All this has to stop. We can’t live like this!

[SweetsMum3]

We need to learn to live with covid like we do with all other viruses, illnesses and diseases. The elderly and high risk are vaccinated… that was the goal, remember?! Like Hancock said, we will cry freedom when the over 70s are vaccinated!

There is no reason for mass testing when the young and healthy get covid mildly. My child is in tears yet again because she isn’t allowed to go to school for 10 days. A few students in her year group tested positive and all students are forced to be locked in their homes… again.

Are the sick?! No. Half have no symptoms. The others have a slight fever and feel a little tired.

This isn’t fair. This isn’t healthy. This isn’t sane. This is harmful and destructive to children. An entire generation has been betrayed. For what exactly? Over a virus which does not affect them. Over fear. Over people being immensely risk-averse. Over loss of control and people can’t take it.

It is time we live our lives and get back to normal before it’s too late. If our children hold us accountable and never forgive us, I will completely understand. We have not stood-up for them. Instead, we cowered in fear not giving a hoot about the collateral damage all these restrictions have caused. Shame on us.

Great post Chessie678 I agree with every word.

It’s like rational response has left the building.

Well said @Chessie678

A PP mentioned achieving 80-90% vaccination rate, as then the virus will have nowhere to go in order to mutate. It will have the remaining 10-20% of the population to infect and mutate in.

I have seen a mention of the eradication of smallpox. This was possible because a) the virus didn’t mutate, b) the vaccination provided sterilising immunity and most importantly c) there has never been an animal reservoir for smallpox, ie it doesn’t infect animals. Covid does and therefore will always be with us.

@Chessie678

twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1406724821090713600?s=20

Headline reads................

"Schools to weigh pupils over fear of obesity spike.

Checks brought back in primaries to reveal impact of lockdown"

Well said Chessie

Good post Chessie Agree with you

You should get an article somewhere with that. Not joking many feel that way and you’ve expressed it well.

@Tealightsandd

Developing countries have taken strict measures to try to keep Covid out, and to suppress and contain. Border control, lockdowns, masks.

Contrary to your patronising notion that it's ok for them to have Covid risks 'because they've already got other problems', they very much don't want it.

No. They don't want it. They also don't want HIV, malaria, maternal mortality, diphtheria, measles, all the other things that they've very much got.

Look, put it this way. You have £5. With that £5 you can buy either:

• a mosquito net, in a high-malaria area;
• a course of rehydration salts for a child, in an area where lots of young children die of diarrhoea and vomiting every year;
• a covid vaccine for a healthy 25-year-old, in an area where your older and vulnerable people have already been vaccinated.

Obviously in an ideal world you would be able to afford all of them, but if you could only afford one, why on earth would you choose the covid vaccine?

And developing countries absolutely can't afford the kind of long-lasting lockdowns and 'border control' that the UK can. It is a bit odd that you are so insistent every other country in the entire world has got stricter measures in place than the UK. Why do you think this?

There's a difference between eliminate versus suppress and contain.

And a big difference between out of control widespread virus versus small numbers of easily treated and managed cases.

Defeatism and individualism are two of the most deadly diseases known to humankind. Lack of foresight and false economy too.

Ok @GoldenOmber

You go and tell developing countries that you think they're wrong to want to protect their populations from Covid. You know best. Better than them apparently.

@Tealightsandd

Ok *@GoldenOmber*

You go and tell developing countries that you think they're wrong to want to protect their populations from Covid. You know best. Better than them apparently.

I don't think you actually read what I said, did you?

Oh I did read it. Every patronising word. Now I suggest you go and read what developing countries are actually saying they want. Not what other people think they should want. I'm off out for a walk.

@Chessie678 post of the day

'Agree that the idea of a healthcare system which requires everyone to sit at home "protecting it" (and getting progressively less healthy as they do so) is bizarre.'

Oh fgs it wasn't literally to protect it, it was to keep a lid on transmission so the nhs could manage the surge which was 5 times the usual amount of admissions even in a busy winter flu season.

We'd witnessed Lombardy's sophisticated health care system become overwhelmed. Ours did not, not at any point was anyone ventilated in corridors however that is never acknowledged by the deniers on mn.

Good post @JaniieJones

It's nice to sign out for my walk after reading something sensible.

Agree that the idea of a healthcare system which requires everyone to sit at home "protecting it" (and getting progressively less healthy as they do so) is bizarre. I certainly feel resentful about myself and my family ending up less healthy and worse off in every way for "protecting the NHS" when it has done nothing for any of us in the last year - though have nothing against the staff.

Absolutely this! It's such a crazy suggestion - that people should stay at home to protect the NHS, rather than be able to engage in activity which helps their long term health and well being. I can understand it as a short term measure in an extreme emergency - yet here we are well over a year later, we are still being urged to protect the NHS. Nuts.

Separately I do agree that the pandemic should absolutely not be used as an excuse to continue to underfund and poorly manage the NHS.

Not that most people were or are sitting at home. Huge numbers have been working in jobs that cannot be done from home or furloughed.

@Tealightsandd

Oh I did read it. Every patronising word. Now I suggest you go and read what developing countries are actually saying they want. Not what other people think they should want. I'm off out for a walk.

Can you help me understand which bit you disagree with?

Do you disagree that developing countries have limited health resources?

Or do you disagree that they will target those resources towards the things that have most effect?

Or do you disagree that malaria, childhood diarrhoea, etc., are more dangerous than covid to those countries once their vulnerable people have been vaccinated?

Because if you agree with all of those things, I'm not seeing how you can justify expecting developing countries to spend those limited resources vaccinating healthy 25-year-olds against covid, if they want to spend those resources battling malaria or measles or HIV or malnutrition etc etc etc instead?

@JaniieJones

'Agree that the idea of a healthcare system which requires everyone to sit at home "protecting it" (and getting progressively less healthy as they do so) is bizarre.'

Oh fgs it wasn't literally to protect it, it was to keep a lid on transmission so the nhs could manage the surge which was 5 times the usual amount of admissions even in a busy winter flu season.

We'd witnessed Lombardy's sophisticated health care system become overwhelmed. Ours did not, not at any point was anyone ventilated in corridors however that is never acknowledged by the deniers on mn.

I agree that given the emergency created by a pandemic it was reasonable to lock down to prevent unprecedented admissions and suppress the virus while we sought a vaccine.

However I also agree that lockdown is not an acceptable way to manage health capacity going forward when everyone has been vaccinated.

'And I still think it is completely unethical to damage the health, education and future prospects of a large number of people, particularly children, to protect a minority. '

Oh chessie really?

It was a pandemic none of the decisions were taken lightly. In a public health emergency restrictions are needed. Now you can tut and moan about 'to protect a minority' all you like but at the peak critical care had surge units all over their hospitals, not just 30 beds but 90 beds. Full of 50 and 60 year ollds. You're seriously suggesting dc should have carried on as normal going to school and attending social events as these 'minorities' were irrelevant? Jesus.

@HesterShaw1

Agree that the idea of a healthcare system which requires everyone to sit at home "protecting it" (and getting progressively less healthy as they do so) is bizarre. I certainly feel resentful about myself and my family ending up less healthy and worse off in every way for "protecting the NHS" when it has done nothing for any of us in the last year - though have nothing against the staff.

Absolutely this! It's such a crazy suggestion - that people should stay at home to protect the NHS, rather than be able to engage in activity which helps their long term health and well being. I can understand it as a short term measure in an extreme emergency - yet here we are well over a year later, we are still being urged to protect the NHS. Nuts.

Because we didn't take measures to suppress and contain.

Two examples (out of several):

1. Masks. The government got rid of masks in schools. Just after letting in and allowing to spread the Delta strain.

1. See above. Largely wide open borders to any and all new strains.

I really must go for my walk now.

Excellent post @Chessie678.

Yes definitely more years of life will have been lost to lockdown than to covid. It was and is an outrage and a scandal.

I've seen something tonight which has made me very happy. Just got back from the supermarket. There was a walkway which was all cordoned off, and you had to queue.up with a member of staff counting numbers in and out telling you when you could go inside. It's all gone, the barriers, the staff member and people are coming and going in and out of the supermarket just like 2019! I know its a tiny joy but.it really lifted me

@Tealightsandd

Oh I did read it. Every patronising word. Now I suggest you go and read what developing countries are actually saying they want. Not what other people think they should want. I'm off out for a walk.

Quick repost before I go for GoldenOmber

@Flyonawalk

Excellent post *@Chessie678*.

Yes definitely more years of life will have been lost to lockdown than to covid. It was and is an outrage and a scandal.

While that is believed to be true, it is also believed that had we not implemented restrictions, the lost years of life from covid would have been greater than the lost years from social distancing. At least this is what the ONS modelling suggests.