Freedom day from “other stuff”

[brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr]

Many people were very excited by - and crying out for - the prospect of normality. Of removing masks and reducing distancing. Of dining out, nightclubs, holidays. Family visits, theatre - without needing to jump through so many hoops.

Why don’t we see the same response in other parts of life. Where the crazy hoops we jump through are there to mitigate an even smaller risk than covid ?

Take for example transport security. When will we be allowed to carry full bottles of liquids through onto aircraft again ? When will we be able to board an aircraft without being bodyscanned ? When will we get to go on a train without being urged to “see it, say it, sorted ?” every few
minutes ?

Those who were vehemently opposed to covid restrictions, vaccines and masks - will you march to prevent people poking around in your bags at concerts ?

I get your point OP, but only on a theoretical level.

Humans are bad at assessing risk. It's our nature. Read some David Spiegelhalter - he writes so well on the matter.

Because we are bad at assessing risk, we take huge precautions on low chance, high consequence outcomes eg. Global pandemic, terrorist attack, avoiding child snatchers and shark attacks. Media doesn't help - basically, our brains struggle to process the mathematical fact that (for example) driving a car carries a higher risk of death than being a passenger on a commercial plane.

So you have a kind of point, I think. But I am more than happy to got through the minor inconvenience of doing things like showing a passport and emptying my water bottle, because I'd rather not be involved in finding out whether terrorist attacks would be much more common if these measures were abolished...

In the same way, I'm okay doing covid tests and wearing masks, to reduce the risk of covid at the moment.

I understand your point. Someone else was talking about this in the media recently- ‘bureaucratic inertia’. Basically the idea that it’s very easy to put new rules in place (like taking our shoes off at airports because of the shoe bomber 15 years ago) but it’s very, very difficult to get rid of them.

I fear this will happen with many of the covid rules, like elaborate testing requirements for travel. Once we’re all used to them… they may just stay.

How about freedom of personal responsibility (so loved by our government) for smokers.

I was also thinking about heroin earlier. (Prompted by discussions on gang violence).

More people die from alcohol (directly or indirectly) than heroin. Most heroin deaths are linked to the illegality - either because there's no way of knowing the purity or strength, but also indirectly due to gang violence and crimes committed to pay for the habit. We should go back to pre 1961 Misuse of Drugs Act. Addicts registered with GP, got their prescription, and led mostly normal crime free lives - working full-time, functioning members of society.

Why is there so much moral outcry over drug related deaths yet we're told to 'live with' a contagious disease that kills and disables far more people than (legally prescribed or sold) narcotics?

Well, for one, Covid isn’t likely to kill me or most people. A terrorist on a plane or train with a gun or bomb will kill hundreds instantly.

I’m not scared of covid. I am pretty damn anxious about terrorists! They can continue to scan my bags, check my liquids & body scan me for as long as extremism still exists!

The chance of a terrorist on a flight is very slim and I would rather increase my risk of death on a plane and not have the liquid scanning for example.

Our primary school is zealous on anti-terrorism type measures and relatively not too hot on anti covid stuff.

low chance, high consequence outcomes

A large part of the evil of terrorism is the fear it creates, fear of going shopping in the West End for example.

It's not just the dozen people a bomb might kill or the PTSD for the beholders, it is the fear undermining society.

I used to go shopping in the sales in the 80s and 90s with my mum begging me to be careful etc.

The thing about completely ignoring the risk, is that it makes it more possible for another damaging attack to occur; it must be a fine balance for the police & anti terrorism experts to tread.

This is exactly what I was trying to say. The risk of a terrorist blowing up a plane is small, when you compare it to the number of people taking flights vs the general population. Yet we take all the precautionary measures we can to avoid a bomb reaching the plane and causing a catastrophe.

Covid is something 99% of the population is being exposed to. And the current ‘threat’ of Covid is bigger than that of terrorism. Statistically.

I’m not scared of Covid or bombs on planes, but why wouldn’t I take all the measures I can to minimise the risk of either of those things causing havoc? I struggle to see how taking a liquid bag out of your purse for 10 mins twice a year, or showing a negative test on your phone for 20 seconds twice a month, is as annoying as people make it to be. People don’t go on about their basic right to carry a 250ml bottle of shampoo through security.

@traumatisednoodle

RSV and flu have mortality rates a factor of 10 lower than Covid, they are also both much less transmissible. They are not comparable IMO

No they don’t.

“ The CFR of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia in children aged

@EileenGC

This is exactly what I was trying to say. The risk of a terrorist blowing up a plane is small, when you compare it to the number of people taking flights vs the general population. Yet we take all the precautionary measures we can to avoid a bomb reaching the plane and causing a catastrophe.

Covid is something 99% of the population is being exposed to. And the current ‘threat’ of Covid is bigger than that of terrorism. Statistically.

I’m not scared of Covid or bombs on planes, but why wouldn’t I take all the measures I can to minimise the risk of either of those things causing havoc? I struggle to see how taking a liquid bag out of your purse for 10 mins twice a year, or showing a negative test on your phone for 20 seconds twice a month, is as annoying as people make it to be. People don’t go on about their basic right to carry a 250ml bottle of shampoo through security.

Hi @EileenGC I can't seem to scroll back in the thread - are you the poster who said they live in Germany where Covid passes are being used? I think the reason so many posters are so upset about this happening in the UK is because, currently, the proposed Covid pass here will only be valid for vaccinated people. Proof of recovery from Covid, or a recent negative test, will not be alternatives and this understandably makes people feel coerced and powerless ... (Boris has said that free Covid testing will end in September unless you have symptoms, unless I've missed a recent reversal).

Basically, until our Parliament comes back from holiday in September, we have no details of the proposed Covid pass other than what was in the press a couple of weeks ago - i.e. if you want to go to concerts or other crowded places, it's double-vaccinated or nothing.

@Bobholll

Well, for one, Covid isn’t likely to kill me or most people. A terrorist on a plane or train with a gun or bomb will kill hundreds instantly.

I’m not scared of covid. I am pretty damn anxious about terrorists! They can continue to scan my bags, check my liquids & body scan me for as long as extremism still exists!

This. The only issues I have with the body scanning is I always seem to set the bloody thing off!

I struggle to see how taking a liquid bag out of your purse for 10 mins twice a year, or showing a negative test on your phone for 20 seconds twice a month, is as annoying as people make it to be.

Are you saying that the only possible pandemic restriction which should be retained is "showing a negative test on your phone for 20 seconds twice a month'? What would those 'twice a month' circumstances be?

In the unvaccinated Covid has a mortality rate of 1%, or 10 % of those in hospital. Much lower in children. RSV is the opposite, I am referring to population rates. Within the whole population RSV has a mortality rate (of those that have it not those admitted to hospital) of less than 0.1% 'flu is about 0.1%, unchecked Covid is between 0.9 and 1%.

jech.bmj.com/content/75/4/415

BMJ estimate is 1.4% for second wave

Xenia

The chance of a terrorist on a flight is very slim and I would rather increase my risk of death on a plane and not have the liquid scanning for example“

Why. What exactly is it that you object to about liquid scanning? Really curious to know.

Not to answer for Xenia but I find it intrusive and unpleasant. Like “how dare you carry a drink for your child you monster” - and also intrusive particularly when parents have to taste the breastmilk. It’s not like being treated with respect or as a human, just as a thing. Being “processed”.

@brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Not to answer for Xenia but I find it intrusive and unpleasant. Like “how dare you carry a drink for your child you monster” - and also intrusive particularly when parents have to taste the breastmilk. It’s not like being treated with respect or as a human, just as a thing. Being “processed”.

Until 17 months ago, I used to fly quite often, but I have never once seen someone asked to taste breastmilk. Not saying it could never happen but it has to be extremely rare.

How often has it happened to you?

So I got interested and googled.

1968-72 was called the "golden age of plane hijacking." A total of 42 people were killed (most hijackers were actually just wanting to go to Cuba or elsewhere, so weren't necessarily terrorists).

On 1973, many countries started pre-flight checks. Numbers of hijackings massively decreased.

Then, of course, 2996 people died as a result of three hijacked planes on 11th September 2001. After this, all countries were expected to conduct preflight checks.

Since 2001, numbers of hijackings have been near zero or at zero annually.

The checks work. Alright, they're irritating. But seems a small price to pay for preventing future hijackings.

Similarly, if there are invasive but not too invasive measures that work to prevent thousands of covid deaths, I'll comply and see it as a small price to pay.

@traumatisednoodle

jech.bmj.com/content/75/4/415

BMJ estimate is 1.4% for second wave

From your link

“The lowest CFR was in those aged

Yes I know it doesn't change the overall CFR. What has the fact that children are largely spared have to do with it ?