents, heart attacks) will die of those things because they won't get the treatment they need;
3. and that is on top of the 1% of the UK population that you're already fine with losing, which is a hell of a lot of people.

So you think that our Tory government are inflicting needless damage on business because they're too soft-hearted about letting people die? That they just can't bring themselves to use policies that would mean letting some people die?

Spot on.

Also - A+E was quiet (and your SIL "bored") BECAUSE of lockdown meaning fewer accidents. Correlation and causality not your strong point clearly. Good luck to your SIL this Winter without the same restrictions in place.

I swear to God, it's like some people think we can just magic anaesthetists and ICU nurses out of the air by repeatedly shouting "LET'S ALL JUST CRACK ON WITH IT NOW" and crossing our fingers.

@GoldenOmber The ignorance is outstanding.

How do you suggest we open up NHS fully and let the virus run through the population which will require excessive use of nhs resources meaning hospitals can't run at capacity?

You can't have it both ways. As much as we'd all like it to be over and no more restrictions.

@itsgettingweird Oh, they have no suggestions or ideas!

@GoldenOmber

I swear to God, it's like some people think we can just magic anaesthetists and ICU nurses out of the air by repeatedly shouting "LET'S ALL JUST CRACK ON WITH IT NOW" and crossing our fingers.

This made me laugh.

Am so sick of the hard of thinking saying 'we just need to crack on'!

I think your post only applies to children in good homes with supportive parents. For thousands of children lockdown has been utterly disastrous and many experts have stated that the gaps in education will never be fully caught up due to social and economic circumstances of many children.

Then there are the hundreds/thousands of children neglected, abused, living in extreme poverty or domestic abuse. They will not bounce back from this six months with lovely stories to tell.

Add in all the children with SEND who's EHCP was suspended, who were left with carer's and support, many of whom can still not return to school because of "risk assessments"

It is very hard indeed to read these posts from people who lack scientific knowledge; and scaremongering statements like "my children's generation being destroyed."

Do you seriously think that all these countries around the world are deluded and the precautions they are taking (which cause much economic damage) are unnecessary? Are they therefore all deluded? Are the scientists on the WHO all completely mad?

Maybe they should all come and see the OP to get proper advice about the science and the potential dangers. I am sure she would be happy to explain it to them. I am sure she has a PHD in virology, or epidemiology. How come they missed her off the advisory panels?

OP - you know nothing whatsoever.

Can you not remember earlier this year, when young frontline staff were dying in hospitals, when ICUs were full, when dedicated young doctors were dying? Has this all slipped your mind?

A pandemic of a new virus is a very serious thing - it has been waiting to happen for many years.

I am sorry that you are inconvenienced by it, but I would rather see proper precautions taken to prevent a second wave.

By the way, a generation of children are not being destroyed - they are simply having to learn to be adaptable for the good of others - perhaps a lesson they could pass on to some of their parents.

If we have an overwhelmed health system?

The NHS has had a very quiet summer. It should have been making the most of that imo, building on what was already put in place & going even more on a war footing.

Remember the hoo-ha over ventilators?

Wasn’t such a big issue in the end was it? Wasn’t there plenty of joy from just turning patients onto their fronts?

But the virus doesn’t transmit the same as other seasonal viruses, 1% may not seem like a big number on its own, but 1% is a very large number if huge numbers of people start to become infected, especially at the same time.

Also what do we define as “ok”, we don’t know how many of the 99% will be ok yet do we? Not for sure anyway. How many of those 99% will need hospital treatment, how many at the same time? How many will need to be off work for a few days or a few weeks, who will be working and providing essential services then?

We can’t simply disprove that the first lockdown didn’t prevent more chaos and disruption, than it has caused - because it has caused lots of problems / exasperated existing problems (like poverty and job security)

I would like to move to planned circuit breaks, I don’t want further restrictions, but I do want to see a reasonable and measured way of keeping transmissions low. At least with a planned short circuit break businesses and communities know what to reasonably expect and when.

I can only say for myself, but I am utterly exhausted with changing rules, and not knowing what’s going to happen from one day to the next.

@CoffeeandCroissant

General emerging global view is that the infection fatality rate is likely to end up at 0.1%.

Sorry, but that's nonsense. Not that an overall IFR is particularly useful given the age differentials, but the consensus view is not that it is that low. CDC and WHO both around 0.65%. Large serological studies in UK, Italy, Spain all gave a range of 0.5% to 1%. But as I said overall IFR not that useful as it depends on average age of population and who in that population gets it.

Plus also ldentifying all positive cases which we know they didn't and we can retrospectively get that data.

The idea of the NHS having had a quiet Summer