SAGE say lockdown cycles could last several years

[IesuMariJoseff]

I can't believe I suddenly live in a world in which our human rights have become conditional based on hidden calculations around hospital capacity.

The first lockdown, I understood. The second, ok. Even now, I'll bare it. It's hard but the vaccines are being rolled out, it felt like the last leg.

Years? Fucking years?

@WannabemoreWeaver

We’ve been ‘doing it’ for nearly a year.

But because mental health and suicide takes up less NHS resource it’s on with lockdown and to tell with people’s mental health

Well my parents are in their late 70s and no way do they want to spend the last years of their life holed up at home, not seeing anyone.

Stole this from another thread. Hop the poster won't mind. It is very good news and I think posters here need to see it

*HOPE

[quote xmasmob]@gallbladderpain

So you will live like this for years? Lockdowns?

They pretty much already have. They weren’t there last year when my brother needed a brain scan because they were too busy with covid. He was ‘following the rules’. He’s now dead.

They weren’t there when my DD had an eating disorder and she was kept on a waiting list for years. We paid privately as the wait for therapy, she’d also likely have been dead by then.

It’s not the doctors fault. They are underfunded. We need to fix that. And lockdown and destroying the economy isn’t going to help that.[/quote]
Sorry to hear about your brother but yes unfortunately I agree with your points. But that is why we are now in this position alongside covid the underfunding of the NHS for years. We haven't had the most positive of experiences either and have had to turn to private care in the past as well however for emergency care as in ambulance, a&e, resus it has always provided and at no point of entry cost (I know we all pay for it through taxes but without the NHS we would have medical bills far outweighing that of what we pay in taxes)
I don't agree that they see covid as more important those it is what they have to deal with...they are treating those who are arriving at a&e literally in life and death situations what do you suggest they do, not treat them at that moment when they are presenting with severe breathing difficulties? And when you have so many of these people then it drains staff from other resources to cope. I don't agree with it but I don't see any other option apart from a huge increase in staff in the NHS so they aren't required to redeploy staff to other areas. A friend of mine works in cancer diagnostics but has a previous background from her younger days in cardiac care and she has been redeployed to ICU because in our area they have had to more than double their usual ICU capacity and with that having to increase the staffing levels. Without increasing that ICU capacity we would be in a dire situation as well.

Yes that’s more like it

Oh and to answer your point no I'm not prepared to live in lockdowns for years to come. I'm not pro lockdown at all ! I am pro controlling the virus though and I look to friends who live in other countries which we don't even need to name who are living normal lives because of their covid policies from the beginning. This constant cycle we are in is unsustainable. I wouldn't disagree with the need for short sharp lockdowns but that only works when cases are so low that they are short and sharp (1-2weeks) and implemented in timely fashion rather than after the horse has bolted everytime

I’m sorry for your loss xmasmob.

"I don't agree with it but I don't see any other option apart from a huge increase in staff in the NHS so they aren't required to redeploy staff to other areas."

Yes, that may now be the most cost effective option for the medium term future. The experience of the last year has transformed health economics I think - almost any expenditure would be worth it to avoid the need for further lockdowns (unless you think there won't be another pandemic for decades. Which might be right, but how do we know?!) It needn't be wasted expenditure - the staff can be deployed on other hospital work when they're not needed in ICU, I suppose?

How much we can expand capacity in the short-term I don't know - but there were news reports that 30k retired medical staff had volunteered to come back and not been taken up on it; and that not all private hospital capacity in London had been called on this time round (unlike in March). It would be interesting to know if that is part of the planning for next autumn - or whether all hope is now being pinned on vaccines. Interesting question for a press conference, maybe.

" I wouldn't disagree with the need for short sharp lockdowns but that only works when cases are so low that they are short and sharp (1-2weeks) "

The other really interesting question is track and trace. Can it ever work to keep infections down 'enough', and if so what do we have to do to make it do so? Was the problem that the results didn't come back soon enough, or was it never going to work (maybe because people can pass on an infection before they have symptoms)? What's the current thinking on whether it's making much difference at the moment? (I think there was a study today which suggested the app - so not the t and T phoning, but the app - had prevented 600k cases, which is significant if so. Haven't read the study)

The other really interesting question is track and trace. Can it ever work to keep infections down 'enough', and if so what do we have to do to make it do so?

For starters, overturn much of our data privacy laws so that phone data, banking data, cctv can be used as tools to help the T&T programme. South Korea are brilliant at this stuff, because they have this access.

It’s worth a conversation, if this shitshow is going to continue.

Yeh track and trace i actually forgot about that ! 'World beating track and trace system' if I remember correctly. Perhaps if that was implemented correctly if cases were lower or they just expanded the capacity of it to deal with the higher level of cases. Then again perhaps it wasn't strict enough? A phone call (if you ever got one) to find out if you were staying at home...how many people lied on that front !
It obviously wouldn't cover all spread due to asymptomatic etc but its bound to at least put a dent in in it if its done correctly and even more so if it was done alongside regular mass testing !

I'm desperate to get out of lockdowns - we've not gone anywhere now for almost a year. We've not seen relatives, and have followed the rules and worked from home (because we could, not everyone can). But the only way we can get numbers of infections down and mutations down, so that the vaccines work and we can get back to something like normal is if people do continue to follow the rules as much as possible (and it would really help if the government supported everyone to have the strictest possible lockdown for a few weeks, rather than this ongoing half-lockdown that is far too long).

Saying you'll break the rules if they keep locking down will actually extend lockdowns for far, far longer. Not everyone has the choice, but if everyone that does is really careful then we can unlock so much quicker, and won't risk vaccines not working.
Seriously, if a new mutation comes along which is vaccine-resistant, I don't think I could bear it. We're so close to getting through this now.

"It obviously wouldn't cover all spread due to asymptomatic etc but its bound to at least put a dent in in it if its done correctly and even more so if it was done alongside regular mass testing !"

True, though I suppose the question is whether the £22bn (more by now?) might be more effectively spent on other interventions such as increasing NHS capacity, or even more simply, paying full pay to those who need to self isolate with symptoms, to encourage them to do so.

Or we could do both! The cost of lockdown is so huge, even if you are just looking at immediate economic costs and ignoring, say, the long-term impact of children being taught on-line, that the expenditure may be cheaper than not doing it. One thing I wonder is what the long-term impact on 'small-scale entrepreneurialism' will be

• if you'd previously had wistful thoughts about opening a restaurant or an events company, would you just drop that now, on the basis that there's now the possibility that you may be closed down the next time a new virus, antibiotic resistant bacteria, etc, appears?

Or... they could have utilised the public sector employees who already have the skills and training to control infectious community disease and trace contacts rather than spaff money all over their mates...

Saying you'll break the rules if they keep locking down will actually extend lockdowns for far, far longer

Oh come on, there's only so long people will keep falling for that one.
People have bee hugely compliant in the main and yet here we are.

@aixenprovence my career is in hospitality. Its obviously probably one of the most impacted sectors by this right now and to be honest I don't know how they can continue attrubuting the spread of covid to that sector when its barely been open for a year however I do have a feeling that potentially the smaller side of that sector may boom after this. I don't live in a city and I'm in the small scale and I do see an appetite forming for supporting those small local businesses. Some in our area have been operating takeaway services and have probably been busier than they have been in years so it would be nice to see that local vibe reappearing after covid. It could well be wishful thinking and as soon as normality returns people may well just rush back to city centres and huge chains but hopefully not, it would be nice to get a positive from something so negative.

@WannabemoreWeaver

Lifes too short for lockdown? Maybe if you are young and healthy, but not for the people you may infect because you 'wont do' lockdown.

I think the opposite. Elderly people have only a short life left! What is a year in the life of a 20 year old, who has 50+ years ahead of them? For an 85 year old this year, lost to lockdown, could be their last year to see their family.

Beware of forecasters. Humans have a large appetite for forecasts and predictions across a broad spectrum of domains. People must recognize that the accuracy of forecasts in systems with phase transitions is dismal, even by so-called experts.” Think Twice by Michael Mauboussin

"Some in our area have been operating takeaway services and have probably been busier than they have been in years"

Yes good point, I suppose it's more the pubs that have been left without that outlet - perhaps the entrepreneurial spirit springs eternal!

"What is a year in the life of a 20 year old, who has 50+ years ahead of them? " The problem is for those who are losing a year of non-deferrable experience - Yr 13s who are missing that last year at school; 1st years at university who are not able to use university libraries, meet friends through lectures, societies, or even live at university at all - that year has gone, never to be regained. (Even more so for 2nd years actually who have lost good parts of 2 academic years.) I think it can apply at any age - new parents who have missed all the social experiences that usually happen in first year of a baby's life; people who are hoping to meet a new partner in time to have children; and, as you say, older people who may not have many years ahead anyway.

Maybe that is one of the divides of lockdowns - those of us who are just basically treading water but not missing anything very much; versus those who are losing an experience they won't get back. I think a pp on another thread put it that things are not 'on pause' - for some people, opportunities have gone for ever. (Dramatic)

What is a year in the life of a 20 year old, who has 50+ years ahead of them?

Some people really are not grasping that this is triggering life long mental health issues in young people. I don’t understand why people are refusing to believe this is happening.

SAGE need to STFU

Actually the point is that we need the people between 10 and 30 for be fully functioning because they are going to pay for this . People of 85 may only have a year left but they have had 85 years , a person of 18 who is facing nodding out on their education, first jobs and formative relationships may not manage to to achieve many of those things. How exactly are people meant to meet potential partners etc . This is far more far reaching for young people than the elderly, that may be unpalatable but it’s the truth of the situation .

"How exactly are people meant to meet potential partners etc ."

Agree. Another of the great lockdown divides - those who have partners, or who have already had children - versus those who want to form a relationship, even a family.

I am not sure this gets enough attention (apart from semi-jokey chat about it being illegal to have sex if you don't live with your partner,). A 3 week break on being able to date is one thing; but this is quite different. (And yes I know they can go for a walk or a bike ride - but how do they meet them in the first place? OLD ok, but work, after work, clubs, societies, none of that is now feasible.)

We are extremely unlucky to be going through this. Pandemics have occurred in the past, and sadly will in the future. Scientists have warned for over a decade now that over and improper use of antibiotics may make some infections untreatable.

I'm trying to think of a positive, but there is little we can do to stop new viruses. Perhaps the upside will be that many more will be proactive with their own health, so that whatever future health service we have will cope?