Learn to live with it?

[shitonitbambinos]

What does this mean?

It seems to be on every post alongside 'no one is following the rules' etc. But what does it mean as no one ever says!

Is it...

1. Our current life - rolling in and out of restrictions
2. Revert to completely normal life and forget it exists
3. Something else?

For me learning to live with it means we have to accept a certain level of risk (as we do with flu to certain sections of society, rubella etc ).

We put in place certain measures to try to help those most at risk - good PPE, mask wearing in public, social distancing in public. We all practice good hygiene.

We allow children to access online schooling if they or their nuclear family are at risk (and the family wish to use it).

We insist employers allow those at most risk to work at home where possible (obviously it won’t always be possible but we can try a bit harder I think).

We could also look at allotting times when those most at risk could access certain services/industries ( if they choose, some will not).

I’m sure there are other things. What seems to be happening now is the worst of all worlds.
Those not at huge risk are being severely restricted inland those at risk are not remotely safe. It’s bonkers.

If you are willing to live with it and accept it just spreading, then you're willing to live with somewhere between 0.5-1% of the population dying directly from it, then goodness knows how many more of the population dying because of not being able to access medical treatment, because the NHS is overwhelmed by all the cases, some of which will affect staff.

You're then also willing to accept around 20% of the population having long-term health problems, some of which might be permanent. You're accepting millions of people will have to cope with grief, with looking after loved ones who are long-term ill, while trying to keep working in workplaces that may have staff off at the same time.
It would be heartless and it would be utter chaos.

Happy to be corrected but it feels like it is basically impossible to protect the economy as it always has been and protect the vulnerable from Covid.

The maths behind all these financial support packages just cant work long term if people are losing their jobs all over the place and causing tax revenues to go down. So yes, most people do need to learn to live with it and carry on as normal as possible whilst taking precautions.

Its savage, and I have ECV people in my close family who are stressed and scared but we can all see the glaringly obvious fatal flaw in keeping everyone under restrictions indefinitely.

@duffeldaisy

If you are willing to live with it and accept it just spreading, then you're willing to live with somewhere between 0.5-1% of the population dying directly from it, then goodness knows how many more of the population dying because of not being able to access medical treatment, because the NHS is overwhelmed by all the cases, some of which will affect staff.

You're then also willing to accept around 20% of the population having long-term health problems, some of which might be permanent. You're accepting millions of people will have to cope with grief, with looking after loved ones who are long-term ill, while trying to keep working in workplaces that may have staff off at the same time.
It would be heartless and it would be utter chaos.

This is all just utter bollocks, not backed up by any actual evidence.

The Greater Manchester HSCP has said that there is no need to lock down, there is capacity in the system and they aren't worried about access to beds. In spite of that the government are still seeking to put GM into tier 3. So where is the logic? When the actual healthcare professionals are saying there's no need to worry and no one listens, what the fuck is going on?

@AlecTrevelyan006

It means accepting that the truth is:

• we cannot eradicate the virus;
• there won’t be a return to pre-COVID lifestyle;
• the vaccine may never be found or it may have very little immunization rate;
• we cannot save every single life and it is not reasonable to expect us to;
• we need to change our ways and learn to live with the virus that is endemic;
• this is a serious disease but notapocalyptic like you are reading in your social media;
• focus more on living than the virus, is not healthy for your minds, the virus is here to stay irrespective of your mental health;
• get a grip and go to work being sensible with trying to minimise infection;

Agree with this

I think the world will increasingly be divided into the clean sensible countries like Taiwan and New Zealand and the rest of us will just be dirty fucked it all up countries where everyone is coughing and dying

@Racoonworld my point is that “just the vulnerable” doing it - but which I assume you mean shield /lockdown/stay at home etc - still involves the rest of us taking measures to protect them. Measures like social distancing, event cancellations, closing down potential hotspots like pubs.

I am totally baffled by people pointing to NZ as a great example of success - does it really seem possible for a country to permanently avoid an illness that is present in almost the entire world? They can't keep the borders closed, they can't quarantine forever. They will have to stop at some point. What then? Even an effective vaccine won't protect everyone. They will have to accept that covid will go around. All they'll have done is delay it.

It means that the vulnerable people can make a choice as to whether to catch it and take the consequences or lock themselves away forever, while everyone else carries on as if nothing is wrong. Basically, let the vulnerable carry the burden so that the rest of us can forget about it.

It's a very selfish approach, but clearly a popular one.

@PuppyMonkey

Absolutely- I’d be happy to retain the rule of six, social distancing, mask wearing and working from home where possible alongside shielding to prevent hospitals being overwhelmed.

What we cannot have is another national lockdown which would plunge millions into poverty. We will need to take stock on March 1st next year and if a vaccine is. It close, everything will have to reopen as notmal.

How long do lives have to be curtailed to protect a system that's supposed to be there to protect us? You don't mean curtailed, do you? That's what's happening to the lives of those who are seriously ill with Covid. I think you mean restricted rather than cut short. But if the current restrictions are protecting the NHS which would be overwhelmed otherwise, then either you continue restrictions for as long as Covid has the capacity to make people seriously ill in sufficient numbers to overwhelm the NHS, or you cease restrictions and accept that medical care for everyone is even more restricted than it is at present.

@AlexaShutUp

It means that the vulnerable people can make a choice as to whether to catch it and take the consequences or lock themselves away forever, while everyone else carries on as if nothing is wrong. Basically, let the vulnerable carry the burden so that the rest of us can forget about it.

It's a very selfish approach, but clearly a popular one.

So, wanting to work so you can feed your family and not descend into poverty is selfish?

But wanting whole economies trashed to temporarily protect your health isn't?

What I'm wondering is why the category of 'vulnerable' only includes those vulnerable to covid and not those vulnerable to mental health issues, poverty, or other illnesses?

@MereDintofPandiculation

How long do lives have to be curtailed to protect a system that's supposed to be there to protect us? You don't mean curtailed, do you? That's what's happening to the lives of those who are seriously ill with Covid. I think you mean restricted rather than cut short. But if the current restrictions are protecting the NHS which would be overwhelmed otherwise, then either you continue restrictions for as long as Covid has the capacity to make people seriously ill in sufficient numbers to overwhelm the NHS, or you cease restrictions and accept that medical care for everyone is even more restricted than it is at present.

Curtailed means restricted.

THERE ARE OTHER THINGS BESIDES COVID.

That's all I have to say.

It seems to just mean, "shut up, I don't like what you're saying" and usually precedes a full blown shit fit.

@AlexaShutUp it’s selfish from both points of view though isn’t it? Selfish to want the vulnerable to shield so everyone can get on with life, and selfish to want the whole population to be restricted to protect the vulnerable. Anyway at some point the restrictions have to be lifted, the virus will still be here and it will be the choice of individuals to hide away or not.

And cap locks.

NZ, Australia, Japan, Taiwan, China, Vietnam, Thailand - billions of people leading near-normal lives. Don’t worry about NZ having to keep borders shut - that part of the world is going to be just fine travelling, trading & thriving between themselves.
That’s what really learning to live with Covid looks like.

@AlecTrevelyan006 the rules for shielding were that everyone in the household had to stay inside the home and garden if you have one or you had to socially distance in the home. As I had to woh we couldn't all si plus we couldn't get supermarket deliver slots and our autistic dd needed food from stores that didn't offer delivery.
Hence why it is important for cases to be controlled when our 3 kids between them are exposed to potentially over 450 kids between them. Or maybe the Govt could not threaten to fine these families and offer proper online schooling to ecv children and children of ecv and protect vulnerable teachers too.
Yeah funny how the general population were locked up when they weren't yet the vulnerable just need to stay home temporarily. Some of the same people advocating this approach seem to also believe that a vaccine isn't forthcoming.
Very easy to spout this nonsense online but there is no easy solution.

But the rest of the country being in lockdown doesn't help your family situation long term though does it. As you say there could easily be help and processes put in place to support ECV families to learn at home if they wanted to without fines or de registering rather than lockdowns and restrictions that plunge many into poverty hunger and homelessness. The 2 situations don't need to be exclusive of each other. If more focus given too ECV families (and I mean actual help not shutting them away to rot) the wider community wouldn't need such strict restrictions and livelihoods would be protected. Theres medically vulnerable and socially vulnerablebothneed equal protection.

@3littlewords it is definitely a difficult situation which has been handled badly by the Govt.

Open everything back up, stop trying to control people's lives, telling them who they are allowed to see and have over, are they allowed to have their business open, where they are allowed to travel, how often they have to wash their hands etc.

@TheLobster

Open everything back up, stop trying to control people's lives, telling them who they are allowed to see and have over, are they allowed to have their business open, where they are allowed to travel, how often they have to wash their hands etc.

So basically do what the US and Brazil have done?

Oh and before anyone mentions Sweden they had and have restrictions on their lives.

@RedMarauder

There are very few restrictions in Sweden apart from limits on huge gatherings. Apart from that, recommendations have been issued but not restrictions.

Bollocks
I was in favour of fully locking down earlier than we did, and getting a decent system of testing and contact tracing up and running before a gradual re-opening.
I believe social distancing, good hygeine, the wearing of masks and as much being done outside as possible alongside a quick, efficient and readily available system of testing, contact tracing and isolating where everyone abides by the rules....should have and would have made a huge difference whilst we wait for a vaccine, to the spread of the virus, the support of the health service and the economy.
The government fucked up on this on a mammoth scale...leaving us in the shite we are in now.

I think herd immunity, focused protections, Great Barrington Declarations or 'enabling the vulnerable to stay at home' is a nice lie to tell ourselves that it is possible for 'most if us' to get back to some sort of normality, whilst segregating those who have been deemed vulnerable. It is a completely flawed concept.

The huge flaws in this are
- no one can agree onwhothe vulnerable are
- the highest numbers of deaths in the 'first wave' were the moderately vulnerable..not the extremely clinically vulnerable
-'the vulnerable' are part of society, and live and work with everyone else, go to school, go to hospital, maintain the economy...are us.
- death isnt the only negative outcome of Covid - we need to learn more about the myriad ways it affects people long term from PIMS to the various consequences being seen in long covid.

When you say to lock everyone up and shut down the economy instead
What, how and who do you mean?
When you say enable the vulnerable to stay at home temporarily
What, how and who do you mean?

Good post HazeyJaneII

The main restriction in Sweden is not having gatherings of over 50 people inside.
Anything else is difficult under their constitution