Lockdown will claim 560,000 lives. Are lockdown fanatics are killing people.

[Billie18]

Worrying reports coming out indicating that Lockdowns will end up claiming the equivalent of more than 500,000 lives because of the health impact of the 'deep and prolonged recession that they will cause. It has been obvious that restrictive lock down measures will impact on the health of the whole population but concern has been shouted down by those in favor of lockdowns. But will those ignoring the dangers of lockdowns on the entire population be responsible for killing huge numbers of people. Killing far more people than any virus.

Don't worry OP, at some point over the next two years, the same people who were criticising others for leaving their house twice a day will be lamenting and wailing about the terrible fallout of lockdown, as if it couldn't be seen coming a thousand miles away.

Of course lockdown will kill many many more people than covid. But all people care about for now is covid and they are unable to lift their eyes away from it for a second to see that in their panic to avoid one single risk, they've set their whole world on fire.

They'll eventually realise it and then we'll have to listen to them whinging. For years. It exhausts me just to think about it.

That’s probably a fewer than the number of people who will die if we don’t lock down at the moment. What do you suggest we do instead?

And shielding the vulnerable and letting everyone else carry on isn’t an option.

The problem comes in that it's very difficult for the NHS to decide to only save some people. If they don't have the capacity and they ended up having to say they'd only take people under a certain age without underlying health conditions, what would be the public response then? Never mind the mental health impact on the medical professionals making those decisions. You could easily argue that if we as a country had a better sense of social responsibility, we wouldn't need lockdowns. But that's a whole different topic.

What reports? Do you have a source please. TIA.

I should add that I think 500,000 is a massive underestimate. If you plunge a whole country into recession, massively increase the unemployment rate, create and add to mental health issues and deny children an education, the fallout of that will last generations.

What’s the source and how many people die with no lockdown at all?

And that choice isn't between lockdown or no lockdown.

Lockdown isn't a solution, it's a panic measure. It doesn't actually solve any problems. It delays some covid infections while at the same time creating a very long list of other problems. A 'solution' that 'saves' some people (many of whom will later get covid anyway) while killing others is not a solution.

Think of it this way: a child is very very unlikely to personally suffer from covid - they may get it but they are almost 100% guaranteed to be fine. However, there is no way on earth they can escape the effects of lockdown - those will affect them, no matter what.

And for the people who say 'children suffer from losing family members' - I'm not sure how many loving parents/grandparents would say 'yes destroy this child's future to delay my exposure to covid.' And yet that's what's happening.

What’s the alternative?

Let the hospitals collapse and then have no healthcare available?

How many people will die if they can’t get treatment for cancer, heart attacks, car crashes, epilepsy, can’t get into a hospital to give birth?

How long would it be for the pandemic to naturally burn out?

We need some comparison figures before we can judge if 500,000 is a lot.

The 'what's the alternative'? posts really bother me because it indicates that this generation has zero imagination or ingenuity if they think that just closing everything is the best we can do. Lockdown is the most moronic possible 'solution' to the situation, there is no nuance or thought put into it, it's literally 'shit, fuck everything in the bin.' As a 'strategy' it's straight out of the playbook of a panicking halfwit.

Let me guess OP you think "we should shield the vulnerable and the rest of us crack on"

@TheDailyCarbunkle

The 'what's the alternative'? posts really bother me because it indicates that this generation has zero imagination or ingenuity if they think that just closing everything is the best we can do. Lockdown is the most moronic possible 'solution' to the situation, there is no nuance or thought put into it, it's literally 'shit, fuck everything in the bin.' As a 'strategy' it's straight out of the playbook of a panicking halfwit.

But you can’t suggest a better alternative?

It is not controversial to state that if you have a solution to a problem and that solution kills people then your solution isn't good enough.

The attitude that lockdown deaths are necessary to prevent covid deaths is utterly fucking bizarre. Someone who dies from lockdown is just as dead as someone who dies from covid. They are equally unwanted deaths. And yet the attitude seems to be that dying from covid is a massive tragedy and dying from lockdown is just acceptable collateral damage. WTF is wrong with people???

@TheDailyCarbunkle So come on, what is your genius solution then, that doesn't involve hospitals being overun and care not being available for many, for anything, young and old.

Lockdown comes at a terrible cost. For me, it’s costing me my ability to work and taking a toll on my mental health while it robs my children of so much normal life. But an alternative reality where hospitals became overwhelmed and the health service stopped functioning would cost us so much more and so many more people would die of treatable causes, of so many more causes than covid. I don’t know how you keep the NHS running without lockdown. If there was another way that cost the economy less, governments would do it.

What's your source OP?

Where’s the number from?

@TheDailyCarbunkle

It is not controversial to state that if you have a solution to a problem and that solution kills people then your solution isn't good enough.

The attitude that lockdown deaths are necessary to prevent covid deaths is utterly fucking bizarre. Someone who dies from lockdown is just as dead as someone who dies from covid. They are equally unwanted deaths. And yet the attitude seems to be that dying from covid is a massive tragedy and dying from lockdown is just acceptable collateral damage. WTF is wrong with people???

Is not about the kind of death though, it’s the number of deaths.

So if 500,000 lockdown deaths is significantly less than covid deaths + all the deaths from having no health system then it is probably worth it.

There are masses of better alternatives. One very obvious one is to use the millions poured into furlough and the pointless test and trace and use it to set up an initiative where you break the country down into very small sectors - as small as neighbourhoods if necessary. Then monitor those small sectors very carefully, tracking infection person by person.

The suggestion that there's no alternative baffles me. Do people really think there's literally no other way at all to deal with the situation?

As inept as this government is I don't think they'd lock us down for the fun of it. It's possible that their information might be a bit better than yours OP

Wow @StacySoloman thanks for stating it so baldly. I suspect people felt that way but no one will admit to it.

So if your child, or a child you care about, is killed by lockdown, you'll consider their death worth it?

Oh, OP you are so very special, aren't you?

You can see The Truth that no-one else can because they are sheeples duped by The Media! But you know better than them, don't you?

You are a True Believer from the Church of Conspiracy Theories.

@TheDailyCarbunkle

There are masses of better alternatives. One very obvious one is to use the millions poured into furlough and the pointless test and trace and use it to set up an initiative where you break the country down into very small sectors - as small as neighbourhoods if necessary. Then monitor those small sectors very carefully, tracking infection person by person.

The suggestion that there's no alternative baffles me. Do people really think there's literally no other way at all to deal with the situation?

I think this is essentially what China has done, right? Very hard lockdown to get numbers under control then strict surveillance and monitoring of the population to the point where they can shut individual blocks or villages down if there’s a case.

Yeah, I'm thinking anyone who genuinely wanted to discuss this would have at least provided a source. A failure to even establish the premise on which the OP is based in fact leads me to believe that there is an agenda here and that it's more Covid Denying/minimising bullshit.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the OP’s source is ‘the Great Barrington Declaration’.

@TheDailyCarbunkle my child has had his life saved twice by emergency hospital treatment (health condition which doesn’t make him vulnerable to covid thankfully). If hospitals cease to function, he could die. So as far as I can see it, while he won’t die from covid (and we already had it, he was asymptomatic) he might die if there was no lockdown and therefore no healthcare. So lockdown is saving all kinds of lives by keeping the NHS - just about - going. Without the NHS so many people die of so many different causes.