How long will people agree to make these sacrifices for?

[DappledOliveGroves]

Inspired by another thread here.

Let's assume the vaccines don't do what they should - either because the virus mutates so rapidly or because our government can't manage to adhere to Pfizer's protocol and a lone dose does nothing to protect people.

Then what?

For all those champing at the bit for curfews, harsher lockdowns, further restrictions on civil liberties - I'm genuinely curious - how long are you willing to maintain this status quo?

Would you be happy to still be in this lockdown in a year? Two years? Five years? Even if the lockdowns are eased and clamped down again, would you be willing to accept rolling lockdowns as a fact of life with no end in sight? At what point would those wanting tougher restrictions decide they can't live like this anymore?

Easy

I’m not right wing and I have lost a young relative to the virus, I don’t think people are simply expendable because they are physically vulnerable but the assumption seems to be the the mentally vulnerable can just suck it up. If this went on for years I wouldn’t want to live at this cost and I wouldn’t want to subject my children to it either and nor would the majority of people on this thread despite having our intelligence and ability to parent insulted and having hysterical comments levelled at us about deaths.

@IcedPurple

*How many times do we have to say it - it isn’t about the social life.

I’ve not seen my partner’s grand daughter yet - she is 6 months old. I want to cuddle her. My kids exams have been cancelled. My partner’s business is failing. It isn’t just about the social life. Bloody ignorant comments on here. Whilst in lockdown what are you doing to help the homeless, the rough sleepers, the people losing their homes? Nothing I bet whist you sit in your comfortable house looking at the sheep*

And waiting for the Ocado delivery man to ring the bell. Because of course it's fine for other people to go out to work so that they can stay comfortably at home on MN.

Comments like these are as tiresome as the "All we're being asked to do is stay at home and watch television''. Well no. Maybe that's all it is for them, but others are watching their businesses collapse, their children's education suffer and are sinking into depression. The smugness from some here is deeply unpleasant.

People love to pretend it’s all selfish people missing their little luxuries like sitting in costa or having a trip to soft play as it helps them to not think about the actual reality of what people are losing during lockdown. If they admitted a tenth of what people are going through, that people are killing themselves, mental health issues have been hugely exacerbated or triggered, children as losing valuable opportunities for social contact and education that will set them at a disadvantage for years to come, people are facing bankruptcy or the loss of their home and so forth, then they wouldn’t be able to feel as smug about being on what they perceive as the ‘right side’: saving lives.

Because only lives lost to covid matter.

It’s a shame so few are intelligent enough to recognise that lockdown can be both necessary and absolutely devastating for many.

So, a thought experiment then

Let's say OK, lockdowns aren't worth it. The cost is too high, let's open up.

Then what?
Either- hospitals can't cope. They collapse as more staff quit or go off with stress or covid. Buildings are completely overrun. Nobody gets healthcare at all, including maternity care, cancer care, emergency care, all of it. It all collapses. Eventually we might work out a different system but in the short to medium (and possibly long) term there is a national medical emergency. Millions die. Millions more suffer.

Or

Hospitals don't admit covid patients do reduce the risk of being overrun and to protect other services. People suffer and die en mass in their homes, with no care at all.

Or

Is there a third option? What is it? And if not would you prefer option a or option b?

Or

Am I being melodramatic and actually cases and deaths would reduce even without lockdown measures and everything would be fine?

It’s a shame so few are intelligent enough to recognise that lockdown can be both necessary and absolutely devastating for many.

Exactly. Lockdowns sadly are needed but I can fully understand why many are close to breaking point. A bit of compassion wouldn't go amiss from the 'Stay the f*ck home' brigade.

[quote TempsPerdu]@Bluegrass She is actually, a really lovely lady. Super dedicated doctor, working long hours on a Covid ward while the rest of us sit at home ordering stuff from Amazon. Her life experience just means she happens to have a different perspective on Covid from you.[/quote]
I think doctors on the frontline are amongst the first to end up jaded and fatigued tbh. They’re also seeing the reality of what lockdown is doing to people. DH is a doctor and in recent weeks especially he’s become increasingly apathetic and lost all faith in lockdown going on for as long as it has. We’ve stuck to the rules personally but he’s said on several occasions when I’ve pondered whether I’m allowed to do this or that ‘Who gives a fuck, just do it, this is no life’. He’s maxed out his capacity to care I think. This past year has been too much for us all.

And yes he’s had to take some time off sick as he is no longer in the right state of mind to be effective at work.

@Fembot123 ah right so no-one official has mentioned continuing exactly as we are now, for years and years then ? I thought I had missed an announcement

@Perfect28 Well I’m afraid your political radar has comprehensively misfired with me; I’m very much soft left, was anti-Brexit, generally Labour-voting but quietly despairing about how their entire pandemic response is based on appearing ‘tougher’ than the Tories and how they seem to have entirely forgotten the young, working mothers (Starmer’s recent calls to close nurseries as well as schools) and others vulnerable to the harms of lockdown.

@WanderingMilly

I'm prepared to stay like this for as long as it takes....but no pandemic lasts forever, so even if it's 5 years down the line, it will eventually get to a level where some sort of herd immunity makes the human race able to live alongside it.

I'd prefer to be back to normal but if that doesn't happen, what choice do we have? Look at the number of deaths now....will we just let thousands of people die because we're fed up of not having our social lives? That sounds more scary than long term lockdowns.

You can def tell the people who don’t work in a competitive field of the private sector very easily on mumsnet! What exactly do you expect to be left standing of the economy after this five year master plan?

[quote frumpety]@Fembot123 ah right so no-one official has mentioned continuing exactly as we are now, for years and years then ? I thought I had missed an announcement [/quote]
😂 No, sorry if I gave you a fright. There have been talks about certain restrictions and rolling lockdowns carrying on at until least the end of 2022 but not a full on lockdown as the Government know that’s unsustainable.

'I’ve not seen my partner’s grand daughter yet - she is 6 months old. I want to cuddle her. My kids exams have been cancelled. My partner’s business is failing'

My kids exams have been cancelled, I want to see my family and friends. I want the same as you! the difference being I can understand why it isn't possible at the moment.

@IcedPurple

It’s a shame so few are intelligent enough to recognise that lockdown can be both necessary and absolutely devastating for many.

Exactly. Lockdowns sadly are needed but I can fully understand why many are close to breaking point. A bit of compassion wouldn't go amiss from the 'Stay the f*ck home' brigade.

Yep.

I support the lockdown and adhere to it. But I understand that I am living a fairly privileged life, i came through covid unscathed, I have financial resources and my own home, my income hasn’t been affected, I’m horribly lonely and finding it awfully hard raising my first baby alone with just my husband and nobody else around, but mentally I’m coping. And not everyone is as lucky as me. So no, I don’t judge or blame the ‘rules breakers’ at all, the people who simply for whatever reason can’t do this anymore. I might be the same in their shoes.

None of us know what our neighbor is going through really, do we? I believe lockdown is warranted for now, and adhere to it, but the consequences are devastating for many of us and not everyone can do it. Especially not after the fatigue of this past year. People’s capacity to cope has simply been outweighed all else.

Surely we can all agree that the infection rate would be higher if no measures were taken?

Absolutely, but as Keating just wisely said, "It’s the efficacy of measures taken to halt spread weighed up against their cost that the rest of us are grappling with"
I'd have thought this pretty clear, but instead of "I wonder if ...?" or discussing it civilly, some just strike positions, sneer and fling insults

Shame, really

Well I'm just going to wade in here with my utterly brutal take on the situation. I supported lockdowns initially (along with virtually everyone I know). I do not support them any more. I have not suddenly become less intelligent, whatever that means - on this thread it seems to mean not agreeing with Perfect.
I don't support lockdowns because I think they end up in exactly the same place, but with horrific side effects and costs. If you have no lockdown, then if we assume that the infection rate, and also the serious illness rate, rises ten-fold: 1) Everyone will know someone who has died or nearly died of covid, 2) people will start to see the physical reality of collapsing emergency services. For example, car crashes would not involve a helicopter coming to fly out anyone who could be saved, or even removing the bodies. Traffic would be affected because police, fire and ambulance services would probably have half their staff self isolating. We could have looting, traffic obstacles, heart attacks lying in the street.
Obviously this is very much a worst case scenario, which I am not sure would happen, but what I'm illustrating is that it's circular. There is a natural ceiling to infections. When they start to obstruct people's lives, they make rational choices to protect themselves. Brazil has had many, many Covid deaths, but proportionally nowhere near as many as Ferguson's stupid model suggested would occur with no mitigation. In fact, Brazil has a lower mortality rate from Covid per million than the UK. The only way I can explain that is that either they are taking a creative approach to the cause of death, or there is voluntary behavioural modification. This is far, far preferable to mandatory lockdowns, because they undermine the basis of democracy. It is dangerous to people's understanding of the separation of powers for them to believe that what a government minister says on a TV show is enforcable in law. That is a police state, and it does matter. Parliamentary supremacy and the exclusive rule of law via the judiciary is the basis of our fundamental rights . It is what protects us from an otherwise all powerful government. If we decide that doesn't matter for any reason, then Priti Patel could just phone up a police officer and order your arbitrary detention because you're a journalist who wrote something she didn't like. She could come up with some vague charges like sedition or public protection. This is exactly what happens in, say, Russia.
The risk of death is real, and the risk of losing all our rights permanently is also real.

The basic problem here is that there is no good option. It’s all just different shades of utter shit.

I’m getting a little tired of “Death is a part of life”. You’re not a wise oracle telling us something we’ve never considered.

It’s a shame so few are intelligent enough to recognise that lockdown can be both necessary and absolutely devastating for many.

^This. The claim that all those who say they will continue to comply are smug, wealthy people whose lives and livelihoods have been unaffected by lockdown is idiotic and untrue. There are committed lockdown compliers and rebels in all sectors of the community. People's view of lockdown is based all kinds of things, not just their job, income and how nice their house is. It's easy to see from MN threads alone that there are many many people really badly affected by lockdown who nevertheless support it.

I guess Priti would have to hope your details haven't been wiped off some database or other @tatutata

Tatuta I agree that voluntarily behavioural modification is much more preferable than enforced measures. If this thread demonstrates anything though, it's how many people wouldn't follow the rules. So we would end up with an overrun health service, for a long time. Potentially with the impacts that you mention.

Many are happy to shout 'it's not fair' but I see far fewer people are willing to offer up an answer to what an alternative looks like.

@tatutata

Well I'm just going to wade in here with my utterly brutal take on the situation. I supported lockdowns initially (along with virtually everyone I know). I do not support them any more. I have not suddenly become less intelligent, whatever that means - on this thread it seems to mean not agreeing with Perfect. I don't support lockdowns because I think they end up in exactly the same place, but with horrific side effects and costs. If you have no lockdown, then if we assume that the infection rate, and also the serious illness rate, rises ten-fold: 1) Everyone will know someone who has died or nearly died of covid, 2) people will start to see the physical reality of collapsing emergency services. For example, car crashes would not involve a helicopter coming to fly out anyone who could be saved, or even removing the bodies. Traffic would be affected because police, fire and ambulance services would probably have half their staff self isolating. We could have looting, traffic obstacles, heart attacks lying in the street. Obviously this is very much a worst case scenario, which I am not sure would happen, but what I'm illustrating is that it's circular. There is a natural ceiling to infections. When they start to obstruct people's lives, they make rational choices to protect themselves. Brazil has had many, many Covid deaths, but proportionally nowhere near as many as Ferguson's stupid model suggested would occur with no mitigation. In fact, Brazil has a lower mortality rate from Covid per million than the UK. The only way I can explain that is that either they are taking a creative approach to the cause of death, or there is voluntary behavioural modification. This is far, far preferable to mandatory lockdowns, because they undermine the basis of democracy. It is dangerous to people's understanding of the separation of powers for them to believe that what a government minister says on a TV show is enforcable in law. That is a police state, and it does matter. Parliamentary supremacy and the exclusive rule of law via the judiciary is the basis of our fundamental rights . It is what protects us from an otherwise all powerful government. If we decide that doesn't matter for any reason, then Priti Patel could just phone up a police officer and order your arbitrary detention because you're a journalist who wrote something she didn't like. She could come up with some vague charges like sedition or public protection. This is exactly what happens in, say, Russia. The risk of death is real, and the risk of losing all our rights permanently is also real.

Brazil is interesting

Afaik the outcome you describe didn’t happen

Overwhelmed health service yes but not half sick etc

@GambasPil

The basic problem here is that there is no good option. It’s all just different shades of utter shit.

Yes totally this

I’m getting a little tired of “Death is a part of life”. You’re not a wise oracle telling us something we’ve never considered

Doesn't that depend who "we" is?
When even Hancock's reportedly said "one death's one too many" and the sentiment's widely repeated all over the place, I'd suggest this is indeed something that's perhaps not considered enough

Brazil has had many, many Covid deaths, but proportionally nowhere near as many as Ferguson's stupid model suggested would occur with no mitigation. In fact, Brazil has a lower mortality rate from Covid per million than the UK

Another thing I didn't know ... and yes, I realise we're not necessarily comparable, but it's interesting all the same

I just don't see what the fuss is about on here.

A load of vaccines have been created that are being given to those most at risk of getting seriously ill from covid.

Until all those at risk have been vaccinated, the government would obviously like to minimise the spread of the disease.

Can someone please tell me what is unreasonable about that?

So all said and done.

How can we all help each other out?

Surely those whom can stay at home, stay at home give some space in society to help stop the virus jumping from one person, hence potential household, to another.

Those whom want to work, as there are some, or have to work, we write to our (useless) MPs to ensure safe working places.

Those whom can spend continue to.

We all, well almost all, want and need a functioning society to emerge to, with functioning health practitioners, unstressed teachers, pub gardens, leisure centres, train travel, clothes shops, cake cafes, firework displays, etc.

I don't want PTSD nurses.
I don't want GCSE students unprepared for A'levels'
I don't want uni students not experiencing adult freedoms from their dorm rooms.
I don't want closed high streets, no aeroplanes, depressed kids, no live music.
I don't want people having socially distanced funerals.
I don't want people being unable to practise their faith, or yoga, or team sport.

We all want the same society to emerge to. Ripping each other apart is not going to achieve this.

(I am also not going to list this family's personal hardships and loss right now but there is clearly some).

With the vaccines, I know not the silver bullet solution but it's something, surely we should, or those whom have the headspace right now, be looking towards the end of this shit storm.

There is so much that is wrong right now, gas been done wrong, that can't be changed but we could try to be a good example of how with vaccine distribution we can start to stop all this.

I have to think that we are at the beginning of the end.

Hope you all stay sane and well. Couple more months. It has to get better it has to.