Here's an interesting view. Lockdown is actually extremely individualistic and throws the working class under the bus.

[Treesofwood]

twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1309030154837135362?s=09

People all ready to gout how selfish people are for questioning or refusing lockdown, it's all about saving lives, we have to do. It for the good of the vulnerable...

Well here is an opposite view. And I think it is very very true. All the questioning about who is impacted most and why. Those cocooned in their house, incomes protected "its not stuck at home its safe at home" rubbish. Who are lockdowns (local or national) really protecting? Who are actually vulnerable? And vulnerable to covid or destitution?

And South Korea locked down twice I believe.

YANBU. Mumsnet is very middle class skewed, full of people who are able to work from home with no issues, savings to fall back on and the knowledge and facilities to home educate their DC. Anyone who can't "hunker down" for the winter and is worried about schools closing is selfish.

I noticed this, among my fb friends in March who were sharing all the shouty STAY AT HOME, YOUR GRANDPARENTS FOUGHT IN THE WAR memes were-
SAHM with husbands with well paying jobs that can be done from home
People who wfh anyway
A hedge fund manager who could wfh.
Ie those who had the least to lose by staying at home.

As an aside MN seems to have a high proportion of (well paid, wfh) introverts who seem to be delighted never have to speak to or see their work colleagues or family ever again for months at a time!

However I think it obviously makes sense if it is practical to wfh, and a person has the facility to do so, it means for those that do go out, public transport is less busy.

To add to the list of countries doing well: Singapore, Hong Kong have done pretty well with huge population density and low level of self sufficiency. They haven’t eradicated the virus, but it’s under good control. Life is not the same but they can do more than we can.

Think about the political structure in Singapore and Hong Kong...

@FatimaMunchy

Think about the political structure in Singapore and Hong Kong...

How about Taiwan then? Democratic and doing extremely well.

HK has had quite a bit of turbulence too. S Korea, Japan also (which were mentioned above).

We know people who live in Hong Kong and according to them the turbulence is not as widespread as the media present it. People returning from abroad must quarantine for two weeks in their own homes, but shortly there are plans to use army style barracks.

Stinky, I agree. People seem to think everyone is just like they are. I think we have become quite "siloed" if that's a word, people just mixing with others like they are and not realising how different other people's lives are. I love my own company but I know many others feed of the energy of meeting others whereas I am drained and drained the more time with others.

Lots of people are in jobs where they have had to work right through since March (my son is a grocery delivery driver for example) and all this "just work from home" doesn't apply.

Also 25% of the UK does not never have £1 in savings so suddenly being paid £97 sick pay a week to be at home or zero in many cases is unfeasible.

'Long Covid' when the virus has only been around less than a year. hmm It used to be called 'Post Viral Syndrome' and you could get it from any viral infection, but usually influenza.’

THIS

Except - we're not actually sure long COVID does equal post viral syndrome. On account of it not having been around that long. Beside which, it's not just about what it is but how many it affects and for how long.

COVID-19 has many unknowns, & yes that applies to Long Covid. But in essence it is a syndrome of chronic symptoms that occur after a viral infection - literally Post Viral Syndrome & naming variants.

PVS can last weeks, months & in some instances years. Every experience of PVS has many unknowns about severity, period, variation of symptoms & long term effects - it’s a syndrome.

Drawing upon existing medical protocols and PVS experiences does not diminish the realities of clinical & experiential patterns of recovery from COVID.

@Treesofwood

There are so many people, especially on here but also in real life, who are so judgemental. Almost holier than thou in their attitude and assertion that they are the ones acting morally, whilst those agonising over whether to send their child with a cold into school or forfeit dinner for the next week are berated for not protecting "the vulnerable". Which is an emotive term and means what exactly?

Exactly. Some people have NO CHOICE. i'm lucky in that my job involves working from home. A lot of people don't have that privilege.

It's disappointing though not surprising how quickly we turned against each other..

We know enough about the virus now that we should change the strategy. I really think the best would be to concentrate the money and resources on supporting those in the shielding groups and let everyone else manage their own risk.

@Pixxie7

If you had a choice between your life and finances what would you choose?

With this virus, my finances.

If this were MERS, with its much higher death rate I may well choose my life.

An interesting item about Long COVID.

‘Into the looking glass - Post-viral syndrome post COVID-19‘

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7320866/#b0035

To be honest m8 I'd choose to have a competent government who had tackled this thing properly so that I didn't have to choose between the risk to my health/public health and my finances/public finances.

@midsummabreak

Paul Banks is spending an absolute fortune on a campaign against lockdown in Melbourne- he is the The Managing director of Regional Reach Australia An and desperately wants to protect precious private enterprises over lives

And over here Nigel Farage started an anti-lockdown party, even though he's loaded and he's far less likely to be affected by it than most people.

Yes the push against containment measures is coming from the right (often the far right).

Also the very rich, who can afford to take the risk of putting very short term greed over longer-term economic health.

It's obscene spending all that money fighting Melbourne's very successful lockdown (it's working and they're starting to plan opening up). To think it could've been spent on making lockdown more bearable for the more disadvantaged and vulnerable.

@HMSSophie

I think the delivery people who bring my goods to my door, as I sit comfortably and safely in my home doing my MC wfh, are exposed to a shitload more people in the course of their day than I am. Covid has absolutely revealed the social inequality in the UK and it's a fucking disgrace.

I agree

@Stinkyguineapig

However I think it obviously makes sense if it is practical to wfh, and a person has the facility to do so, it means for those that do go out, public transport is less busy.

Yes it helps lower the risks for those who can't WFH. The last thing they want is more crowded public transport.

Obviously proper containment measures like Australia and New Zealand took would've been better. The arguments we're all having (lockdown vs letting it spread) would be redundant because by now, eight to nine months on we'd be back to mostly normal - with schools, offices, shops, bars restaurants, gyms, etc open as usual.

I think all this judgmental shouting at each other is utterly pointless. We don't get to choose whether lockdown is imposed or not. We don't get to choose whether pubs or schools are open or whether the advice is to wfh or not. I'm a law-abiding, rule-following type. I don't like Johnson or the Tories, but I will follow the rules.

Lockdown affected me less than most. That doesn't mean I want more of it or that I judge those who think it's the wrong thing for us to be doing. It's perfectly understandable that people have different views - these are unprecedented events, and only hindsight will reveal the true effects of the different tactics used by different countries.

@Kljnmw3459

It's disappointing though not surprising how quickly we turned against each other..

We know enough about the virus now that we should change the strategy. I really think the best would be to concentrate the money and resources on supporting those in the shielding groups and let everyone else manage their own risk.

The problem is that The Vulnerable are rather a large group. Millions of them including many many healthcare and school staff. That's why we need to take measures to contain the spread.

We also know that lots of younger people are hospitalised with Covid. They don't die because they get treatment. Which they wouldn't get if Covid spread unchecked and all the hospital beds were full. Meaning no-one gets any medical treatment for anything.

Countries that realised this sooner now have much healthier economies then us.

And I know people are sick of me bleating about it but we do need to exercise caution re Long Covid. We are all vulnerable to it's risks.

Yes it helps lower the risks for those who can't WFH. The last thing they want is more crowded public transport.

This is my position exactly. There are some parts of my job that can't be done from home so I've been part home working part woh. Back in march and April, woh was fine because the buses were empty, pretty much. There's been gradually more people about since July onwards and now we're coming into winter and there's even more so it's a worry. The last two weeks each journey home has been crowded beyond social distancing measures. So, not overcrowded by normal measures, but seats that are taped off filled etc. It makes me nervous. Stay at home, really! I personally would rather you did, if you can.

Plus I would like to point out that I wouldn't even be worried if we had a semi effective tracing system or were able to test all those who need it, but we don't, so given that I have to get out there to earn my wage and given that our government hasn't got things under control, I'm kind of at the mercy of other people not going out and about unnecessarily so that I can carry on earning without carrying too great a risk.