Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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.

Will you be angry if we end up back in lockdown?

768 replies

turnshavetabled · 27/08/2021 08:27

/ harsh restrictions?

I feel so tired of this all - but mostly tired of feeling lied to by the government. The false promises - 'irreversible' 'final lockdown until science / the vaccines can save the day'

And Scotland are already floating more restrictions, only a few weeks after reopening. It's gutting. I wish they would just tell us what the probably already know is likely to happen over the next few months.

OP posts:
user1497207191 · 01/09/2021 15:29

@stepupandbecounted

We aren't going to have another lockdown, at most we will have a few restrictions back. We can't actually afford another lockdown, even if we needed/wanted one!!! Has anyone seen the levels of debt....perhaps look at that and see if we can do another one, short answer: NO way.
Trouble is that "minor" restrictions such as mask wearing don't seem to have much effect and certainly not enough to bring infection rates down if they become too great. After all, infection rates were rising right from Easter when the 3rd lockdown was eased, and that was when there were still lots of restrictions, i.e. nightclubs closed, indoor hospitality closed, social distancing and mask wearing imposed, etc.

I do think we'd be looking at a binary choice of keeping things pretty much "open" as normal, as they are now, OR lockdowns. I don't think a "middle ground" was achieve anything really. And of course, if you close down parts of the economy again, such as hospitality, then the Govt has to bring in all the same furlough/business grants, etc which cost billions. And when "part" of the economy is closed, it has the knock on effect on other industries, i.e. pub closures affect not just breweries but also entertainers, transport, professional services (tills, stock takers, marketing etc), so you have the ripple-through effect where lots of industries are hit.

The tens/hundreds of billions that another lockdown would cost is simply not affordable. Not to mention the "cost" in human misery etc.

I think we just have to accept that if covid infection rates get too high for the NHS to manage, then there'll be some people with covid who don't get the health treatment they require. After all, plenty of people without covid didn't get the necessary treatment over the 18 months!

MercyBooth · 01/09/2021 15:37

Well as i said upthread ive got weight to lose so have started a healthy eating plan. But if they pull another lockdown i will go on a hunger strike.

quackinglikeaduck · 01/09/2021 16:11

But then you're prioritising Covid patients over patients with other health problems. Lockdowns cause other problems, such as mental health, suicides, cancer patients not getting urgent treatment, patients not being able to get GP appointments, routine screenings not being done, etc etc.

The vaccines seem to be working for the majority at the moment, i.e. reducing seriousness of covid, and deaths from covid. We can't protect everyone from covid, and yes, sadly, there'll be some for whom the vaccines don't work, or who can't have the vaccine. We can't protect those people at the expense of giving other people health issues or killing other people.

If hospitals are "too busy" with covid, then, sadly, some covid patients will end up not receiving medical care. That's what happened during the lockdowns, but then it was people with covid who got the medical attention, but those with all manner of other conditions, some serious and life threatening, didn't care the medical care they deserved. We can't do that again. Why should a covid patient trump a cancer patient??

So let me get this right - you're saying that someone who works with the public and is at high risk of covid (nurses, doctors, bus drivers, teachers, police etc.), and gets covid, would not be as entitled to medical care as someone who wfh but has a heart attack or has cancer?

Even now, lots of people needing healthcare can't get it because of the backlogs and the NHS still isn't back up to speed.

Lockdowns have caused a lot of damage and misery - probably moreso than letting covid rip without lockdowns.

Badbadbunny - the NHS doesn't have backlogs because of lockdowns but because of covid. Do you understand how bad it is for patients with other illnesses to get covid as well? How dangerous it makes surgery? How hard it makes to carry on normal treatment when staff are ill? (But perhaps you agree with the previous poster I quoted and think that covid patients shouldn't get medical care at all?)

Letting covid rip at the start without lockdowns would have been catastrophic for hospitals but more so for all the people who couldn't get into them and get any kind of medical care for anything. Lockdowns are the only thing before vaccination that has kept the lid on covid just enough for hospitals to carry on with some of the most important treatment for other things.

A lockdown is an emergency measure used only when you need to stop cases growing, fast, for whatever reason. No one can say we won't ever need to do that again (I hope we won't).

Anyone suggesting that we should just not treat covid patients needs to think through how that would actually work in practice. You would need to persuade medical staff to triage people not according to their clinical need, but according to whether or not they're covid positive. They would need to knowingly send people dangerously ill with covid back home, perhaps to die, while accepting people into the hospital who are not in imminent danger. Seriously, how on earth do you think that would work, even if it was a fair way to treat people? As a strategy that would create far more problems than it solves.

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 01/09/2021 16:13

Polls always come out in favour of reintroducing restrictions when necessary.

Do you really think people don't lie to polls? If I'm asked a question I often say what they want to hear and I'm sure many people do. I've done YouGov and other polls just to get the money.

Beamur · 01/09/2021 16:16

If a lockdown is necessary then I will lockdown.
I don't actually mind very much as I can wfh, enjoy having my DD off school, but I am aware that it's pretty rubbish for many people so I doubt it will happen unless essential.

quackinglikeaduck · 01/09/2021 16:22

I think we just have to accept that if covid infection rates get too high for the NHS to manage, then there'll be some people with covid who don't get the health treatment they require. After all, plenty of people without covid didn't get the necessary treatment over the 18 months!

So, in this brave new world of more people working from home, middle class people who can wfh and have less risk of covid are now also entitled to priority medical care for their illnesses, ahead of people with covid who are more likely to be working class people who work outside the home in risky environments.

Have a heart attack due to too much processed food delivered to your door? Get medical care. Have covid severely after working in the factory producing that food? No medical care for you, it's time to prioritise non-covid illnesses.

herecomesthsun · 01/09/2021 16:25

@PinkSparklyPussyCat

Polls always come out in favour of reintroducing restrictions when necessary.

Do you really think people don't lie to polls? If I'm asked a question I often say what they want to hear and I'm sure many people do. I've done YouGov and other polls just to get the money.

I don't. You Gov pay people? Really?
PinkSparklyPussyCat · 01/09/2021 16:32

They do if you register online. It's only something like 50p a survey but I used to try to work out what they wanted me to say.

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 01/09/2021 16:36

So, in this brave new world of more people working from home, middle class people who can wfh and have less risk of covid are now also entitled to priority medical care for their illnesses, ahead of people with covid who are more likely to be working class people who work outside the home in risky environments

Really? I have suspected carpal tunnel syndrome thanks to working stupid hours with a poor set up at home. I've had one video consultation on Livi as I couldn't speak to my GP and was told to buy a splint on Amazon. I'm not convinced it is CT as not all of the symptoms fit but as I can't get any treatment, let alone priority treatment, I don't know.

QueenofKattegat · 01/09/2021 16:38

Yes YouGov pay people. It's nothing more than an online market-research site.

quackinglikeaduck · 01/09/2021 16:39

@PinkSparklyPussyCat

So, in this brave new world of more people working from home, middle class people who can wfh and have less risk of covid are now also entitled to priority medical care for their illnesses, ahead of people with covid who are more likely to be working class people who work outside the home in risky environments

Really? I have suspected carpal tunnel syndrome thanks to working stupid hours with a poor set up at home. I've had one video consultation on Livi as I couldn't speak to my GP and was told to buy a splint on Amazon. I'm not convinced it is CT as not all of the symptoms fit but as I can't get any treatment, let alone priority treatment, I don't know.

No, of course you can't now, which is right - prioritisation should be on the basis of clinical need, not type of illness.
quackinglikeaduck · 01/09/2021 16:41

If hospitals get overwhelmed, and we don't (for whatever, possibly good, reason) use a lockdown as a way of relieving the pressure, then yes, very difficult choices will have to be made as to who gets treatment. There is however no convenient high-level way to make these choices that couldn't itself cause just as much outrage (or worse) than lockdown. It's far far better if hospitals don't get to that point at all.

IMO this is why all the things like mask wearing, voluntarily meeting outside and people socially distancing if they can are worth carrying on with when we can. Even if they collectively only shave a few percent off the total number of cases, in bad weeks that might be just enough to stop the government having to consider more extreme restrictions, or a local hospital having to cancel operations.

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 01/09/2021 16:54

No, of course you can't now, which is right - prioritisation should be on the basis of clinical need, not type of illness.

Oh I completely agree (even if I am pissed off they wouldn't refer me to Bupa for a proper diagnosis!) I was making the point that those of us WFH can't see or speak to a doctor either. Anyway if it gets worse I won't be WFH or anywhere else as I'll get signed off!

Bizawit · 01/09/2021 17:43

What restrictions are those, as we currently have very few, other than some encouragements that aren't being enforced

@herecomesthsun yes, currently the situation is ok (apart from some of the ongoing border/ travel restrictions which are still very onerous and hopefully will soon be lifted). But I thought we were debating the possible reintroduction of restrictions. I know there are a lot of people who have opposed the recent lifting of restrictions and would like many restrictions to remain (especially for children in schools).

Bizawit · 01/09/2021 17:54

*remain or be reintroduced

Dreamstate · 01/09/2021 18:25

If the lockdown can make my noisy neighbours disappear for the entire time then yes being ir on, otherwise ill be angry because at least I can escape their chav behaviour and god awful conversations

Greenhand · 02/09/2021 12:29

@quackinglikeaduck

If hospitals get overwhelmed, and we don't (for whatever, possibly good, reason) use a lockdown as a way of relieving the pressure, then yes, very difficult choices will have to be made as to who gets treatment. There is however no convenient high-level way to make these choices that couldn't itself cause just as much outrage (or worse) than lockdown. It's far far better if hospitals don't get to that point at all.

IMO this is why all the things like mask wearing, voluntarily meeting outside and people socially distancing if they can are worth carrying on with when we can. Even if they collectively only shave a few percent off the total number of cases, in bad weeks that might be just enough to stop the government having to consider more extreme restrictions, or a local hospital having to cancel operations.

I agree with this.

It's why I support mask wearing, social distancing and would encourage outdoor socialising.

I don't really understand the need to have indoor spaces open for social reasons over the summer other than for economic reasons. I do appreciate for example some venues are indoor only.

However, I would be closing those indoor venues at this point in time to counter the bounce in cases from schools returning in England and the freshers' week superspread towards the end of September.

But then again I don't work in or own an indoor venue.

Personally, I found the lockdown earlier this year OK-ish. Bubbles allowed, I could exercise outdoors with a friend or single family member (so a social outlet), didn't mind about shops being shut. Downsides for children not being at school and also being cold when meeting up for a walk. I do live alone 1/2 time so it was a bit oppressive but it wasn't horrific as I had expected. Boring yes, sad not to see family yes, depressing - somewhat.

gogohm · 02/09/2021 12:37

Angry no, annoyed yes. Will I comply? Only partially. I've worked throughout and I'm a key worker, I've had covid (very mild) double vaccinated since. I don't think locking down is the answer, it's getting the most sociable group vaccinated and good hygiene along with targeted testing at high risk events

forinborin · 02/09/2021 13:49

I just think it would be prudent to ensure that no one goes into the winter vit D deficient. There's no super strong evidence specifically for covid, but better to be safe.

PinkSparklyPussyCat · 02/09/2021 14:12

I don't really understand the need to have indoor spaces open for social reasons over the summer other than for economic reasons. I do appreciate for example some venues are indoor only.

I'm going out for a meal tonight, indoors as the restaurant doesn't have outside seating. I wouldn't go if it was outdoors though, it's cold and grey here and I can't think of much worse than shivering outside if it's cold or trying to avoid wasps if it's warm!

Delatron · 02/09/2021 14:16

Aren’t economic reasons very important? You can’t just write off entire industries like the theatres, arts, music, restaurants, nightclubs..
That’s a lot of jobs and livelihoods there.

TempsPerdu · 02/09/2021 14:18

I don't really understand the need to have indoor spaces open for social reasons over the summer other than for economic reasons. I do appreciate for example some venues are indoor only

Really? Well, aside from the obvious massive blow to jobs and livelihoods - we live in the U.K and this has hardly been a vintage summer for weather.

I had an evening meeting for a kids’ club I help to run the other night and afterwards ended up chatting to my friend on the street for 20mins or so (London, so hardly the back of beyond). By the time I arrived home I was chilled to the bone and had to spent the rest of the evening wrapped in a blanket on the sofa. Hardly conducive to a relaxing and sociable evening catching up with friends!

All of the outdoor venues near me have had to invest in patio heaters for the outside diners as it’s been so cold.

Bizawit · 02/09/2021 14:43

I don't really understand the need to have indoor spaces open for social reasons over the summer other than for economic reasons

😂😂 Hmm Confused 😩. I think this is the root of the problem. So many people in this country apparently don’t see the need for: indoor spaces, human faces, social interaction, hugs, basic civil liberties and political freedoms, travel, in-person education, jobs, all types of social and health services that don’t relate directly to covid, need I go on..

Thewiseoneincognito · 02/09/2021 22:25

Unless we have a complete cure (we don’t, yet) then we have to accept lockdowns as inevitable, especially in the colder months.

Covid really doesn’t care about jobs, the economy, mental health, education, international travel or socialising. That’s the raw truth and we have to come to terms with that, we can not reason with a virus or play by our own rules and expect it to follow along.

The public have been misled into believing vaccines were the end of this, two jabs and it’s over, free again. Truth of the matter is vaccines can not be solely relied upon to keep case numbers manageable particularly in the colder months.

An unstable health system in a nation which heavily relies upon it is a risk to the day to day functioning of the country. A near collapsed NHS would be a catastrophe we can not risk experiencing, Covid untamed without restrictions would be detrimental to us all.

MercyBooth · 02/09/2021 23:35

Covid really doesn’t care about jobs, the economy, mental health

And neither do you. That much is clear.