Myths re lockdown was wrong

[Betsyhilton]

Just seen someone on another thread basically trying to claim that lockdown didnt reduce deaths. The contested John Hopkins survey seems to be encouraging people who basically behaved selfishly, ignored medical advice and did what they liked to now claim retrospectively that they just knew lockdown was wrong.

AIBU to think these are just basically selfish irresponsible people who ignored official advice at the time because it caused them inconvenience and are now jumping on any theory to try to justify their self centred behavior?

it was stay home and protect the NHS not stay home and protect yourself.

I think it absolutely clear the Government couldnt have given two shits about us.

If lockdowns were so effective? Why were the ‘experts’ like Patrick Valance not following them?

You must lack any critical thinking skills if you would follow rules that the rule makers and advocates don’t feel that they need to follow.

If you worked in a hospital and saw the vulnerable people, that other people loved, love, suffer....you would do whatever was asked. I work in a busy A&E and to this day see people that know they have covid/flu, with not a care for others who have no immune system ( due to cancer treatment etc) Fuck all you who think you are more important/entitled!!!!

I did what I thought was best for me and my family,and don’t give a flying fuck about what anyone else thinks

I was working in a community mental health team. I don't know anyone who died of covid, but I had 4 service users (young men) who killed themselves in lockdown.

So to manage your anxiety you think people should 'Stay the fuck at home' ?

It's the nature of people everywhere to be like "do as I say, not as I do".

I sat down and thought to myself that if I don't go to other indoor places unless I have to, and if I go at less-busy times and keep away from everyone else, I am less likely to catch this new illness that has killed thousands in China. That behaviour just happened to look a lot like "lockdown rules".

Plus I saved a fortune on my commute WFH.

I rest my case!!!

Yeah. Just like people who got anxiety from being locked down wanted to not be in lockdown.

Theres more than one type of anxiety.

Oh give the fuck over. It was all a con. If you can’t see that now then fucking god help you because there’s nothing down for you in life. I applaud every person that took no notice of any of the bullshit that was put in place. Glad society has such fantastic people.

Exactly this.

Do you think that CoOp was the only person who had a health condition that lockdown benefitted?

The literal fucking point of lockdown was to benefit people with certain health conditions, like cancer, cystic fibrosis, and HIV, so that they wouldn't get sick and swamp hospitals. That CoOp's condition is mental instead of physical doesn't make it less important.

I live alone. I followed all the lockdown rules. Was unable to see my partner for a long time as we lived in different countries of the UK. I found it devastating. It has had a long term effect on ne. I can understand people ' giving up' if they saw no one. At least those people who had someone at home were not alone for months. I heard a woman say she had not touched anyone in 3 months. It resonated with me,I don't mean sexually. Whilst i understandcand dupport the necessity of the lockdowns there should have been bubbles initially. It would have been less intolerable. Dark days.

how could the average person, make a difference when all the main stream media were pushing for lockdown and restrictions ? besides the public didnt have all the knowledge, understand or information that the govt had, so how can the public make an accurate analysis of the intelligence if they did not understand or know most of the information ?

Absolutely horrendous, but as you can see on here, there's some who would see those deaths as reasonable collateral rather than someone who if they contracted covid, maybe becoming unwell and very very tiny chance of it being fatal.
It maddens me this selfish 'i might get ill!!

Expecting the whole world to stop for a virus with a 99.6% survival rate is selfish and destructive. Suck for the elderly and immunocompromised, but it's up to them to avoid catching the virus, and they can die of the flu or even the common cold, and while it's sad, the world is not expected to destroy itself to prevent the near-inevitable.

There was never any evidence that asymptomatic people could spread the virus, applying arbitrary restrictions regardless of infection was just a flex of political power.

My grandmother died alone and terrified because of covid rules and I don't think I'll ever forgive myself for going along with what we were told to do.

No one knew what the survival rate was when it first started spreading. This was one of the aspects of it being a novel virus. Novel means new.

OP, what about all the people who died of cancer because they couldn't get any "non essential" appointments so their cancer was missed? I'd say that's selfish of everyone who cheered on lockdowns.

What about mentally ill people like Nikki Grahame, whose usual weight-control routine was disrupted when her gym closed, leading to her anorexia fatally spiralling out of control?

There was, clearly, an increase in child abuse during lockdown. Looks to have been about 20% and each one of the statistics is a real, abused child. Child abuse is horrific and no reasonable person would wish an increase. It is also far from the only way that children suffered during the pandemic.

On the flip side, although young children were the least at risk of serious illness through Covid, some did die. Others lost parents. As of the start of this year, at least 70,000 children were still suffering from long Covid symptoms (some of whom have debilitating symptoms).

Much of the above might have been prevented by swifter or longer lockdowns. It is likely that, without lockdowns, while we may not have seen a rise in child abuse, there would have been more illness and death among children.

Reasonable minds will differ over the necessity and particulars of lockdowns but I think anyone with two brain cells to rub together, and who hasn’t tipped over to extremism, understands that the decision comes down to a balancing of harms, including harm to children in all its forms.

That is why, to me, your post seems cynical in the extreme.

You know that is not how deaths are normally recorded though?

It's ^very* common in elderly people with poor hearts to have a heart failure that is exacerbated by respiratory illness like flu, causing death. As in, if you are old and your heart is failing, it is highly likely that is what will finally cause your death. In instances like these the cause of death is recorded at heart failure, not flu.

These conventions were changed for covid because of people's stupid obsession with covid deaths as if they are fundamental different than any other cause of death. Which now makes it impossible to accurately compare things like covid and flu deaths.

We inherited this virus from China and we copied their response...

So what? There are new viruses and new variants of existing viruses all the time, we don't destroy the world just in case.

A con? so me being hospitalised for over a month nearly dying and now suffering from long covid to the point I can no longer work just imaginary then. Are the 4 people I know who died of covid not actually dead then since covid is a con. Just because covid never effected you personally doesn't mean its not real. It's incredibly disrespectful to make statements like this. When someone dies of cancer or cardiac arrest do you go up to their families and say its a con that didn't happen. Do better.