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.

I agree bottlenecking shopping was stupid, I suspect that was one of the blame shifting arguments the government was relying on the general public to take on.

So working from the point that the infection numbers would have been the same and this is still pushing hospitals to breaking point what’s the plan now? Are we still cancelling routine NHS services to accommodate covid or are they still going ahead?

my feeling is we’ve run out of nurses and doctors at this point but I’m genuinely interested in what happens now.

@BeanToCup Yes we should also be testing more symptoms and close contacts and paying people to be off work.

I agree op 100%. The dire situation we will be in once the covid dust has settled is truly frightening, I'm now reading on here how people are wanting all schools closed again. Do people think that life can just return within a couple of years after this and we'll be fine?

We are going to be living post covid era for over a decade. Our children will bear the consequences and pay the higher tax for this shitshow, thousands will continue to die due to mismanaged treatments and slow diagnosis of long term illnesses. Remember the effect of the economic crisis 2008? That was a quarter of this and took years.

I honestly believe some mnetters are thriving from this having nothing better to do anyway so actually want more lockdowns and want to police people as it's giving them power. I literally want to get off the world we have gone mad....

@Cornettoninja

*Something like 23% of those caught Covid after admission for other procedures/treatments though.

So not all coming into hospital because of Covid*

@Vintagevixen you raise a fair point but those people will/should be managed on a covid ward until discharge. They’re using up the same resources wherever they got it.

The question is how is that manageable in a scenario we don’t implement measures to restrict the spread to reduce the chances of it getting into hospitals in the first place. What’s the alternative to the measures that damage the economy?

Thinking the government needs to provide the resources to double down on infection procedures, not only in hospitals but in care homes. Maybe fund things so agency care workers are not constantly swapping round from unit to unit or home to home.

possibly vaccinate front line HCP's first?

I'm not saying there shouldn't be measures to restrict spread and we should just go back to normal life. Of course we should have measures but lockdowns are a blunt instrument, and cant see why we cant try and at least keep some sections of the economy open eg non-essential shops. Retail really accounts for minimal spread I believe from what I have read.

Yes you are right decisions on life and death when caring for patients are hard, but it's not like its something we didn't do before Covid anyway. I've assisted in lots of these decisions and find it possible to be pragmatic whilst also being sympathetic. I find it doesn't overwhelm me but that could be just my psychological make up!

Agree that the whole thing of closing shops for a month and then reopening them for three weeks (and then telling people they could travel around to see family for five days) was always going to see a spike. It was just stupid. But even that wouldn't have been so bad if we'd been able to identify all positive cases and enabled them and their families to stay indoors.

They genuinely changed tack on the testing, I remember it happening. When our world beating app was first set up we were all told that if we'd been around someone with covid we should get tested. Then bloody Hancock gets on his hind legs and starts whining about people "using up" tests when they don't have symptoms. But it was actually what they told us to do! And what we should have been doing. It can't spread if you keep infectious people out of circulation. That should have been the driving force all along.

Vintagevixen LivinLaVidaLoki

You both make valid points. I didn't know the actual figure for transmission in the hospital setting but it does still leave us with a significant number of people being admitted with covid.

We'll probably never know the exact percentage of people who have died because of the testing balls up early on, the number if asymptomatic infections which don't result in a test and confusion over died from rather than died with. I tried to be clear and specific with the wording to avoid misrepresenting what the stats meant.

Thanks for keeping it civil.

Yes you are right decisions on life and death when caring for patients are hard, but it's not like its something we didn't do before Covid anyway. I've assisted in lots of these decisions and find it possible to be pragmatic whilst also being sympathetic. I find it doesn't overwhelm me but that could be just my psychological make up

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with your psychological make up (); I’m pretty resilient about death, it happens and I have advocated for good deaths and am pretty passionate about it. I don’t believe in the preservation of life at all costs including quality,

BUT the numbers susceptible to covid are too large to provide much thought or counselling to. Standards would have to be dramatically lowered, at least until such a time covid burned itself out or there was an effective vaccine widely administered, and would inevitably include people who would have absolutely survived with intervention.

If we accept that doctors are currently already making those calls (they are) for the weakest for whom intervention would be cruel then it stands to reason in allowing any increase in numbers of sick will mean that people who would have otherwise survived just won’t.

Couldn't agree more, OP. The overreaction to Covid is appalling.

Just read that Priti Patel said 'If the virus continues to spread then we will take stronger measures because at the end of the day our objective is to save lives and to keep people safe'. But to put it bluntly, we can't afford to save the lives of everyone, not when lockdown after lockdown is fucking up the lives of so many.

Posted too soon!...

That’s the point you’re risking HCP’s psychological welfare. You’re asking them to withhold treatment they know will help a patient (who wants to) survive. The numbers involved and nature of the illness are not going to allow for in-depth counselling and making sure the patient is fully informed.

I think the governments mistake was assuming everyone would be compliant and sensible and follow the rules. They didn’t take into account that there are a hell of a lot of people who just don’t care or can’t be arsed, or don’t understand. So it’s just farcical, because for the rules to work 100%, you need to have 100% of people onboard. This is particularly more important with a virus because it only takes one person to walk out of the circle to actually void any actions taken by everyone else.

Saving lives at all costs is the stupidest thing ever. Honestly, I can't believe we have been conditioned to think when it comes to Covid that this mindset is ok.

We don't all drive at 30mph because 70mph can kill people so to 'save lives at all costs' we should inconvenience everyone and drive at 30.

We don't do it because that would be ridiculous

It's all about saving the MOST amount of lives. That's what lockdown will do.

@southeastdweller

Couldn't agree more, OP. The overreaction to Covid is appalling.

Just read that Priti Patel said 'If the virus continues to spread then we will take stronger measures because at the end of the day our objective is to save lives and to keep people safe'. But to put it bluntly, we can't afford to save the lives of everyone, not when lockdown after lockdown is fucking up the lives of so many.

Objective at this point surely is just to get to vaccine without severely crashing out in some way.

We can’t save lives at all costs anymore.

Interestingly I am friends with a bunch of medics including some usually pretty right wing ones, and NONE of them subscribe to the "collective madness" theory.

@Frankly321

Frankly too many people seem incapable of obeying basic instructions to stay the fuck at home.

You would never know there is meant to be a lockdown in place with the number or people and cars about.

We need the army in now to fine the fuckers and cart them off to jail.

It is not hard- Unless you are a key worker, STAY THE FUCK AT HOME AT ALL TIMES.

U R mental

@sparklygoldtinsel

It's all about saving the MOST amount of lives. That's what lockdown will do.

But why should we?

I'm still confused though at many posters saying it's ridiculous but none actually coming up with a viable solution.

Troll

I think all the suggestions of very hard lockdowns, schools closing, never going shopping etc. are made without thinking about how many people are in 'key worker' roles. Nearly everyone I know part from SAHMs are key workers (and that doesn't include many in NHS) so lockdown is pretty pointless anyway.

MrsK my NHS consultant doctor sibling however agrees with me and thinks we have put the old before the young in this and the mandatory measures go too far.

I agree OP.

I don't know what we're working to any more.

We can't outrun death. It is coming for all of us sooner or later in one form or another.

What matters is the quality of life we have while we are alive. And at the moment that is extremely poor for a lot of people.

There is no attempt at democracy anymore. I sent a number of questions asking about the framework for decision making to the Scottish Government in June, and have had no response, despite 4 follow ups requesting a response and acknowledgement of receipt of these.

To me it is weirdly reminiscent of domestic abuse; (reminiscent is not quite the right word, having not experienced domestic abuse myself but..) It is like we have been asked to accept something, a bit of discomfort and thought initially 'Well it was only this once, it's not going to happen again, and if it gets worse, well I won't stand for it'....

..And our boundaries have been gradually eroded. Our freedom of movement, of congregation, of challenge to government powers have been slowly, psychologically, stripped from us, so that we acquiesce, and submit and don't see the loss of power we are experiencing as a population.

Just as the domestic abuse perpetrator erodes the boundaries of the victim, exerts increasing control over their life, and maintains it is in their own best interest.

Frankly321 is not genuine, I am certain.
Sounds demented.

@sparklygoldtinsel

It's all about saving the MOST amount of lives. That's what lockdown will do.

How do we know this?

Have the government even looked in depth at the lives lost by lockdown versus the lives projected to be lost by Covid?

Is one projected amount more than the other? If so which one is it.

We simply don't know because, despite having had 9 months to at least try and produce some sort of cost benefit analysis the government haven't even attempted this.

Also the whole ‘key worker’ phrase is kind of ridiculous. Who pays public services, the nhs etc.? We are all ‘key workers’ because we are all needed for the system as a whole to function