Why are we not in lockdown right now?!

[InkyPinkyParlezVous]

If things are as bad as they say, why are we not locking down right now?

Surely waiting til after Christmas is just too late to stop this "tidal wave"

We aren't in lockdown because we are still waiting on more data coming. Chris whitty has just been giving evidence on it.

Well actually, WE can't afford it. Where esle do you think the money will come from?

True, people seem to skip this part. From us, and dc in future

@SLH2003 - that made me giggle.

@DrNo007

There is no evidence that lockdowns work in the medium to long term and on the contrary there is evidence that they are counterproductive, as they just produce another 'exit wave' of infections when they end. It's up to us to learn to live with covid. There are by now well known prevention/mitigation measures we can all do at home to minimise our chances of getting seriously sick, plus there are a roster of cheap generic off-patent drugs that should be (but largely are not in the UK) prescribed to people when they get sick but are still walking around at home, in order to prevent hospitalisation and deaths.

Oh! I thought that was the point of lockdowns, To shift the timings of highest infection rates.

And a roster of cheap generic off-patent drugs really? Specifically for covid? Marvellous. What, off patent drugs, precisely?

OP: Why aren't we locking down? Locking down now? Surely we should??

[PP rightly assume OP would like things to lockdown.]

Also OP: I really hated lockdown, it totally broke me, it left me really badly affected.

Whut.

@NightmareSlashDelightful

'Lockdown' is a sop to the fretting middle-classes.

Only people in certain circumstances can actually lock down. Everyone else has to carry on, because the bins still need emptying, you've got to maintain police, fire and ambulance services, doctors and nurses, most if not all retail, supermarkets and food suppliers, haulage, education, heat light + power, sewerage... the list goes on.

Lockdown is the 'leakiest' of all NPIs. It's a luxury of the privileged that society more broadly can no longer afford. It doesn't work, not fully; it just protects the comparatively comfortable at the expense of the less well-off.

We now have vaccines, rapidly improving treatments and an almost two-year global knowledge base about covid. We don't need lockdown any more; it's a medieval approach to a 21st century problem.

100% this

@the80sweregreat

It's the isolation period once you've caught it that's the biggest problem , the scientists either need to half this time or we will be in trouble. Not sure if they can though ? Can they do this ? I don't want any more lockdowns or schools to close and I don't want people dying ( who does ?) but it's still all the unknown and even Chris Whitty said yesterday they need more data and it might be milder and easier to control. I still think we are holding our breath, but it's not as bad as last year because of the vaccines etc

The point of isolation is to stop you mixing when you are infectious.

How can scientists half the time of a natural phenomenon? Thats like saying, scientists need to stop the aging process or scientists need to stop water being wet.

If omicron makes people infectious for between two days before you symptoms and up to 10 days (or even longer) after you get symptoms, you can't just change it. It just is.

@thedefinitionofmadness

We are not in lockdown because that would be the final nail in Boris Johnson's coffin.

Odd. That was said just before the first one too!

I have cancelled meeting with friends and family in restaurants and cafes. However I am having the booster on Tuesday and want to be able to receive it. I am also hoping to see my son who has been on deployment; we are hoping to travel on Boxing Day to see him in England.
I will be careful as much as I can before then; thankfully it is the last day of term tomorrow. We are dropping like flies, from + cases in families to being off from booster side effects.

@OhLookMoreShit

Get a grip!

😅😅 said harsher than I would but yes this

@Lacedwithgrace

If people won't wear masks for 10 minutes in supermarkets they're not going to adhere to lockdown rules. And those healthy enough to think they're safe because they're vaccinated don't give a shit about how a lockdown could help others, so they also won't adhere to rules. And pwecious Chwistmas needs to be saved

Equally, too many of those who wouldn't experience the worst aspects of lockdown don't give a shit about the suffering of the people who would.

@Lacedwithgrace why did you spell precious and Christmas like that? Do you have a speech impediment?

Hi @RedToothBrush

Still being pedanticaly logical I see

I have tried answering that one a few times in the last few days. I wonder where the idea of a shorter / 5 day isolation period started?

Wherever, it was eithe by someone woth absolutely no idea, or was misunderstood and that error repeated ad nauseum!

Red, I know , it's just my musings I guess , trying to find a way out of the problems without having a new year lockdown!
I know that ten days will still be needed :(
Despite all the vaccines and boosters

[quote WheelieBinPrincess]@Lacedwithgrace why did you spell precious and Christmas like that? Do you have a speech impediment?[/quote]
Gwace... just saying

If we had a strict lockdown now until Christmas Eve, people might be able to mix at Christmas. Without it, it's difficult to see how that is going to be possible. But this government care more about the economy and pre-Christmas spending than they do about families spending holidays together. If the lockdown had started 5 days ago we could have preserved Christmas mixing, but even now it might be possible.

Quite, about WE and OUR CHILDREN will be paying.

Some clown on another thread said that “Rishi can afford it, but he doesn’t want to spend the money.”

If only some people could receive an electric cattle prod every time they think such nonsense. And a double prod somewhere very painful if they share their ignorance on social media…

What on Earth do you think a lockdown is going to do?

SA have decided not to even increase their restrictions btw.

@Rocket1982

If we had a strict lockdown now until Christmas Eve, people might be able to mix at Christmas. Without it, it's difficult to see how that is going to be possible. But this government care more about the economy and pre-Christmas spending than they do about families spending holidays together. If the lockdown had started 5 days ago we could have preserved Christmas mixing, but even now it might be possible.

If we had a strict lockdown between now and Christmas Eve it would be widely flouted. People keep conflating having a law with people behaving in a particular way. They are not the same thing.

Lockdowns won't work now , too many people have given up on it all and policing Christmas would be impossible.
I think that people were more on board with it all last year , but the government have blown it now and not many will give up seeing family this year. They know this , it's probably why they are just limping along and getting us up to New Years without one.
Plus waiting on more data too

@Akire

It seems to be those who willing take risk to carry on as normal. In your 50s probable not wise go down a packed pub but up to you. They don’t want give money to pubs to close but this way many are really struggling.

It makes sense in some ways if your 25 living away home your Xmas is meeting friends week before and having a party. For others they save that social mixing for Xmas day to see family. Mix at own risk seems to be the message this way they aim keep both sides happy and costs them nowt

This

Here we go, “This government t cares more about the economy and pre-Christmas spending than they do about families spending holidays together” .

How FOOLISH are you? Where do think the money for the NHS comes from? If no one spends, the economy is done for. But, hey, silly economy. The economy is for other people . Oh, no, not me and my family. We don’t do the economy . We do Christmas .

at the level of stupidity on here.

A number of reasons

They don't actually know how bad it will be yet. The boosters may help a lot.

There's very little point in bringing in lockdowns just before Christmas as people won't comply and businesses will be up in arms

They don't want to pay more furlough

Boris can't get vaccine passports past his backbenchers, let alone a lockdown

Boris' position is very fragile right now, demanding lockdowns is begging for a leadership challenge

Another lockdown is a bit of a game changer as there is no clear end point anymore. That's a really hard sell.

It is much smarter to play as they are and scare the shit out of everyone in the hope they get boosters and limit contacts of their own accord.

A lockdown would be more politically palatable after Christmas if hospitalisations soar.

Well, Rishi Sunak is in California so anyone asking him for any more money will have a bit of a wait and it'll be no!
Interest rates have gone up today too

If we had a strict lockdown between now and Christmas Eve it would be widely flouted. People keep conflating having a law with people behaving in a particular way. They are not the same thing.

I think that is probably true, yeah. But I think that is partly because the messaging is mixed so as not to curtail pre-christmas spending. I think everything should have shut down at the end of the school week last Friday, and we should have focussed on boosters and reducing transmission to enable schools to reopen in Jan and allow families to mix over Christmas. The messaging should have been totally clear about what the trade offs are.