Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

How are they going to back pedal the fear?

85 replies

Heatheronthehill · 25/01/2021 22:41

They’ve upped it so much recently.
I understand what they’re doing and why they’re doing it,
But so many people are terrified to leave the house (currently working as they want it to) but what happens when they want to ease restrictions and bring some of the economy back?
I’m worried that they’ve ramped up the fear so much now that people don’t actually want restrictions to ease, don’t want to go back to their ‘real life’.

AIBU?

OP posts:
MarshaBradyo · 26/01/2021 08:56

It’ll go back unless prices change

Although London had policy change on cars coming up

All the fear tactics really play up the ‘safe’ word

HelloMissus · 26/01/2021 08:56

It’ll be fine. Build it and they will come.
Last summer people went on holiday, ate out, saw family - basically whatever they were allowed to do.

When football stadia opened small sections to the public in tier 2, fans battled for tickets.

MN - especially the noisier parts - is not remotely representative of the general public.

umpteennamechanges · 26/01/2021 09:06

People aren't staying in right now for 'fear' generally speaking.

They're staying in because that's the sensible thing to do in the current circumstances.

When it's no longer the sensible thing to do, they'll go out.

The extreme people on both ends of the spectrum (rabid anti-maskers, anti-vaxxers, let it rip through society so I can go out, lockdown forever, this is life now forever, etc etc) are the minority.

It's a bell curve. Most of those of us who are pro-lockdown aren't shaking behind our sofas.

I'm pro-lockdown and think lockdowns should have been earlier and harder but I'm also:

  • Massively financially impacted, losing our cars imminently and verging on bankruptcy
  • Someone that ate out to help out over summer a fair amount
  • Someone who adjusts my activity outside the home in accordance with the local case levels and therefore risk levels
  • Work in a fairly risky environment.

Clubbing huge amounts of people together based on your reasonably biased perceptions doesn't do anyone any favours. It just creates division where there doesn't need to be any.

umpteennamechanges · 26/01/2021 09:13

About 1,400 people die every day in the UK under normal conditions, roughly two thirds of these from either cancer or circulatory illnesses (heart attacks and strokes). We don't see a daily count of cancer or heart attack deaths in the press, even though these combined would be about 900 or 1,000 a day.

Because it's not highly contagious and doesn't run the risk of creating hundreds of thousands of extra deaths if left unchecked.

I can't believe we're still having these kind of discussions at this point which demonstrate no logical thinking.

umpteennamechanges · 26/01/2021 09:19

Should deaths from AIDS also be featured on front pages, do you think?

Guess you didn't watch or read much news in the 80's and 90's then???

If AIDS was killing 100,000 a year we would definitely be hearing about it as much.

There are 105,000 people in total diagnosed with AIDS in the UK. 98% of them are on treatment plans which means they can't transmit the virus.

Less than 200 people die from it per year.

Can you see why the coverage is quite different?

200 vs. 100,000 with lockdowns

I mean, seriously people. Apply some thinking.

southeastdweller · 26/01/2021 09:41

@umpteennamechanges

Should deaths from AIDS also be featured on front pages, do you think?

Guess you didn't watch or read much news in the 80's and 90's then???

If AIDS was killing 100,000 a year we would definitely be hearing about it as much.

There are 105,000 people in total diagnosed with AIDS in the UK. 98% of them are on treatment plans which means they can't transmit the virus.

Less than 200 people die from it per year.

Can you see why the coverage is quite different?

200 vs. 100,000 with lockdowns

I mean, seriously people. Apply some thinking.

Yes, my question about AIDS being on the front page was poorly thought out. But deaths from AIDS is never covered in the media now, and I wonder if kazzy thinks they should be.
southeastdweller · 26/01/2021 09:43

@umpteennamechanges

About 1,400 people die every day in the UK under normal conditions, roughly two thirds of these from either cancer or circulatory illnesses (heart attacks and strokes). We don't see a daily count of cancer or heart attack deaths in the press, even though these combined would be about 900 or 1,000 a day.

Because it's not highly contagious and doesn't run the risk of creating hundreds of thousands of extra deaths if left unchecked.

I can't believe we're still having these kind of discussions at this point which demonstrate no logical thinking.

@umpteennamechanges So why are Covid deaths on front pages?
NastyBlouse · 26/01/2021 10:43

@umpteennamechanges

About 1,400 people die every day in the UK under normal conditions, roughly two thirds of these from either cancer or circulatory illnesses (heart attacks and strokes). We don't see a daily count of cancer or heart attack deaths in the press, even though these combined would be about 900 or 1,000 a day.

Because it's not highly contagious and doesn't run the risk of creating hundreds of thousands of extra deaths if left unchecked.

I can't believe we're still having these kind of discussions at this point which demonstrate no logical thinking.

You’ve missed my point. It’s not so much why they’re there but the fact that they are there.

The OP is about fear — which in many situations in the modern world is illogical. And I’d add that we don’t have to be afraid of covid to take it seriously.

It doesn’t matter if 1,000 people a day die of covid, cancer or are vaporised by Ming the Merciless. Stick a thousand deaths on the front pages every day and provide a running tally and people’s anxiety is going to start to rise. It’s saliency effect.

And my point is that once those tallies come off the front pages, which they will when they start to drop, general levels of anxiety and fear will begin to decrease.

LunaHeather · 26/01/2021 12:22

Most of the fear that posters are reporting comes from MSM.

I know the ads on public transport are unavoidable - but you can avoid MSM. If you are watching TV with ads, mute them, do anything else while ads are on. Play noughts and crosses with yourself if you have to. Or just breathe!

I have a quick check of news once a day to be sure the law hasn't changed, that's it.

It was from MN I learned that people get "breaking news" alerts to their phone, why?? If you work in media, sure, but otherwise, I don't get it.

Some posters seem to be scaring themselves. If you get a perverse enjoyment, no judgement. But if you are really distressed, I cannot tell you how much going "low media" will help.

IcedPurple · 26/01/2021 12:25

@Bluntness100

Agree, everyone I know is gagging for it to be over and groans when it’s speculated it’s increasing. My friendship group were texting tonight about fingers crossed for mid feb so we could all get together and have a bit of a party.

My daughter and her partner started their new jobs last year and habe pretty much had to do the whole thing in lock down virtually, it’s shit.

Same. Everyone I know is desperate for this to be over and has been for months.

Even those who have enjoyed WFH and dread going back to the commute, would still happily take that in exchange for a return to normality.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page