To think we have gone collectively insane in our response to covid

[PlumsAreNotTheOnlyFruit]

This is something I have thought for a while. I feel like we are in the grip of insanity when it comes to our response to covid.

We seem to be prepared to destroy our economy, get into massive debt, surrender our freedom and mess up our children's education over covid.

It's a virus which can and will spread, and now seems more virulent than ever. Unless you have a total eradication policy, which is impossible for the UK to implement now anyway, then only mitigation is possible.

All of Europe whatever their policies have been now have many cases. Why do we have to suffer covid AND watch our businesses go under with a potential decade of economic misery.

How many lives have been saved by our policies? Has anyone even done an analysis? We reject cancer drugs because we say they are too expensive for the number of years of life saved. We allow polluting diesel vehicles to drive in urban areas despite the 40,000 who die each year from the effects of air pollution. Why is covid different?

I am cross that we haven't thrown everything at expanding health care capacity since March and instead have spent our money paying people not to work after closing things down.

Right now I feel that the virus will continue to spread whatever we do and that that our focus should be on shielding the most vulnerable until they can be vaccinated. I realise that isn't likely to be 100% effective but neither are our present policies.

Total agreement from me.

Dp couldn’t access a blood test even when we had come out of the first lockdown and the hospitals were empty

Again had to pay to get things done.

I think now the NHS have the perfect excuse for their incompetence

If we took this approach within weeks we would have scenes of people dying with no dignity in hospital corridors.

We had this situation long before covid, tbf.

The government have had 9 months and counting to get plans in place to bolster the health service. That would have been plenty of time to train up auxiliaries to treat the mild cases and take pressure off hospitals.

Instead they chucked billions at Nightingales (that are unusable), track and trace (which is not fit for purpose) and PPE contracts (which is not fit for purpose).

Brilliant 👏

In the same conversation with my mum I spoke of above, she was telling me that a friend of hers had had a grandchild born at the beginning of lockdown. This poor child has had multiple serious chest infections and the doctors think it is because he hasn't had a chance to mix with other babies, swap low levels of pathogens and build up his immune system in the first year of life.

That is complete theory . Loads of babies didn't mix with other babies in the first year of life anyway, particularly firstborns.

@Vintagevixen my second baby was born the first day of the second lockdown. She has seen my PIL once, and she has been to one shop. Thats it. As a comparison I had her sister in a playgroup at 2 weeks surrounded by snotty children. My DD1 has an amazing immune system. I really worry what the effects of not being touched by another person or being exposed to the world will have on my DD2. I try to let DD1 snot on her to help her immune system 😆

plums! thumbs up seriously. i never thought i would find anyone here on mn who thought more or less exactly the same as me. i made a very similar post couple of weeks ago if you search "corona lockdowns" you may find my old thread. it does feel like the government don't actually care about the impact all this is having on everyone and the way people talk as if death is some sort of new phenomenon. we jump a mile if someone has a cough(hey didn't you know it's winter)? yourself and your dd/ds will be catching such colds it doesn't mean they have covid. i agree it is serious but the government really needs to find a different way to handle this. it seems to me this government and previous governments have this really bizarre policy if at first you don't succeed just keep doing the same thing over and over again. i mean if you get in your car and your faced with a dead end you still going to try to drive into it? nobody likes to see loved ones ill with any kind of virus but i think tons of more people will be dead from mental health related issues for many households esp with volnerable residents covid will be the last thing they are worried about

Icenii this isn’t the case- an A&E doctor called into LBC recently. He was despairing that the Nightingale hospitals had never been utilised. The myth that we wouldn’t have the hospital beds or doctors is just that- a myth! He said every doctor he knew had signed up to volunteer at the nightingale on their days off. That they’d never been called on to do so. The doctors are standing by to help. There are 7 specialists hospital around the country standing empty.

@Madhairday

How many deaths do you think this virus will ultimately be responsible for. The cancer patients who can’t access treatment or testing, the suicides when people realise they have lost everything. The rise in dementia cases because people can’t get out and be socially active and many many more people who die because of reasons associated with this virus.The figures I don’t think will ever be known. But I reckon it wouldn’t be much difference to if we just got on with things.

But can you really not see that 'if we just got on with things' all these numbers would be far, far worse? The cancer deaths worse because if covid is allowed to spread freely the health services would be even less able to treat, let alone diagnose? Suicides worse because of multiple factors arising from a society where a virus spirals out of control and so affects every part, further decimating mental health services? Why on earth do you think that 'if we just get on with it' these issues would magically become lesser? It just makes no sense to me. Can anyone explain, because I'm seriously depressed at the lack of critical thinking here, and I am willing to be wrong if someone comes along with a good argument for why all these issues would suddenly die down if we allowed an exponentially growing virus to burn freely.

To me it's like saying, oh dear that house is on fire but it's only got a few elderly and sick people in it, besides it would use resources to put it out and affect the economy badly. And then when the fire spreads to the next house, it's oh we can't put it out because it costs too much and because those people don't really matter. And then it spreads because we refuse to do anything and suddenly everything spirals out of control.

I'm so, so baffled and I would really like to hear an argument that doesn't a/ use false or misleading information (ie no excess deaths, no more than flu, no young people dying, long covid is just PVS) and b/ use anecdata - I don't know anyone with covid, I know more people who have taken their own lives, my hospital isn't struggling.

I'd like to see some evidence based, peer reviewed science that backs up your position. And that doesn't mean the Great Barrington lot which has been soundly debunked by most scientists.

@Madhairday But where is the evidence based, peer reviewed science for lockdowns? Lockdowns have never, ever been proposed as a solution for pandemics.

See here on the WHO website, countries outlined their Pandemic plans after the 2009 pandemic.

www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/communicable-diseases/influenza/pandemic-influenza/pandemic-preparedness/national-preparedness-plans

No mention of lockdowns at all and also lots of discussion around how useless masks are and how they should not be recommended for healthy members of society .

i

What happens to the ecomony if the hospitals are overrun, what happens to those young healthy people who would recover if they cant be treated in hospital because the hospitals are overrun and too many medical staff are not able to work due to being ill themselves.
What happens to someone in a car accidebt or heart attack or fall if they cant get medical attention.
What happens to our utilities if to many people are too ill to work in these areas. Our shops, our distribution services, our garbage collections, our farms, our food manufactures.
Its not a choice of sickness/ death v ecomony. If the virus is out of control the ecomony will be distroyed anyway.

@Belladonna12

In the same conversation with my mum I spoke of above, she was telling me that a friend of hers had had a grandchild born at the beginning of lockdown. This poor child has had multiple serious chest infections and the doctors think it is because he hasn't had a chance to mix with other babies, swap low levels of pathogens and build up his immune system in the first year of life.

That is complete theory . Loads of babies didn't mix with other babies in the first year of life anyway, particularly firstborns.

Don't they? My firstborn was mixing from a few weeks old! As soon as she was able to she and other babies were swapping snot and eating dirt together. I was under the impression that acquired immunity was a pretty mainstream scientific theory, and the hygiene hypothesis is one quite mainstream theory behind the rise in childhood allergies?

And she is just relaying what the hospital doctors told the parents so...

I think if we hadn’t gone into the November lockdown I think we would have had a better outcome than now.

Our area and surrounding areas were going down in numbers. Everyone was able to SD even on the pavements.

Instead we had a build up of people wanting to do their Christmas shopping all out in the first weeks of December. Stores and the pavements were packed, together with now we have a much more contagious virus and now we are paying the price of the lockdown.

I think we are damned if we do and damned if we don't too. I don't think not locking down will be any better. Regardless of what we do, there will be a whole sector of people that are angry, upset and disagree with the approach. If we don't put controls in place, people will be here stating facts just like you are, arguing for lockdown and social distancing. Regardless of the approach, someone will be unhappy. At this point in time it just happen to be the people on this thread.

The economic argument is the strongest opposition to tough restrictions but what strikes me is that in all I’ve read on that argument there is no plan on how to manage covid. It always conveniently ignores how we will manage a high rate of absence in the workforce due to sickness and the intertwining consequences of that (I’m primarily thinking of childcare tbh) with the supply chain.

Where are the answers to those questions. Anything that boils down to ‘it won’t be that bad’ isn’t an answer. We have the proof that people may not be at deaths door but they will be too ill to work.

I’m old enough to remember the rise in statutory self-certification sick days being raised to 14 days during a particular flu (swine or bird? Not sure) in the early 00’s because of the pressure on GP’s and the need to curtail the spread. The country didn’t stop but there was endless commentary on the damage to the economy etc. that’s an example of a measure that worked alongside the economy. What measures are being tabled now?

Trackandtrace but the hospitals are NOT overrun nor are they remotely close to being so. Why are 7 specialist Covid hospitals standing empty!!!

Don't they? My firstborn was mixing from a few weeks old! As soon as she was able to she and other babies were swapping snot and eating dirt together. I was under the impression that acquired immunity was a pretty mainstream scientific theory, and the hygiene hypothesis is one quite mainstream theory behind the rise in childhood allergies?

Just because your firstborn was mixing it doesn't mean they all were! Mine didn't mix with other babies. They started mixing with toddlers at nursery at about two. They are young adults now with no allergies and perfectly healthy immune systems.

This was a Naples hospital last month. A traffic jam near a hospital where extremely sick people were being given oxygen in cars. Inside the hospital the dying were on floors unattended to in corridors. A man is found dead in a toilet

This happened in a European country with one of the best healthcare systems in the world. It happened under lockdown measures.

If this can happen under lockdown measures. What do people think would happen WITHOUT lockdown measures?

Without lockdowns and restrictions the situation would be far far worse.

As to hospital beds, there’s loads in the nightingale units. We could have conscripted and trained (if necessary as I suspect there would be volunteers) people to do some of the easier tasks to free up trained nurses and doctors more so there was adequate staff to msn these).

I’m at the stage where I agree.

I’ve just been to visit a friend. They won’t come to the door because they are afraid of the virus. They won’t leave the house to shop. They wfh. They are almost completely isolated. They have no underlying risk factors.

We had a conversation with her leaning through an upstairs window.

The entire time I was worried someone might report me because we are in a tier 4 area and they may deem it ‘unnecessary travel’ as I was in my car.

Awful.

@Iknewyouwerewaitingforme

Trackandtrace but the hospitals are NOT overrun nor are they remotely close to being so. Why are 7 specialist Covid hospitals standing empty!!!

Some hospitals have no ICU beds and people are be sent to other hospitals. The specialist Covid hospitals are empty because there aren't enough staff to run them. There will be fewer staff if they are off sick.

@skysports

''I think we live in a country where keeping everyone alive at all costs trumps everything else. We have forgotten that death is the natural order. We keep people alive with very severe dementia. We have people clinging to live my the fingertips regardless of the quality of that life.
Then along comes a virus that will tip those very vulnerable over the edge, it will mean not enough beds to care for all of these people let alone the rest of the population.

So we shut down society, business and schools. Other things suffer but they matter not.....everything is about covid abs covid alone.''

Completely agree with the above.

@MarshaBradyo I think they would if they saw more friends and relatives become very sick with it - one of my flatmates (a 28 year old) was incredibly ill with it and is still not recovered 6 weeks later. My partners Mum was hospitalised. Seeing the virus first hand has scared me, so stands to logic if more people had more first hand experience of it, they would be scared.

The question to OP and those who agree with her is simple: If letting the virus do its thing with no restriction is significantly better for the economy, then why is the government—who are advised by expert epidemiologists, economists, etc. rather than social media commenters—choosing lockdowns and other containment measures instead? Sheer benevolence? You think they care about the deaths of a few hundred thousand people more than they care about the economy?

Flaxmeadow this is scaremongering without revealing the much bigger more complicated picture.
Below from this article - www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-clinics-in-naples-italy-on-the-brink-of-collapse/a-55703503
“Naples and its region is paying dearly for the government's budget cuts many doctors say. Several hospitals have been privatized while public clinics have downsized their medical staff and physicians. They were overworked even before the pandemic hit.”

[quote Chickenqueen]@MarshaBradyo I think they would if they saw more friends and relatives become very sick with it - one of my flatmates (a 28 year old) was incredibly ill with it and is still not recovered 6 weeks later. My partners Mum was hospitalised. Seeing the virus first hand has scared me, so stands to logic if more people had more first hand experience of it, they would be scared.[/quote]
So many people get it very mildly though. Take the mass testing in university so many didn’t know they had it.

AGREE. A MILLION TIMES. AGREE.