Is it really worth all this?

[Dustballs]

What are we shutting down for? What are we trying to save?

I don't understand what the purpose of this is anymore.

@TheLastStarfighter

I'm pretty sure you know the answer to this. It's been repeated over and over for 6 months.

If cases go up, deaths will go up. Roughly 1% of people die from the virus. That means its not a massive risk for most individuals. And because of the way averages work, for the majority of people it is much, much less than 1% risk. Behaviorally that makes it hard for people, because its a relatively hard jump for humans to make from personal risk to societal risk.

But if we get to a point where we have 100,000 cases per day, as has been analysed was the case at the end of March, and we do nothing, then roughly 1-2 weeks after that we will have about 10,000 people every day needing hospitalization, and about 1-3 weeks after that we will have 1,000 people dying per day. Most of them will be dying in hospital. Hospitals don't have the capacity, particularly the critical care staff, to deal with that many people needing that level of care. That's why we built the nightingale hospitals. You know this.

Now putting it in perspective at that point, roughly 1,600 people die each day in the UK anyway, so it would be about a 60% increase in daily deaths.

But then a few other things come into play.

Although 1,600 people die in the UK each day, not all of them die in hospital.

And remember there is exponentiation growth, and in this scenario we are doing nothing to stop the spread, so if cases double each week then after another week you have 2,000 deaths per day, then 4,000, then 8,000, then 16,000. So we are up to 16,000 deaths every single day, after just another 4 weeks, if we do nothing. Now that is 10 times the number of people who normally die in a day, of all other causes, ongoing and increasing every single day.

Obviously at some point this becomes self limiting, because presumably at some point people start to think that going out at all is a bad idea even if there are no restrictions in place.

Of course all of this affects the availability of things like supply chains, water, electricity etc.

But, as I said, I think you already know this because it has been talked about a lot. So which bit is it that doesn't resonate with you?

the absolute worst case scenario - from implementing no mitigations at all - was 500,00 deaths

there is plenty of evidence now to show that this estimate was too high

and if we maintain some social distancing and good hygiene and keep most office staff WFH we could easily open up hospitality and leisure industries without swamping the NHS

TheDailyCarbuncle - just said this about that:

This scenario would never happen.

The Imperial Model, which I presume you're getting this from, was a guess, a complete shot in the dark. It as also not based on any realistic idea of human behaviour - it was based on a completely fictional, unrealistic situation in which ill people continue to spread the illness far and wide, even when they're so ill they're on a ventilator (which is obviously not physically possible). I wish someone would come out and explain that all the available evidence now indicates that the Imperial Model is entirely and utterly wrong. It's not surprising that it's wrong btw - it was based on zero data - but it's about time it was completely debunked as people obviously still believe it.

We are shutting down to protect political reputations, to protect politicians from the inevitable media fallout and calling them "mass murderers" etc if we follow the Swedish model. Even though it actually seems to work better allowing the virus to run its normal course.

I mean, what are a few tens of thousands of undiagnosed and untreated cancers, heart attacks and strokes, compared to the future electability of politicians?

Just look at how many otherwise rational people are changing "Nicola has handled this so well" when Scotland has the third highest death rates in Europe, thousands were sent home from hospitals to care homes to infect other residents there and she now presides over the most controlled country in the world outside North Korea and a few other communist states, where you may go to a pub but tough luck if you are an ice skater and want to use an ice rink!

It’s kicking a can down a long road. My issue is that road is now very damaged.

Sadly people have lost jobs but not because of any action we've taken, but because a virus is spreading and most sensible people were limiting their exposure in some way before lockdown. Economies always take a downturn in epidemic situations, the more spread/death the worse it gets.

If you accept the fact that whatever we do there will be economic consequences then it becomes about damage limitation. People who have no income can apply for UC, very few people slip through the cracks. Yes it's awful if you're going through it, but it's better than the alternative.

Why are ice rinks not open?

Our local one is shut too and I assumed it was just us?

I'd have thought ice rinks would be as safe as swimming pools which are open.

It’s prolonging they inevitable. We won’t eradicate it, never will. Best we can hope for is a vaccine and even then that’s not a certainty.

My DC was once an outgoing bubbly child that was fantastic in social situations. Now- they’ve gone to a new school and are not allowed to mix and get to know others except those sitting directly beside them.

It’s tragic. LO is a shadow of her former self because opportunities have been ripped away from them in a way we took for granted. Can’t make new friends so get confidence is at rock bottom. And this is a child who never ever struggled before so I can only imagine it’s worse for the ones that struggled beforehand.

Dustballs Why are ice rinks not open?

Our local one is shut too and I assumed it was just us?

No-one really knows, because there is little guidance from the Scottish Government on it and its been left to local authorities to interpret. So it just seems to be that they haven't got round to it yet.

Its not just ice rinks, there seems to be a problem with indoor venues in general. If local authorities haven't inspected them and given the go ahead, then they can't open and also there is a problem with their insurance not covering them if they are open without permission.

I think. No-one really knows. Sports venues have been closed in Scotland a lot longer than any other country in Europe. Equestrian centres have had a horrendous time for the same reasons, even though they aren't open to the public and everyone going there can be monitored.

Or there is meant to be some liaison between the sports governing bodies and the local authorities but some local authorities won't follow guidance unless issued by the Scottish Government and there isn't any, so it goes round and round in circles.

Or possibly because some indoor sports facilities have been wrongly classified as public entertainment venues when the centre owners are trying to run them as private facilities with members only scheduled to attend.

Its stange that Nicola Sturgeon has been unable to address the issue in her many daily tv briefings, because I know that lots of people who run these centres have been desperately contacting their MPs and local authorities, usually without any reply.

Running events are the same. Some elite level track races can go ahead because of very small numbers in each race.

Much competitive sport in Scotland now has become elite-level only. It also costs more when permitted, due to the extra personnel needed and sanitisation, etc.. eg. some sports used to have first aiders doubling up as assistants, but thats not allowed now. Extra people are needed to open one gate and close another, and so on.

Unfortunately other countries with better health care systems are handling this better. It is all about the quality of your health care system and how many doctors/beds you have per thousands. We need quick tests on entry to any nhs hospital and segregation of Covid positive cases (to the extent possible). But there will be people who have heart attacks arriving at A&E who are also Covid positive. Obviously first saving their life has to be a priority. Countries such as Germany and Switzerland treated people very early (oxygen, steroids, antibiotics, drops, anti coagulants months and months ago) and were and still are on top of testing. They also have better aka fairer education systems so people at the top in their countries tend to be there more on merit than connections/private school privilege. I am not at all surprised where we have ended up as a country. Just look at our cancer rates previously compared to other more developed nations. We are also a country of free thinkers rather than rule followers so that will impact as well. Historically speaking that is a good thing.

Yes it is important to have a functioning economy.

Yes it is important to have non-Covid NHS treatments.

But we will not have either of those things if we let the virus spread through the population.

@Waxonwaxoff0

Well, you can’t eradicate it and we do need a vaccine. But China and a few others have nailed the track and tracing which means that people can, with a few precautions, get on with shit with virtually zero chance of catching this virus. Our countries haven’t managed this unfortunately and we need better governments.

We had nearly two months to get our shit together from the time when people were collapsing on the streets in China.

Instead of getting ready for the worst case scenario, the majority of world governments did fuck all and hoped the worst case scenario wouldn’t arrive. Bad plan.

Covid is here to stay we have to learn to live with it.
All these restriction are an affront to our hard won liberties. People need to take personal responsibility for their own health end of.

We need to keep calm and carry on not in my name are the young having restrictions imposed and their lives ruined.

When we look back we’ll see we have killed far more than we have saved.

People need to take personal responsibility for their own health end of.

Right, and how do you suggest they do this if the NHS gets full to capacity coping with Covid? Buy their own ICU bed? Or should we just stop treating Covid patients?

As a pp said, a lockdown just kicks the can down the road.
Spain had a much stricter lockdown than we did first time, but that hasn’t stopped a major second wave.

Sweden did the least as far as I can see, and isn’t doing any worse, and probably better. Yes, I know you can’t really compare, given population densities etc. but I have a Swedish friend in Stockholm, which is pretty densely populated, and they’ve been carrying on much as normal, with no worse outcome that I’ve heard of.

I don’t think any country will be able to be too smug about how they’ve handled this until we’re all out the other side. This Beast didn’t come with an instruction book - we’re all in pretty much uncharted waters.

@GETTINGLIKEMYMOTHER

As a pp said, a lockdown just kicks the can down the road. Spain had a much stricter lockdown than we did first time, but that hasn’t stopped a major second wave.

Sweden did the least as far as I can see, and isn’t doing any worse, and probably better. Yes, I know you can’t really compare, given population densities etc. but I have a Swedish friend in Stockholm, which is pretty densely populated, and they’ve been carrying on much as normal, with no worse outcome that I’ve heard of.

I don’t think any country will be able to be too smug about how they’ve handled this until we’re all out the other side. This Beast didn’t come with an instruction book - we’re all in pretty much uncharted waters.

The Swedish mortality rate from Covid is one of the worst in Europe, only just behind ours. And five times higher than their Scandinavian neighbours.

Really?

Start reading the news properly.

People need to take personal responsibility for their own health end of

Also, does this mean that you think anyone who doesn't fancy catching Covid should just quit their job and stay home? Including your GP, dentist, hairdresser, child's teacher, electrician, delivery drivers, paramedics, police, the people who make your food and clothes and keep your utilities working?

It's a really hard balance between protecting people, being able to offer adequate care for covid patients and other emergencies and procedures , and keeping the economy, and thus peoples livelihoods going.....

...but were acting as if it's only our government! This is a balance numerous countries are trying to achieve....Its not a unique problem to the uk, however shit and inefficient our government is. there isnt a right answer that will solve the problem.

Totally agree. It's too much. Children need to go to school and people need to get back to work to keep the economy going. Those who need to shield, need to do so and the elderly need to step up and stay away from Corona hazards and let the rest of us get on with it.

Enough.

I'm with you OP.

Interesting article on Sweden

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/25/what-lessons-can-europe-learn-from-sweden-covid-19-experience

I think the longer we live like this, the harder it will be to get back to how life was before. Is it worth giving up the life we had before Covid for lockdown that doesn’t work anyway? Our whole social structure is starting to break down, everyone’s so worried about the virus they don’t see all the other huge problems crawling out the woodwork. Say good bye to your children’s future.

The Swedish mortality rate from Covid is one of the worst in Europe, only just behind ours. And five times higher than their Scandinavian neighbours.

Yes it is at the moment. But the Swedes have made no secret of the fact that they are in it for the long haul and they think that repeated lockdowns will do more harm than good in the long run. They recognise that Public Health is more than just Covid.

@WokesFromHome you do realise that it isn't only the elderly who are vulnerable don't you?

When you say 'let the rest of us get on with it', what do you mean by that? What does getting on with it mean?