[quote Watermelon999]@TheDailyCarbuncle
“An ideal alternative would be to have a healthcare system and a disaster plan that has actual capacity to deal with situations like this.”
Yes completely agree. The reality though is the opposite. Every winter our hospital literally runs out of beds due to “normal” winter pressures. That’s despite using every available space. Routine care and surgery invariably gets cancelled for bed space. You’d think that they would learn but it happens every year. I can’t imagine what will happen this year. It’s very scary.
“the next thing would be to look properly at the actual data and look critically at the actual benefit (or otherwise) of 'protecting the NHS.' It's beyond bonkers to protect the NHS by making people sicker and more depressed, by tanking the economy such that you reduce revenue and increase poverty and the resulting effects of job losses.”
I agree with proper analysis of the data in order to determine the best way forward. I would hope the experts are doing this, but there seem to be vastly differing opinions, and conflicting decisions. Plus no one explains the reasoning very well, so people don’t get on board with it.
The problem with not protecting the NHS and carrying on with life, even with extra precautions, is that we will become overrun with people struggling with breathing who require urgent medical intervention, like in April. It was a very scary time.
In the short term this will quickly become unmanageable. In our hospital covid admissions have more than quadrupled in 2 weeks. ITU is nearly full already. Without some action to slow/reverse this, what do we do? Turn people away?
The more patients admitted with covid, the more other services are restricted or stopped. The fact is there is just not the capacity for both. We are already backlogged from having departments closed and staff redeployed in April.
“It's political pandering from politicians who would rather tank the economy and destroy people's lives than say 'there is a hard limit to what we can do in this situation.' I am genuinely shocked that people not only accept being told they can't see their own families, that they must leave elderly people isolated, lonely and struggling, they demand it. Such is the level of tunnel-vision and lack of understanding about what you can really do in this situation. “
I’m not sure it’s that simple. There’s a fine balance between allowing freedom, boosting the economy and protecting the vulnerable. I wouldn’t fancy making those decisions. People have been allowed to care for their vulnerable relatives, and single people allowed to bubble up. We were allowed to see friends and family, at distance, but unfortunately people started ignoring the distancing and therefore the rates increased.
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.[/quote]
People have not been allowed to care for vulnerable relatives in care homes - some people in care homes have barely seen a loved one for months and months, 'for their own good.' Research has shown that over lockdown a significant proportion of care home residents died, not from covid, but from the effects of isolation and despair. Many simply stopped drinking and died of dehydration. How is that a positive outcome? That's a genuine, honest-to-god question. How is it beneficial to prevent a person having human contact 'for their own good' resulting in that person's death? How? I am so angry asking that question I can't tell you.
'Protecting the vulnerable' means focusing on the politically hot issue, protecting politician's reputations. It doesn't mean actually protecting vulnerable people, because if it did 'vulnerable' would include care home residents who need family contact to continue living, people who need jobs to be able to eat, people with mental health issues who need face to face treatment to avoid deteriorating, and the many many other people who are vulnerable to abuse and despair made worse by lockdown.
If your 'vulnerable' only includes one group of people, and the needs of those people are prioritised to the extent that it actually causes the death of other vulnerable people then you have to really ask do you actually care about vulnerable people? Or are do you have fatal tunnel-vision where fear has made you focus on one thing?