People don’t really understand the purpose of the restrictions, do they?

[Notcontent]

My DC has already had Covid and I am not in any vulnerable category (and probably been exposed already). On a personal level, the restrictions have had a very negative effect on my life and I also feel that the way the Government has handled everything has been very erratic and inconsistent.

BUT, “we are where we are” and I fully understand the purpose of the restrictions - they are there not necessarily to protect me personally or my DC but to halt the spread of the virus and therefore reduce the number of people who will get really sick with it.

But it seems that a lot of people still don’t get it and say things like “well, it should be a personal decision” or “we are having a party because none of us are vulnerable”.

Plus I have taught many children over the years who have had interrupted education over the years with some missing 1.5 years due to cancer treatment etc. None of them had their ‘education fucked’, all caught up and achieved. Our children missed 3 months of school from end of March to July. There really is no need for all the dramatics about it.

I don't think it's helpful to spread a narrative that british people are more selfish than other nationalities. There is no evidence of that.

On the other hand, I agree that people don't get it, even if they are not being deliberately uncooperative. I think we all make our own risk assessments. Some of us are making those risk assessments, bearing in mind the likelihood of spreading the infection to others and some people are making those risk assessments based on risk to themselves. I think people for complacent in London, the South East and East of England as many we entered the November lockdown in tier 1 and thought there was little need for it. The low stats for those areas have people a false sense of securitycat a time a new strain was spreading now easily. Not a good mixture.

The school one is what is pisding me off the most. The idea that kids mix at school so it's fine for them to mix or of school and go inside each others houses, thus creating a never ending chain of possible transmission between families. Hopefully the new strain is making parents act with more caution.

How can children be more behind than they’ve had off and this be due to pandemic disruption? What utter bollocks is being spread on here!

My daughter had her education significantly disrupted due to a brain tumour. Twice. She’s now got professional qualifications and an excellent job. It’s far from ideal but they will overcome this if their parents get a grip and stop wailing and acting like toddlers.

@hamstersarse

I don’t think the means justify the ends

I understand the intentions, but I don’t think the rules achieve either saving the NHS or saving lives, as is evident right now

And I don’t think this is because people aren’t complying.

What we aren’t being told clearly is where the deaths are occurring, and how. So I think, but can’t get official data right now, approx. 25%+ of deaths are still occurring in care homes. My question is how that can still be? What has the strategy been to protect care homes? Apart from the same rules as everyone else, it seems not much. Personally I’d have preferred some of the £170bn spent on furlough going into absolute barricade of the care homes, throw everything at it so residents are protected. That is where a lot of the deaths are still occurring, yet we don’t seem to talk about it.

Also hospitals, it also seems a lot of ‘hospital admissions’ are not coming from being admitted ‘with coronavirus’ symptoms, they are coming in with other ailments and either catching it or being tested positive in hospital. Again all gets sketchy because information is scarce, but if a lot of this is hospital acquired, what is the strategy to stop this? I’ve not heard of much.

I think the disagreements from me come from this area...we still haven’t got the basics right, where we could make the most progress. Yet people seem incandescent with rage if you meet your friend in a garden. It’s seems topsyturvy to me 🤷‍♀️

I agree with all you are saying here.

What we aren’t being told clearly is where the deaths are occurring, and how. So I think, but can’t get official data right now, approx. 25%+ of deaths are still occurring in care homes. My question is how that can still be? What has the strategy been to protect care homes? Apart from the same rules as everyone else, it seems not much. Personally I’d have preferred some of the £170bn spent on furlough going into absolute barricade of the care homes, throw everything at it so residents are protected. That is where a lot of the deaths are still occurring, yet we don’t seem to talk about it.

People in care homes are looked after by people who live in the community with other people who also go to work, to the shops and potentially have children at school. How do you propose this barricade would work? Lock two shifts worth of carers in with the residents for the duration?

@MyPersona

What we aren’t being told clearly is where the deaths are occurring, and how. So I think, but can’t get official data right now, approx. 25%+ of deaths are still occurring in care homes. My question is how that can still be? What has the strategy been to protect care homes? Apart from the same rules as everyone else, it seems not much. Personally I’d have preferred some of the £170bn spent on furlough going into absolute barricade of the care homes, throw everything at it so residents are protected. That is where a lot of the deaths are still occurring, yet we don’t seem to talk about it.

People in care homes are looked after by people who live in the community with other people who also go to work, to the shops and potentially have children at school. How do you propose this barricade would work? Lock two shifts worth of carers in with the residents for the duration?

I don't know but you'd think it would be priority.

I see the school my ds does to is introducing lateral flow testing which ensures they are absolutely minimising the number of infected children getting into the school. They have just emailed their plans - and it is pretty robust.

My eldest son is at uni and had total free reign to lateral flow tests in November and December - he had about 4.

I don't know if this is happening in care homes (I don't think it is) but I would say there were absolutely the priority rather than university students who were unlikely to ever be sick (they weren't). The money spent on those testing systems in the wrong places really gets my goat.

It may have also been possible to get some carers to 'live-in'. I don't know, but it is very possible! But we haven't even tried, as far as I know!

I think it could be acknowledged by people on this thread that people like me have the same intentions - I want as few people to die as possible. What I disagree with is how we are going about it. THere is no point wasting money on lateral flow tests for uni students if it's not even in place in care homes. Me meeting a friend in my garden is so irrelevant in the scheme of things, especially when you consider where and how people are dying from coronavirus and how these risky areas don't get the same attention.

We know who is at risk, yet we don't seem to want to focus the attention there. THere was no doubt that 'last time' there was huge failure in the care homes which accounted for the majority of deaths and I don't really see that that has changed. I am prepared to be corrected on this, but I simply don't have the information either way, and instead we are rattling on about someone not standing 2m away from someone in a country lane.

I am trying to find the data around the settings of deaths.

I have found the latest stats from the ONS about care home deaths. It is from July. That tells you something already!

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/deathsinvolvingcovid19inthecaresectorenglandandwales/deathsoccurringupto12june2020andregisteredupto20june2020provisional

Even in July, care home deaths accounted for 29% of the deaths in England and Wales.

My point is - what is the strategy here? We know they 'historically' account for nearly 30% of deaths to coronavirus. What exactly have we done about this?

At this very point in time, I don't think much.

Other interesting data is the 111 triage service which points to a problem with hospital acquired infection. People calling 111 with coronavirus symptoms (i.e. fever, cough, trouble breathing etc) has not dramatically risen in the last few months, it has been pretty stable, even reducing in some areas.

You can explore this here digital.nhs.uk/dashboards/nhs-pathways#dashboard

So these are people within the community that are reporting coronavirus symptoms. And nothing much to see in terms of an increase.

So where are all these cases? Who are the 'admissions'? Where are the deaths?

There is no point wasting money on lateral flow tests for uni students if it's not even in place in care homes

The students were tested because they’d come together from all areas, mingled in the way that students do, positivity rates were high, many of them were asymptomatic and they were poised to all go back from whence they’d come. Spreading contagion.

From threads on here many did not stay at home when they got back, they still wanted to mix with their local friends and their parents were sympathetic to that. They were being deprived of their rightful experiences to the extent they’d be permanently scarred otherwise.

They were a massive risk. I live in the sticks and couldn’t understand how on earth the numbers in my area had suddenly escalated, until I zoomed in on the map and realised it was the agricultural college students going back.

Anyway my understanding is that the lateral flow tests are now in care homes, but it stands to reason that if there is a high rate of community transmission more people have it including care workers.

@ComtesseDeSpair

I don’t think they’re “very different asks” at all for the many people who have been prevented by law from earning a living and lost their livelihoods as a result; or for the many people whose other health issues have been neglected or exacerbated during the past year. I think you’re in a very fortunate position indeed if lockdown and restrictions have only been about wearing masks in Sainsbury’s and not seeing your friends.

Legally very different - currently you can’t be compelled to have medical treatment against your will, if you have capacity to make that decision. You’d have to completely rip up all of that legislation.

Whereas we already have plenty of legislation preventing people from gathering in large numbers, and things like shops and public transport are not public spaces so they can specify what they like. So it was much easier to make mask/social distancing regs law.

I suspect vaccination will remain “optional”, but a prerequisite for foreign travel, front line work, and various other things so people currently on the fence end up getting vaccinated because it is too inconvenient not to (eg like many US states make MMR entirely optional, but a mandatory condition of going to a publicly-funded school). I’m sure the rabid anti-vaxxers won’t but they’ll get to enjoy feeling persecuted.

@MyPersona

They were being deprived of their rightful experiences to the extent they’d be permanently scarred otherwise

My blood boils when I hear people talk this bollocks

@Changechangychange

I’m sure the rabid anti-vaxxers won’t but they’ll get to enjoy feeling persecuted

Congratulations, you're the first one on these threads saying that those that are cautious about new vaccines should be persecuted

MyPersona Thu 31-Dec-20 13:37:06

I see the school my ds does to is introducing lateral flow testing which ensures they are absolutely minimising the number of infected children getting into the school. They have just emailed their plans - and it is pretty robust.

I wouldn't get excited about lateral flow tests. My medical sister has taken the test four days on the trot after experiencing covid symptoms. Only fourth one was positive, when she was ill enough to go to bed.

[quote trulydelicious]@Changechangychange

I’m sure the rabid anti-vaxxers won’t but they’ll get to enjoy feeling persecuted

Congratulations, you're the first one on these threads saying that those that are cautious about new vaccines should be persecuted[/quote]
If you want to pretend I’ve said that, you should wait a bit until my comment is on a different page. Anybody who is capable of scrolling up two comments can see what I actually wrote. I said the rabid end of the anti-vax movement would “enjoy feeing persecuted” if there were ongoing restrictions for people who had not been vaccinated, not that people who can’t have the vaccine should be rounded up and shot.

You have pretty much confirmed what I said though. And it’s interesting that you see yourself as “rabid”.