Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

On course for another lockdown?

650 replies

TalkToTheHand123 · 19/03/2022 07:07

Covis cases on a rapid rise, heading towards 100,000 daily cases. Are we heading for another lockdown?

OP posts:
Delatron · 19/03/2022 13:03

I understand it’s difficult for the CEV but there are lots of examples on here and in real life where they have caught Covid and it hasn’t been as bad as anticipated. The 3/4 vaccinations will protect against serious disease for most. I do understand for some that their immune response to the vaccine won’t be as good.

However even my CEV FIL who wouldn’t leave the house for months is now more relaxed and it going on holidays.

Pootle40 · 19/03/2022 13:03

@AnyFucker

Give it a fucking rest
This. Please get a life
WTFGG · 19/03/2022 13:04

After partygate the Tories wouldn’t fucking dare as no one would comply !!

PferdeMerde · 19/03/2022 13:04

Have things died down in Ukraine that we're back to covid scaremongering?

Waxonwaxoff0 · 19/03/2022 13:05

@PferdeMerde

Have things died down in Ukraine that we're back to covid scaremongering?
Haven't seen any "are we going to be nuked" posts for a few days, so I guess so.
TypicaIMe · 19/03/2022 13:06

@louiseofthelakes

I know most people will disagree with me, but from my selfish point of view I found it upsetting that ALL restrictions came to an end just as immunity from booster vaccines for those who are CEV were beginning to wane. My husband is CEV and in many ways the past month has been much more concerning than any time during the pandemic. Until now on the rare times he had to venture out it was reassuring to know that most people were sticking to the rules of the time, wearing masks, social distancing, reassuring to know that most people who tested positive would be isolating. Once our children/grandchildren came to visit again they all tested beforehand, giving us at least some security. But with free testing not to be available anymore this won't be possible.

Now we cannot rely on these levels of protection, the only way to protect him would be to shield again. However as nothing has been put in place to give those who are CEV the freedom to make that decision that is not possible. So going to work, children to school and college, knowing the person sitting next to them might have covid as they no longer have to isolate, is more dangerous than ever. Especially as rates are higher in this area than they have ever been.

It does feel that any public sympathy for those who are CEV has evaporated (as shown in the post about the elderly woman catching covid on a much needed holiday) and certainly the government couldn't care less. But equally I know others should have the freedom to do what they want to do, and not be anymore restricted in any way...it's just for those who are CEV it's a scary time and we feel forgotten. I know I am selfish.

Has your DH had his fourth jab? I had mine a couple of weeks ago - while I was incubating my fifth round of Covid, unfortunately, so I'm currently ill anyway.

I do agree with you about testing, and how important it is for CEV people.

Re the lady going on holiday - people are, perfectly understandably, agog that her DD wishes we could be in lockdown because of her mother's decision to go on holiday, where she caught Covid. We don't actually know the mother's feelings on it - she may be perfectly happy with the risk she took, the poster didn't say. I do think if you're CEV you need to be a bit more risk aware, as we always were with other infectious diseases.

Nobody has said they have no sympathy for the lady with Covid - it's the daughter wishing for lockdown because of her mum's decision they've taken issue with.

HesterShaw1 · 19/03/2022 13:08

@Delatron

I understand it’s difficult for the CEV but there are lots of examples on here and in real life where they have caught Covid and it hasn’t been as bad as anticipated. The 3/4 vaccinations will protect against serious disease for most. I do understand for some that their immune response to the vaccine won’t be as good.

However even my CEV FIL who wouldn’t leave the house for months is now more relaxed and it going on holidays.

Well quite. Look at the person who said they were CV and had had Covid five times.
crepesncream · 19/03/2022 13:09

with a group of friends (all older than her). ALL of them have now got the virus, my mum quite badly, all have been triple-vaccinated.
Not a very good advert for the vaccines then. Shock

HesterShaw1 · 19/03/2022 13:09

This really does sound like a statistic plucked from the rear end of a rodent.

It was the conclusion of John Hopkins University research and was widely reported a few weeks ago. Just because you didn't know about it, it doesn't mean it was plucked out of the rear end of a rodent.

TypicaIMe · 19/03/2022 13:12

@HesterShaw1 that's me. I do need to clarify that I've only been considered CEV for two of those infections, the others I was CV (the bump to CEV is because of new drugs I'm on).

The two post CEV infections I've had have been quite different - the first was extremely mild and short lived, but I was only a few weeks after my third jab. The infection I currently have is awful and not getting better after a week - I had my fourth jab while I was incubating it, so no protection from it.

grapewines · 19/03/2022 13:12

Yeah, it actually is selfish to want an entire country to lock down to protect your mother at this point in the pandemic. The family should take their own precautions. I assume someone choosing to go on a group holiday will be aware of the risks and have weighed them up prior to going. Since she went on a holiday, the mother is probably not that keen on being locked down again either.

Lolaqp · 19/03/2022 13:12

@Waxonwaxoff0 @duvetdayforeveryone @TypicaIMe

if the posters responding with their own experiences were decision makers for the country then yes it would be selfish to make a decision for everyone purely based on their own self-interest.

But they aren't. So quite honestly your posts are hysterical!

For a person to wish that things were a certain way because you have a loved one at risk - is not selfish.

It's completely OTT and manipulative to start quoting back horrendous child abuse cases to people who have fears for their loved ones with restrictions being lifted.

The restrictions ARE LIFTED and you're bashing these people who are afraid.

And I'm sorry but you have clearly demonstrated that it's perfectly ok for you to shut down opinions that you don't like but accuse others of doing the same for taking a balanced view.

You're just making it so that people can't speak up about their fears and that's is not nice, kind, whatever.

bellac11 · 19/03/2022 13:13

Im a bit sick of some of the myths on here

Yes you can get 'long cold', in the same way you can get 'long flu', people just dont seem to know this. I have been left with long term symptoms from a cold many years ago and the same thing happened around 30 years ago too. Colds, flu and covid are all related to the same virus.

For people saying that they dont want a lockdown but do want 'other mitigations' put in place, what do you think the vaccine programme is, its a huge programme, probably the biggest we've ever seen. The lockdowns were needed until we got vaccines on board.

For people saying the numbers of covid patients are going up, can someone supply an analysis of the nubmers of people admitted BECAUSE of covid and not incidental covid patients.

But ultimately, now that we have vaccines there wont be lockdowns

The incidental need for more medical staff was the case way before covid and there was no plan then (particularly when brexit also caused a huge loss of staffing) to train and hire more doctors and nurses or build new hospitals so I doubt there will be for covid.

BattledoreAndShuttlecock · 19/03/2022 13:13

The vaccines are poor at preventing you from catching Omicron, which is a shame, but they're still very effective at the vital task of mitigating severity. If a coach full of unvaccinated OAPs had caught Covid then several of them would probably have been very sick - you just have to look at Hong Kong to see that.

Chasingaftermidnight · 19/03/2022 13:15

No, pigs are more likely to fly - unless a particularly deadly variant appears. And compliance would be rock bottom anyway.

I do feel for CEV people and pregnant women though.

stripeyflowers · 19/03/2022 13:15

Yes, to anyone who loves being locked down I say go for it. We won't disturb you as we go about our normal, everyday lives. Our time is short on this planet. ,To wilfully lose your life before you actually stop breathing seems insane to most of us, thank goodness.

BattledoreAndShuttlecock · 19/03/2022 13:17

@HesterShaw1

This really does sound like a statistic plucked from the rear end of a rodent.

It was the conclusion of John Hopkins University research and was widely reported a few weeks ago. Just because you didn't know about it, it doesn't mean it was plucked out of the rear end of a rodent.

It wasn't John Hopkins University research for a start. It was the conclusion of a team of three people, one of whom is a John Hopkins economist, based on a cherry picked meta-analysis of studies, coming to the opposite conclusion of the study which dominated the inputs.
TypicaIMe · 19/03/2022 13:18

[quote Lolaqp]**@Waxonwaxoff0* @duvetdayforeveryone* @TypicaIMe

if the posters responding with their own experiences were decision makers for the country then yes it would be selfish to make a decision for everyone purely based on their own self-interest.

But they aren't. So quite honestly your posts are hysterical!

For a person to wish that things were a certain way because you have a loved one at risk - is not selfish.

It's completely OTT and manipulative to start quoting back horrendous child abuse cases to people who have fears for their loved ones with restrictions being lifted.

The restrictions ARE LIFTED and you're bashing these people who are afraid.

And I'm sorry but you have clearly demonstrated that it's perfectly ok for you to shut down opinions that you don't like but accuse others of doing the same for taking a balanced view.

You're just making it so that people can't speak up about their fears and that's is not nice, kind, whatever.[/quote]
Where have I mentioned child abuse cases?

And it's me who's hysterical?

Oh and if you want so much to be kind perhaps don't use disgusting misogynistic terminology.

TypicaIMe · 19/03/2022 13:20

And @Lolaqp - if that poster's mother wants to isolate, she can. Nobody is stopping her, nor berating her for it should she choose to. She doesn't need everyone else to lockdown, too.

Yeahthat · 19/03/2022 13:21

No.

HesterShaw1 · 19/03/2022 13:21

It wasn't John Hopkins University research for a start. It was the conclusion of a team of three people, one of whom is a John Hopkins economist, based on a cherry picked meta-analysis of studies, coming to the opposite conclusion of the study which dominated the inputs.

OK, fair enough.

However I wasn't using it as incontrovertible proof that lockdowns did nothing. The first one probably reduced some infections.

However the point was the poster dismissed it as being plucked out of the arse of a rodent simply because she wasn't familiar with it.

rhizobium · 19/03/2022 13:21

@HesterShaw1

This really does sound like a statistic plucked from the rear end of a rodent.

It was the conclusion of John Hopkins University research and was widely reported a few weeks ago. Just because you didn't know about it, it doesn't mean it was plucked out of the rear end of a rodent.

It wasn't John Hopkins research, one of the authors works there.

As said in many posts in this thread to the original poster - it is fraught with methodological issues included excluding all studies with an epi design (effectively meaning studies that produced findings showing protective effects were excluded), their meta-analysis is biased by cherry picking studies and including duplicate findings, and they conduct no formal risk of bias assessment.

It has not been peer reviewed which is presumably why none of these issues have been picked up.

Obviously a review which excludes the majority of studies finding protective effects of lockdown is going to be biased towards the null.

bellac11 · 19/03/2022 13:22

I forgot to add to my post about being sick of infantilisation of the elderly, with all the killing granny talk there was during the christmas that got shut down

If someone chooses to go somewhere or do something, good for them, they have agency over their life.

TypicaIMe · 19/03/2022 13:23

And finally, I've spoken about my concerns and fears as a CEV person. I haven't shut anyone down whatsoever.

Unlike someone who ends a rather condescending post with a superior be kind.

HesterShaw1 · 19/03/2022 13:23

It's completely OTT and manipulative to start quoting back horrendous child abuse cases to people who have fears for their loved ones with restrictions being lifted.

Lockdowns and their adverse effects on children are extremely relevant to that particular case. That was an official conclusion.

The emotive term "loved ones" has been used for two years as a way to try and shut down debate and guilt people into shutting up, just like "Be Kind" has.