If the government were honest about the next 4 months

[RuleWithAWoodenFoot]

They'd say that children are probably going to catch covid, there is nothing to stop this happening. Lots of families will probably catch it off their children, school staff will probably catch it off children too.

Education is going to be disrupted again if the above happens. No way around it. But it could be 'over' by November when the bad weather kicks in and older folk start getting ill as per usual circumstances. At that point booster vaccs could start.

It's definitely 'an approach', but not telling people that this is the plan is unfair. Do you think people have realised this yet? Or are the Emperor's new clothes still in view?

[quote Warhertisuff]@RuleWithAWoodenFoot

I agree with you. There seems little point suppressing a virus that won't be going anywhere if the health service isn't being overwhelmed.

It makes sense for Covid to be allowed to be allowed to pass through schools in the first half-term. It's like taking off a plaster... better, and ultimately less painful, to rip it off than do it slowly.[/quote]
It's not like taking off a plaster at all.

Poor poor children. Especially the ones with pre-existing health conditions, the ones who will get long term symptoms and the ones in exam years.

significant measures should be put in place to support CEV children

how easy it would have been to give any vulnerable child 12-15 a vaccine in time to develop immunity; we haven't been very good at that, but we could get a push on now

@herecomesthsun

It's not like taking off a plaster at all .Poor poor children. Especially the ones with pre-existing health conditions, the ones who will get long term symptoms and the ones in exam years

Given Covid is here to stay, and given its prevalence, it's now a sad fact of life that the majority of children will be exposed to Covid over their lifetimes unless we suppressed Covid with strict restrictions forever (ie more than some better ventilation and LFTs etc)... so yes, almost all will be exposed eventually, so why prolong the period of which it occurs?

because we could so easily vaccinate the most vulnerable first?

because we could so easily have masks in school (we have the masks)?

because we don't actually want more illness in children and more children in hospital, even if we don't think they'll die?

because children have already suffered a lot this pandemic and it isn't fair to protect virtually all the adults and then infect almost all the children , deliberately, with a new disease, when we don't know it's long term side effects?

oh yes, and also there is a big advantage to prolonging the time to infection because scientists will come up with new treatments to promote recovery and diminish long term consequences of infection

@herecomesthsun what @herecomesthsun said. I don't understand why UK seem so accepting of this.

By 'this', I mean pisspoor government handling.

@herecomesthsun

oh yes, and also there is a big advantage to prolonging the time to infection because scientists will come up with new treatments to promote recovery and diminish long term consequences of infection

I think if people think that, they should be allowed to act accordingly.

Who would argue with an individual choice like that?

But the opinion should not be forced on people. And if they want to prioritise an enjoyable life in the moment, they should be able to do that too.

So on the one hand there are people wanting an enjoyable life and on the other hand kids wanting their education to actually take place

if these are in direct conflict with each other, which should we prioritise?

[quote Warhertisuff]@RuleWithAWoodenFoot

I agree with you. There seems little point suppressing a virus that won't be going anywhere if the health service isn't being overwhelmed.

It makes sense for Covid to be allowed to be allowed to pass through schools in the first half-term. It's like taking off a plaster... better, and ultimately less painful, to rip it off than do it slowly.[/quote]

1. The health service IS overwhelmed. That's why there are millions of people waiting for operations and millions more who aren't being seen.

The government's "let them get covid" policy is keeping the NHS too busy with covid to keep up with everything else.

My mum is supposed to have regular 4 monthly appointments for her condition. She's had one since 2019. And another booked for a month or so's time - if the hospital don't have to cancel outpatients again.

1. Schools aren't like Vegas. What happens in schools doesn't stay there.

We're at October 2020 levels of hospitalisations and people on ventilators already.

Encouraging covid to spread through millions of children will have a knock on effect in the community.

Just like the G7, or Boardmasters, but much much bigger.

And as the health service infrastructure struggles to cope and the death toll rises another lockdown becomes ever more likely. Just like the last three times our governments refusal to do what was necessary inevitably led to lockdowns.

And tens of thousands more British people dead.

1. We're meant to protect our children.

Not infect them with a pathogen with as yet unknown long term effects.

1. If you wanted to to create a covid variant that is especially effective on children, that's how you'd do it.

If you wanted to to create a covid variant that is especially effective on children, that's how you'd do it

This is a point of concern that I’m finding difficult to put aside.

I can accept living with covid, I can accept a degree of bungling from those in charge. I’m finding it very hard accept the same gamble for my dd. To me the most obvious mitigation that we’re no longer using is isolating if contacts.

I know it’s a burden, it certainly is for our family, yet it’s the most obviously simple measure for maintaining a degree of control in schools. I can’t believe that people will be put in the position of sending their dc to school with a positive case at home. As much as I would like to do what I believe is the right thing and keep my dd away from school if/when there is a covid case in the house, I can’t realistically afford to do that without the backing of my employer or the threat of fines for non-attendance hanging over my head (and the rumblings I’m reading are that school authorities will be briefed to crack down on people not attending).

What does OP suggest they do very quick to critics but no solution forth coming

@rwalker

What does OP suggest they do very quick to critics but no solution forth coming

We could try to protect our own people?

We could do some of the things that have been proven to help across the world over the last 20 months.

The key to it, as ever, is controlling transmission by all the Swiss cheese methods our government is abandoning.

But our government just shrugs, gives up, and apparently accepts that 50,000 more of us are going to die.

Again.

As IF the current covid strategy will keep deaths under 50,000 a year. We were over that in 2020. We were over it this year by March.

50,000 a year is only 961 deaths a week.

We've had about 756 in the last 7 days.

In summertime, with most of the schools still off.

@rwalker

What does OP suggest they do very quick to critics but no solution forth coming

The OP is criticising the lack of transparency more than the actual policy itself. The alternative they’re after is clarity.

Although I would personally criticise the governments management too including their appalling reaction times (see March 2020, and January 2021in particular. Sending children back to school for one day and then locking down was particularly special), lifting low level measures that could easily run alongside opening up society but contribute to slowing the rate of infection such as masks and social distancing in unventilated/heavily populated environments and then most recently going from 100-0mph on contacts isolating even lifting the requirement for household contacts.

@PrincessNutNuts

The problem is we are one of the fattest unhealthy and entitled countries so the outcome would never be great.

Blame the government all you want but being fat, unhealthy, giving false info to track and trace ,refusing to wear masks ,ignoring rules, 30% of people with symptoms never got test, big chunk of the people told to isolate didn't and vernally no conforming didn't help the cause .

[quote rwalker]@PrincessNutNuts

The problem is we are one of the fattest unhealthy and entitled countries so the outcome would never be great.

Blame the government all you want but being fat, unhealthy, giving false info to track and trace ,refusing to wear masks ,ignoring rules, 30% of people with symptoms never got test, big chunk of the people told to isolate didn't and vernally no conforming didn't help the cause .[/quote]
Crikey, what a way to talk your country down.

I'm a patriotic, proactive, positive, "can do" sort of person, so I don't have much time for negativity, defeatism and fatalism.

Anything other countries can do, Britain can do just as well.

We have more resources than most of the nations handling covid better than us.

But we need leadership and an effective strategy.

A government's first duty is to protect our own people.

They have failed.

Not the British people.

" 30% of people with symptoms never got test, big chunk of the people told to isolate didn't"

Most likely because statutory sick pay is a pittance in this country and zero hours agency or gig work is often used to avoid paying even this.

If you are in a job where you can work from home and / or get paid isolating is easier. If not well bills still need paying don't they?

Both of these are due to govt policy so ...

because we could so easily vaccinate the most vulnerable first?

The most vulnerable in society have been
vaccinated... The delay with children was largely because the risk of the vaccine is comparable to the risk of Covid.

because we could so easily have masks in school (we have the masks)?

As we can see from Scotland, masks don't stop infections from growing. The best they do is temper they growth somewhat. So if the choice is 3 months to get population immunity in schools,
or 6 months for the same period end result but with masks, I'd go for the former.

because we don't actually want more illness in children and more children in hospital, even if we don't think they'll die?

With Delta, unless we are prepared to live in lockdown, or near lockdown, conditions forever, we won't be able to stop children from getting Covid. The only difference is timing. Restrictions just extend the inevitable...

because children have already suffered a lot this pandemic and it isn't fair to protect virtually all the adults and then infect almost all the children , deliberately, with a new disease, when we don't know it's long term side effects?

The only way to avoid children being exposed is for them to live a half-life of endless restrictions, with no end in sight for masks, and social activities heavily curtailed forever. You may think it's healthy for our children to live the rest of their childhoods in this very unnatural and heavily constrained way in the interests
of being certain there are no long term
implications (which by definition you can't be sure of for many,many years). I fundamentally disagree. Our children's lives are for living, not for hiding away scared of their own shadow as they forego anything resembling a normal childhood "just in case".

I think the issue is some people want it all and I personally can't see a way for that. There are consequences to kids and teachers on all options - even the do-nothing forever one!
Even if we accepted much higher rates and associated death tolls, chronic illness, completely broken nhs etc, that's not going to help kids either!
We could limp on accepting many kids will get it this term, some will be off ten days, some will be off months, watch as nhs waiting lists get longer, give a sympathetic nod to those kids whose lives will be changed forever, or whose parent has a life limiting illness, reluctantly eventually accept some mitigations in schools although by then the collateral damage will be far greater.
We might be lucky and nobody gets a single case and we can all 'live with covid' happily ever after.

Other countries don't take this 'we are all going to get it anyway' stance. Why are we?!

Serious question, those who are against any mitigations at all, who think that what we are currently doing is the best option (or least worst), what do you think will happen if we carry on as we are and is there anything you are prepared to sacrifice for a different outcome? Bear in mind nhs is a limited resource.

Just to drop this in - there are more people in ICU on ventilators right now, that there were when the 2nd lockdown was called.

And why are we not getting the news reports from ICUs? It is also very quiet on the ages of people currently in ICUs and covid wards. It fits the government's plan to get back to business as usual.

I expect other countries will soon fall into line behind us.

Some countries have even started getting rid of the vaccine pass.

As several other posters have already said, any half or even full assed attempt to limit spread will just drag things out. I’d rather get it over with now than have a (nother) shitty winter term, Xmas and New Year.

Which countries have ditched the covid pass Puppeteer?

The government are completely inept. Sad but true. Cannot trust them to protect anyone. Winter is going to be difficult. I hope schools stay open.

At least those who think we can just ignore covid might learn something and next year might be different. I so hope we actually learn from these experiences. At the moment the government are acting like fools.