Anti Lockdown Thread/Lockdown Sceptic Thread

[SussexDeb]

I am hoping to start a thread for those of us out there who don’t want or believe lockdowns are the solution to the pandemic.

I am one of many people who think the harm lockdowns do massively outweigh the benefits we get from them. This is both on the impact on society and the economy.

I wanted to make a thread for those of us who do not want a second lockdown and wish for different strategies to manage the pandemic such as Herd Immunity and protecting the vulnerable.

I also want this to be a non judgemental thread. Where those of us against the lockdowns can vent without being called selfish or a ‘granny killer’ or any of the other names used for those of us who question the narrative.

It would be good for Boris and friends to also show the data for MH referrals, new prescriptions for antidepressant, anxiety and sleeping pills and the financial data (household income, employment statistics, household debt, food Bank usage) alongside the COVID data. I guess it would be hard to organise that since it is still early days in this pandemic, but they probably wouldn't show the numbers if they did exist.

@sunflowers246

What happens when The Vulnerable are allowed out again? They won't have developed the appropriate t cells so it will be just as dangerous for them as it is now.

But at least the rest of the economy can continue earning and paying taxes (partly to support the vulnerable).

And hopefully a vaccine will be available at some point- the vulnerable should be the first to get it.

I wonder how many of them will be left by then.

Your honesty is noted.

@Facelikearustytractor

It would be good for Boris and friends to also show the data for MH referrals, new prescriptions for antidepressant, anxiety and sleeping pills and the financial data (household income, employment statistics, household debt, food Bank usage) alongside the COVID data. I guess it would be hard to organise that since it is still early days in this pandemic, but they probably wouldn't show the numbers if they did exist.

The Office Of National Statistics covers a fair few areas - GDP, unemployment levels, reported anxiety levels, businesses opening and closing...alongside the deaths (with Covid as cause of death on death cert) and other Covid statistics (with a lag of a few weeks). here

Total lockdown worked but what's being mooted now is just pissing about, making lives stressful and joyless for no reason. I'm totally against it. Closing hospitality whilst people can still travel and schools and unis stay open is utterly pointless.

Sweden continues to look like they are doing well. Why is this ignored by, basically, the rest of the world? You'd think it would be copied...

There's a lot of lockdown for the vulnerable being suggested for a thread that has declared itself against lockdowns.

@Wheresthebeach

Sweden continues to look like they are doing well. Why is this ignored by, basically, the rest of the world? You'd think it would be copied...

The U.K. is currently tenth worst for deaths per million. Sweden is 13th. At various times both countries have been the worst.

Unemployment rate hits highest level in three years
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54520521

"Overall employment is down about half a million since the pandemic began and there are particular groups who seem to be most affected, young people in particular," he told the BBC's Today programme.

which means for every life lost with or of covid, ten people have lost their job

Which of those is worse for society as a whole?

The short term impact of death if tragic on an individual level. The medium to long term impact of mass unemployment is catastrophic.

Had there been no lockdown (or even if we had not reduced further restrictions) it is likely there will have been more deaths. But how many? The Ferguson prediction of 500,000 deaths was an absolute worse case scenario based on doing nothing - and even in that situation most people now accept the figure would not have been that high. And how many jobs would have been lost? Some, yes, but not half a million (with many more tom come).

It will definitely and sadly turn out that the cure was indeed worse than the disease. IMHO, obviously.

With unemployment I think it’s worth noting that this figure is likely to rise further once furlough ends. Most economists predict 7.5% minimum but on average it’s estimated to be 10%.

However for young people it is estimated to be 37% for those without degrees it could top 50%.

Disgusted at my local council going to the Gov to beg to enter tier 2. I'm actually seething. We'll be a laughing stock for one thing, and we're already the butt of many a joke 😡😞

I think there is some evidence out there for reinfection. Doesn’t that make herd immunity very problematic and a big risk?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54512034

However for young people it is estimated to be 37% for those without degrees it could top 50%.

That's getting on for South African levels. That's.... not good.

One thing I am curious about. A few weeks ago, it was uncovered that Sir Patrick, who leads the Government's expert advisory panel on vaccines, reportedly holds stock worth £600,000 in GlaxoSmithKline which is involved in developing a vaccine. This is a quite ludicrous conflict of interests and, in any sane world, he would have never been anywhere near offering guidance on such issues.
This is one of many reasons why I have stopped believing a word the government - or its scientific advisors - tell us. The lot of them are a bloody disgrace.

@Namenic

There is no evidence that large numbers of people can be re-infected. There have only been very few reported cases.

There is also the possibility that the first positive test was in fact false in these cases.

toxteth this is my thought too. I cannot understand why it’s allowed? How can he been seen to provide unbiased advice?

I’m shocked about the GSK thing. You’d think that he would avoid anything like this in his position.

I can’t believe how he can’t see how this undermines public trust.

This is like Petrol on a flame for many conspiracy theorists and anti Vaxxers

Ecosse - my point is not that it is not possible that it is a rare phenomenon but that it is very risky given the current evidence to pursue such a strategy.

Think about the death toll with if you let it go through society - you risk north Italy or Wuhan. Once you are in a situation like that it is hard to back out of. Now - it is possible that the risk is low, but it has happened before.

The other option is to take measures, including quarantine, fines, forms of lockdown. There are downsides to this - but the time course is usually longer so you have a chance to mitigate the effects

Come off it @puppymonkey. Men are not at significantly higher risk of COVID.

But they statistically are! For example:

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/26/men-are-much-more-likely-to-die-from-coronavirus-but-why