I'm so angry...

[MaryShelley1818]

We are in an area with local restrictions so high transmission rates in the North East of England.

Someone I know had her 40th at the weekend and photos on FB of her having a party in a pub, cake presents, her and kids, her parents, her sister who works at a local University in a very high position, and about 4-5 friends. No Social Distancing, drinking, cuddling, shots, photos.
How are people just carrying on as normal??!! How can you be so bloody thick as to post all the photos on FB. Am I missing something?? I'm furious.

We've followed every single rule but seems I'm in the minority and the longer people just do whatever they want for, the longer I'll have to go without seeing my friends and family.

this is a good example as to why the pandemic is still with us, too many selfish thougtless people around

But if everyone absolutely followed the rules to the letter, the pandemic would still be with us. Think what you like about the “selfish people”, but the pandemic would be here regardless. To be clear, I do think that large gatherings etc aren’t ok right now, but realistically, we are not New Zealand and we cannot wipe it out, and people who think we could are delusional.

this is a good example as to why the pandemic is still with us, too many selfish thougtless people around, , apart from this party i am so tired of the mental health of young people , not being able to party etc, look at the other end of the scale, i am 73 , havent been near my grandchildren, the only ones in my house are me and hubby, i feel slightly depressed, partly , age wise.we do not live forever and i am wondering when i can hug my grandchildren

“I’m so tired of the mental health of young people”. This is the most selfish thing I’ve read on this thread. Having just heard of another suicide of a friend of a colleague who was a healthy 21 year old man please forgive me if I don’t think your life is worth more than his. Unfortunately the government has decided it is and thrown he and his peers under the bus. No jobs, no prospects, entering the workforce in the deepest recession in living memory. Mental health services in crisis because “covid”. Face to face support not available because “covid”.

But yeah, you’re miserable so everyone else should be too, yet his generation are the “selfish” ones

I find the idea that if everyone followed the rules everything could go back to normal utterly incomprehensible.

Why? I live in Sydney. We had lockdown for a few months and most people stuck to the rules. We have zero community transmission now and are more-or-less back to normal.

We have zero community transmission now and are more-or-less back to normal.

For how long ...

@redvest

Some opinionated twat on TV today saying lockdown doesn't work because the cases are going up in those areas.

Local lockdown isn't working because people refuse to follow the lockdown rules.

So lockdown would work if people stopped doing what your friend did.

Bollocks.

The "opinionated twat" is right. Local lockdowns don't work, because a virus does what viruses do, given a fraction of a chance.

And if the people in local lockdowns are refusing to comply, I'd be refusing with them, if I were in a lockdown area.

Remember: we had a national lockdown which put millions of people out of work (I am included in this). The huge majority (98%, where I live - though I was one of the 2%) complied.

It made fuck all difference, and we are now still looking at the ruins of the economy.

The last election was the first time I have never voted Conservative (because of Brexit) in 30 years. But if even a long-standing Conservative voter is saying "never again", God help a Conservative government which won a majority thanks to 'floating voters'.

@IrmaFayLear

TheDailyCarbuncle I unilaterally award you the prize of the most intelligent MNetter!

I second this.

@randomer@annabel85
Absolutely 👏
My feeling is I can’t keep on worrying about what other people are doing? If they are following the guidelines - great. If they choose not to, well, I damn well hope they don’t infect someone.. I can only do what I do, following the guidelines we are given, for the sake of my mental health I can’t keep worrying about what Joe Bloggs down the road is doing or what might happen in the next two or four weeks.. . if you are following the guidelines you ‘should’ be ok. If you want to have a massive party, invite all your friends, kiss and hug everyone and then stick it on FB well, then you have to be prepared for the consequences....

@ssd

I agree op.

We've followed all the rules since March. Dh went out with a pal the other week, to a pub for the first time since March. He's now got covid. It's utter shit.

That's bad luck for him.

I've been out every day since March, and I haven't had Covid, that I know if. Nor have I had flu (which is a bugger for me, if I get it).

If I get either, it will be a bit shit (underlying conditions). But I'd rather take my chances and lead a normal life. Occasionally, I'll catch something which will make me very, very unwell. But I don't expect the rest of the world to stop turning while I spend 6 weeks in bed. And I'd rather my job were still there at the end of it. I can cope with being laid up for weeks, if I have an income to look forward to at the end of it.

This way, I have absolutely nothing at the end of this. Can you imagine how this feels?

*@etopp *
*
The "opinionated twat" is right. Local lockdowns don't work, because a virus does what viruses do, given a fraction of a chance.
*
Precisely, the virus has been given half a chance because people aren't following the rules.
It won't be completely eradicated, but we can keep it down and control the spread of it.

@inappropriateraspberry

Do you really, truly think the virus would just turn tail and run away if people largely stuck to the Rules? Or do you think it might rear its ugly head again once people emerge from hibernation, now, or in 6 months' time, or in a year's time? What then?

It's just another boring virus. It will kill some people, either directly or as a result of complications. Everyone else will get over it. It's no different from any other fucking virus!

[quote Teddybear27]**@randomer@annabel85
Absolutely 👏
My feeling is I can’t keep on worrying about what other people are doing? If they are following the guidelines - great. If they choose not to, well, I damn well hope they don’t infect someone.. I can only do what I do, following the guidelines we are given, for the sake of my mental health I can’t keep worrying about what Joe Bloggs down the road is doing or what might happen in the next two or four weeks.. . if you are following the guidelines you ‘should’ be ok. If you want to have a massive party, invite all your friends, kiss and hug everyone and then stick it on FB well, then you have to be prepared for the consequences....[/quote]
Again nit-picking, but there are a lot of people who are not sticking to the rules, because the rules are stupid. However, these same people are slightly less stupid than anyone who posts anything on Facebook.

I'm not sticking to the rules, and never have done. I haven't got a Facebook page (if that's what they are), though. So I can just get on and do it quietly.

@TheDailyCarbuncle

People have been handed the responsibility of protecting people from a virus that they may or may not have. They have been told that if they, without any malice or intention, infect another person while going about their everyday life they are personally responsible for that. And in order to prevent it from happening, they have to deny themselves a job, a social life, the potential to travel and meet new people.

Where does that responsibility end? When does it end? When does my being a human, one that can get sick and can pass on illness, stop being a problem? Perhaps everyone should isolate indefinitely to prevent the many millions of other deaths from infection that happen every year? Why don't we care about those deaths? Why don't they count? Why was it ok for me to pass on flu last year and potentially kill someone, but not ok for me to pass on covid this year?

Beyond actual actions I take to hurt you, I am not responsible for your health and you are not responsible for mine. Living means risk, and some of that risk is getting ill. I will not stop living my life to prevent a risk that I can't help posing as human being. I will NOT.

This x10000000

@etopp No, I'm not saying it will disappear, it will always be around, but we can keep a handle on it if we stick to the rules. It's a new virus, we have no vaccine, we don't completely understand it yet and there is little immunity to it in the community. Therefore, doesn't it make sense to try and do what we can to slow it?
If none of us obeyed the rules and we all went wherever we wanted, mixing with strangers as well as those we know, the virus would be spreading like mad, the hospitals would be overwhelmed and many vulnerable people would die earlier than they should.
Why is it so hard to just suck it up for the relatively short term? Why are you exempt? Are you immune, do you have a vaccine? Can you guarantee you would definitely not spread it unknowingly?

@Tiredwiththeshits

If Covid runs out of people to infect. It basically does die out. We now know that for us to have isolated cases, people need to be symptomatic and tested positive or just isolating themselves or tested positive through a random test etc, anyway... the issue is, COVID-19 is also a-symptomatic which means, we need to distance to stop the spread. So yes people ‘having a bit of fun’ and mingling is exactly what is keeping this in circulation. The only way to stop something you cannot see is to limit the risk of catching it. Unfortunately I know of waaay to many people who totally ignore the rules. We follow the rules but we are also boring and focus mainly on work and our nucleus.

So yes people ‘having a bit of fun’ and mingling is exactly what is keeping this in circulation.

Disagree completely. Whats keeping it in circulation is that we cannot all just hide away ad hope for it to go away. We missed the chance to contain. Government fucked up tracing after lockdown got us to reasonable numbers. And now, even with 100% of rules followed, the virus would still be in circulation, and numbers would be rising. And will continue to rise given work/school and restuarants and such are the most likely places to be infected at the moment (officially apparently). Of course work and school are needed, and people meeting at home contributes nothing to the economy. So its home contact thats being blamed, despite clear figures showing thats not where the main transmission is. As long as people mix, and as long as a large number of people remain asymptomatic, and as long as test and trace is a fuckup, this will keep going. Its little to do with rulebreaks, and everything to do with this being a bitch of a virus to contain in any meaningful sense (once the genie is out of the bottle so to speak. Acting earlier could have changed this, but..that option is not there now so here we are) given how it spreads, and how many do not even know they are ill (and testing being only for those who show symptoms..a mere 20% of those infected accrding to some studies!)

I understand rulebreakers in this regard. As it seems quite daft to limit private contact while the main transmission is elsewhere. Some common sense is needed of course, but I cannot really see what damage seeing your elderly grandparents who live alone and are totaly isolated does. Differet to having a houseparty with 30 people IMO, which would clearly be stupid given circumstances and I would be quite anoyed to see this happening. But I can't find it in myself to be annoyed about small family gatherings. Even moreso when in much of the country, banned family contact is allowed if going somewhere where money is spent.

We try to stick to the rules. We are in a 'lockdown' area also. I have been informed today that support bubbles are not allowed as no households should be mixing at all. However, MILs mental health is at rock bottom and she has actally been self harming in the recent past due to isolation from lockdown. We 'broke the rules' and let her come to see us before support bubbles became a thing as it seemed almost inhumane to just leave her to flounder. We will continue breaking the rules and allow her to see us twice weekly. I don't know if it is a rulebreak or not as its not exactly that clear, I have been looking but..a load of cotnradictory nonsense everywhere. If it is, sorry for being a rulebreaker, but we will not allow MIL to potentially kill/harm herself 'for the good of everyone else' whilst spread appears to be elsewhere anyway. That has been the only rule we have broken this time. If this makes us selfish, so be it. Yes, we are putting our own families health before that of others. There would be something wrong IMO if we didn't given the situation tbh.

@HermioneMakepeace

I find the idea that if everyone followed the rules everything could go back to normal utterly incomprehensible.

Why? I live in Sydney. We had lockdown for a few months and most people stuck to the rules. We have zero community transmission now and are more-or-less back to normal.

Aussies generally know how to behave though.

If people could be trusted to be sensible, wash hands, keep distance, wear masks, isolate when needed etc, these extra measures may not have been needed. Along with a fully functioning test and trace as well.

I also think its not really about being trusted to isolate when needed. I would imagine the huge majority would be very willing to do this. But are they able to? Given it means 2 weeks without pay. Potentially over and over again? In this regard, there needs to be some urgent thinking about a system which could provide for people who do not have a comfy safety net that would allow them to do this (luckily I could do this, and will if needed. But many I know could not). Because regardless of what answers people give online, if faced with the situation of losing their homes/their kids not eating/losing job for sake of isolation for 'potentially' having covid as maybe been too close to a person who later tested positive..or taking the risk that they are fine and not isolating, in order to keep home/let kids eat/keeping job, most would go for the second. In an ideal world, everyone would isolate in such a situation. But until there are safeguards in place to allow this from everyone, its not going to happen. That should be the current priority, along with sorting out test and trace. As if people simply CANNOT isolate, they wont/cant. And throwing 'you are selfish/horrible/killing grannys' at them will not change the situation for them. Nor will threat of a fine help in such a situation.

So yeah, the if people could be trusted to isolate part I would disagree with, I think most can be trusted to. If their situation allows it. Otherwise, those who could under other circumstances be trusted to do it, can't do it.

People do what they can get away with though. The difference is lax policing and enforcement in the UK (with the occasional focusing on an easy target). Try and take the piss in somewhere like Spain or Italy where the police aren't to be messed with.
And look how well an extremely draconian lockdown, followed by very strict policing of masks/rules etc went for Spain eh? They are doing really well right now, clearly policing getting tougher is the answer

We've been threatened with a second wave because of rule breakers for a while now, yet look at the stats?!

Also this.

VE day was definitely going to cause a second wave, then the protests, then beaches, and so on and so on.

We are seeing a rise now. But its not caused by rulebreaks. Its caused by things opening back up after lockdown. Which had to happen. The rise was always going to happen when life returned to some form of normality. Because of how the virus works, and how hard it is to even track given the huge majority with it don't even know about it.

I was not blaming Spain for their numbers in the last post either. Its inevitable really that numbers soar when society opens up again (which is needed). And how strict Spains policing of the rules is (or tougher lockdows, like wanted on here) doesn't stop this clearly, nor would it here.

[quote inappropriateraspberry]@etopp No, I'm not saying it will disappear, it will always be around, but we can keep a handle on it if we stick to the rules. It's a new virus, we have no vaccine, we don't completely understand it yet and there is little immunity to it in the community. Therefore, doesn't it make sense to try and do what we can to slow it?
If none of us obeyed the rules and we all went wherever we wanted, mixing with strangers as well as those we know, the virus would be spreading like mad, the hospitals would be overwhelmed and many vulnerable people would die earlier than they should.
Why is it so hard to just suck it up for the relatively short term? Why are you exempt? Are you immune, do you have a vaccine? Can you guarantee you would definitely not spread it unknowingly?[/quote]
@inappropriateraspberry

I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

I am very, very unwell and haven't been treated in hospital because of Covid. But I'm one of the people who doesn't matter as a result.

As a result of lockdown, I have not only lost medical treatment (which I was having, pre-Covid), but also my livelihood. I don't qualify for benefits. I am long-term disabled - but not quite disabled enough - and my sector has been killed off by lockdown.

I haven't got a clue if I'm immune, but at this stage of things, I wouldn't care if I died of Covid. I am in so much pain, and am struggling so much financially, that things couldn't be much worse.

@NRatched

If people could be trusted to be sensible, wash hands, keep distance, wear masks, isolate when needed etc, these extra measures may not have been needed. Along with a fully functioning test and trace as well.

I also think its not really about being trusted to isolate when needed. I would imagine the huge majority would be very willing to do this. But are they able to? Given it means 2 weeks without pay. Potentially over and over again? In this regard, there needs to be some urgent thinking about a system which could provide for people who do not have a comfy safety net that would allow them to do this (luckily I could do this, and will if needed. But many I know could not). Because regardless of what answers people give online, if faced with the situation of losing their homes/their kids not eating/losing job for sake of isolation for 'potentially' having covid as maybe been too close to a person who later tested positive..or taking the risk that they are fine and not isolating, in order to keep home/let kids eat/keeping job, most would go for the second. In an ideal world, everyone would isolate in such a situation. But until there are safeguards in place to allow this from everyone, its not going to happen. That should be the current priority, along with sorting out test and trace. As if people simply CANNOT isolate, they wont/cant. And throwing 'you are selfish/horrible/killing grannys' at them will not change the situation for them. Nor will threat of a fine help in such a situation.

So yeah, the if people could be trusted to isolate part I would disagree with, I think most can be trusted to. If their situation allows it. Otherwise, those who could under other circumstances be trusted to do it, can't do it.

Yes I agree with you on that.

To be honest there won’t be many people who could manage having to take unpaid leave for 2 weeks if it happens regularly.

It’s always sort of glossed over by those in charge, assuming that everyone will just do it as it’s the right thing to do, without considering the bigger picture.

I agree many would gladly do it if given the support. Equally some will still selfishly continue doing what they want to, going by many of the comments on this thread.

WHO realised very early on that that approach would only be effective in a very very limited way for countries that already had thousands infected across entire countries. Even the WHO has now accepted that we are way beyond that approach.

Dr Michael Ryan of the WHO has been bordering on incoherent about covid at times - his assertion that one must avoid covid at all costs is bizarre in the light of the fact that such a thing is in no way possible - for us to achieve that we'd have to accept not having any healthcare or any other services for a period of time which is obviously nonsense. So what's the message after that - avoid covid unless you happen to be unlucky enough to be a doctor or someone providing an essential service?

I've been watching the WHO press conferences since the beginning of March and I don't recognise this description at all. I have always found both Dr Michael Ryan and Dr Maria Van Kerkhove extremely coherent and consistent (sometimes blisteringly coherent) about what we need to do to get through this pandemic. Can you provide any examples of what you mean?

I don't recognise your description of WHO's attitude to risk avoidance. When did Ryan say we must avoid covid at all costs? WHO have spelled out repeatedly and in detail the devastating costs of lockdown to human rights, health, wellbeing, functioning societies and economies. WHO do not advocate lockdown. They call it 'so-called lockdown measures'. They are very clear that if you need so-called lockdown measures it's because you have fucked it up and lost control of the virus. They are very clear that lockdown just buys you some time to mend your fuckup.

Dr Maria Van K in particular is always very good at explaining how it's never too late, even in situations of widespread community transmission (e.g. now, March/April), to work backwards towards containing large outbreaks, then smaller clusters, then sporadic cases, until we have few or no cases. Like NZ, China or the Isle of Man, for example.

And incidentally, I don't care if international travel is a bit difficult for a while if it means I can live normally day to day in this country. I think that would be a very reasonable deal.

@etopp I'm so sorry you're in this situation and that is bloody shit.
That is a separate issue to obeying the rules re rule of six, bubbles etc.
They should be dealing with 'normal' cases in hospitals. We built large Nightingales for this reason, I don't understand why they aren't being used to keep COVID patients separate from others, particularly when there is a high risk.
A lot of industries/sectors are struggling, but I think the sooner we can get this under control the sooner many industries will rebuild. And that comes from following restrictions, rules etc.

@SwimSwim

“OP people are fed up with more and more restrictions when the numbers of people being admitted to hospital/ICU/dying is now very small, relative to the population. “

This is just not true, certainly not in our area (NW). Covid hospitalisations are increasing daily at an alarming rate. Itu is filling fast.

So what would you do? Leave things as they are and tell people with covid they can’t be admitted as the beds are full? Cancel routine procedures and emergency non-covid procedures eg. cancer surgery/joint replacements to free up more beds? Or put extra measures in place to try and slow the spread?

I agree many would gladly do it if given the support. Equally some will still selfishly continue doing what they want to, going by many of the comments on this thread.

Yes some would still not bother, even with the help to do so. I think in the original lockdown, it was estamited 90% (and considered better tha expected IIRC) compliance? Unfortunately, there will always be some who think they can do completely as they like*. If someone refused to isolate even after being given the help to do so, I agree the are a shitty person tbh.

*given the ending of my post, this might be contradictory though!

I don't really class refusal to isolate as the same as seeing an extra family member though tbh.

I think there is a fair bit of 'the rules are daft', and in part I do agree with this. I doubt many would find it daft to isolate with covid though. While thinking a lot of the rules seem daft though, as I said, we have followed them. Until it was hugely detrimental to our family to do so, anyway. I wouldn't be thrilled with our situation, allowing MIL to come outside the rules for the sake of her deteriorating mental health (or even, others seeing family still for their own reasons), being shoved alongside people having huge house parties and such though. I guess some will say it is the same and say we are indeed selfish. Cest la vie I guess! I can live with being labelled selfish for caring about my own family above 'the public benefit'

@NRatched

“I guess some will say it is the same and say we are indeed selfish. Cest la vie I guess! I can live with being labelled selfish for caring about my own family above 'the public benefit'”

I don’t think there’s any comparison between caring for a vulnerable relative and having a Houseparty, but I may be wrong!