New lockdown

Davesnave

GDB2222 said:

Davesnave said:

The 'You're all selfish muppets for behaving like human beings who need the companionship and love of other human beings' is a separate debate from what I was talking about.

I was referring to the way everything came to a grinding halt in Lockdown 1, even in situations where there was no or minimal risk. And the risks for those under 60 with no special health conditions are very minimal indeed.
Whatever action a government takes there will be negative consequences. Lockdowns have created a massive number of those, many as yet not fully counted, like undetected /untreated serious health issues, physical and mental, all of which have huge costs.There was no cost/benefit analysis done because we were in panic mode with no plan in place. This showed-up in the contradictory advice given about masks and the large sums apparently wasted on things we don't seem to hear about now like Track & Trace. It was a government making decisions on the hoof and people lost faith, especially when public figures were seen to break or bend the rules.

Buy into the selfish muppet narrative if you like; I'm sure Boris and Matt would be glad if people do.

P.S No point looking for a pint in my village. Both pubs are now closed permanently.

Forgive me if I am speaking out of turn, and I'll delete this if you like, but you live on a small holding in a rural area. The risk for you of catching Covid must be one of the lowest in the country. Where I am in London, the number of cases has gone up 10-fold in 8 weeks. We should perhaps have a tiered system of responses, so that you are subject to restrictions more appropriate to your local risk, but that was tried and people found it confusing.

No leave it up, that's why I said this shouldn't be about private individuals. Most of the time the lockdowns have had zero effect on me.

The points you make are good ones, though I would point out that the government's own data shows <400 people under 60 and with no serious health conditions have died so far. That's 3 hundred and something too many, but as I said earlier , against that  is all the harm from 'ordinary' work not done by the NHS last year and the vast weakening of the economy won't be a help to medical care in the long run either. It's underfunded now for heaven's sake.

My main point stands: that the first lockdown was harsh and people would have accepted that had there not been seen to be much bungling thereafter, but that and the antics of people like Cummings entered the public perception, so support this time around seems from conversations I've had to be much weaker now.

What I think doesn't matter, but someone should attempt to explain the actions of the 'muppets.'

Thrugelmir

Davesnave said:

Doozergirl said:

jimbog said:

pinkteapot said:

One thing to be aware of - friends/family outside your household aren’t allowed to physically help you move. Professional removers are still allowed to work, so you may need to use them if you were DIYing it but relying on others to help.

The guidance doesn't say 'aren't allowed' it says 'unless absolutely necessary'

 This isn't the same as lockdown 1. Some lessons have been learned.    

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/949536/NationalLockdownGuidance.pdf?fbclid=IwAR038cD9tmNhpdaQftjgrarRkGPBPTvbbEnZwno1NSv41TxwyuA_fnyB7m8

I think the main lesson our leaders have learned is that many of us won't to put up with the same stringent conditions they imposed first time around. They'll reap what they sowed last year. It'll be an interesting harvest.

The main lesson is that many people are even more stupid and selfish that we could have imagined. People are going to reap what they sow. Unlikely to be pleasant. 

AdrianC

Davesnave said:

AdrianC said:

And that's why we're still here. Because millions of our compatriots are selfish muppets who don't see why they can't have a pint or go on holiday, because they'll be fine, it's just the flu.

Those lessons haven't been learned, and they're why we'll keep coming back to this point.

The 'You're all selfish muppets for behaving like human beings who need the companionship and love of other human beings' is a separate debate from what I was talking about.

I was referring to the way everything came to a grinding halt in Lockdown 1, even in situations where there was no or minimal risk. And the risks for those under 60 with no special health conditions are very minimal indeed.

No, not really. They're lower than they are for those over 60, and those with "special health conditions". But they really are not "very minimal".

Covid is not death-or-full recovery. Long covid is starting to show just how bad it can be - and we're only months in.

Back in March/April, we didn't know very much about it at all. Slamming the brakes on hard was the sensible thing to do. Some of that precaution was unnecessary - and we've learnt a lot about treating it. Ventilators were the be-all-and-end-all. Now, they're recognised as being actively unhelpful in many cases. But we've also learnt that it's still wreaking havoc... More so than it was with the current variant. The South African variant may be resistant to the current vaccines.

But many people are selfish muppets who are of the "I'm all right, sod you" mindset. And they're the ones transmitting it, and the ones in whom it's diversifying into new variants.

theartfullodger

Thrugelmir said:

The main lesson is that many people are even more stupid and selfish that we could have imagined. People are going to reap what they sow. Unlikely to be pleasant. 

True: But the problem we all face from this stupidity is the extra load on the already underfunded and overstretched NHS, plus others, innocent, may just have to passed the toad in the street, get the plague, reaping what the toad sowed.

Anti-vaxers should have benefits (including pension) stopped and/or deported: IMHO

Bonniepurple

Davesnave said:

GDB2222 said:

Davesnave said:

The 'You're all selfish muppets for behaving like human beings who need the companionship and love of other human beings' is a separate debate from what I was talking about.

I was referring to the way everything came to a grinding halt in Lockdown 1, even in situations where there was no or minimal risk. And the risks for those under 60 with no special health conditions are very minimal indeed.
Whatever action a government takes there will be negative consequences. Lockdowns have created a massive number of those, many as yet not fully counted, like undetected /untreated serious health issues, physical and mental, all of which have huge costs.There was no cost/benefit analysis done because we were in panic mode with no plan in place. This showed-up in the contradictory advice given about masks and the large sums apparently wasted on things we don't seem to hear about now like Track & Trace. It was a government making decisions on the hoof and people lost faith, especially when public figures were seen to break or bend the rules.

Buy into the selfish muppet narrative if you like; I'm sure Boris and Matt would be glad if people do.

P.S No point looking for a pint in my village. Both pubs are now closed permanently.

Forgive me if I am speaking out of turn, and I'll delete this if you like, but you live on a small holding in a rural area. The risk for you of catching Covid must be one of the lowest in the country. Where I am in London, the number of cases has gone up 10-fold in 8 weeks. We should perhaps have a tiered system of responses, so that you are subject to restrictions more appropriate to your local risk, but that was tried and people found it confusing.

No leave it up, that's why I said this shouldn't be about private individuals. Most of the time the lockdowns have had zero effect on me.

The points you make are good ones, though I would point out that the government's own data shows <400 people under 60 and with no serious health conditions have died so far. That's 3 hundred and something too many, but as I said earlier , against that  is all the harm from 'ordinary' work not done by the NHS last year and the vast weakening of the economy won't be a help to medical care in the long run either. It's underfunded now for heaven's sake.

My main point stands: that the first lockdown was harsh and people would have accepted that had there not been seen to be much bungling thereafter, but that and the antics of people like Cummings entered the public perception, so support this time around seems from conversations I've had to be much weaker now.

What I think doesn't matter, but someone should attempt to explain the actions of the 'muppets.'

I was quite astonished to discover that the term “underlying conditions” in this case involved ANY long term health issue - including depression, chronic pain and road traffic accidents.  Admittedly the last 2 May increase the risks due to lack of movement, but the catch all means that ANYONE who has a long term issue noted on their medical records has an underlying condition.  If 1 in 4 people have depression (whether treated by intervention or not),  then they have an “underlying condition”.  Perhaps we should say that X number of people who have been lucky enough never to have seen their doctor have died of covid.

warwick2001

I personally believe that the difficulty with the COVID pandemic is that, to many, the guidelines/restrictions only become the right course of action (and you actively agree with their implementation) once you know someone close to you who suffers/suffered/died from it. Its very easy to get caught up in the "I know no-one that's had it, or died from it, therefore its not as serious as what everyone makes out...." narrative. And we've seen in the media, there are idiots wandering around hospitals trying to film COVID sufferers in wards. There will always be people that don't engage until it personally effects them, and that's a very human response. I'm fairly sure if their mothers/fathers/brothers/sisters etc. had died from COVID, they wouldn't be claiming its a hoax.

I'll be honest, during the first lockdown, I knew of no-one, I'll repeat, no-one, that either caught or suffered from COVID. And I had the attitude 'what's the point of a lockdown, its only a flu, people die all the time, why should I, and many others, have to suffer this !!!!!!'. However, this time round, my workplace colleagues have been decimated by it, and everyday on our internal news bulletins, there are reports of more and more catching it, and suffering from it (another 30 people tested positive just this morning). Unfortunately, due to this most recent lockdown, it is very likely some of us will lose our jobs. However, I suspect if you ask those who do, they would much rather be unemployed than dead/seriously ill/suffer from long-term COVID symptoms.

I have an small insight as my wife works in the NHS 'front line'. I am frightened for her safety everyday, as I know what could happen to her/us if she were to contract the virus. And we are both very healthy 40-ish year old's. But as is now being revealed, the numbers of healthy folks (i.e. those without pre-existing health conditions, and even the young 'uns) suffering badly from COVID is on the rise. So, if you were to give me the option of keeping my wife safe to return home healthy every day, or popping to the pub/restaurant/whatever else I fancy doing on a Saturday afternoon, I know what I'd choose. The government has basically taken one of those options away from us, and although its pretty rubbish in the short term, if I get to spend the rest of my life with the people I love, then I can't grumble too much. I will still grumble, but just a wee bit....

AdrianC

A friend's daughter is heavily pregnant. She had been working from home, but was asked to come in to the office to help interview her maternity cover replacement.
One of the other people interviewing turned out to be +ve. Oops.

There was a case mentioned on the radio the other day. An older woman from a south Asian background, trying to shield, but being given serious family pressure to go to a family wedding. Absolutely promised faithfully it would all be covid-secure, and it would be bare minimum. It wasn't. She caught it from somebody else there. She died. Oops.

Thrugelmir

theartfullodger said:

Thrugelmir said:

The main lesson is that many people are even more stupid and selfish that we could have imagined. People are going to reap what they sow. Unlikely to be pleasant. 

True: But the problem we all face from this stupidity is the extra load on the already underfunded and overstretched NHS, plus others, innocent, may just have to passed the toad in the street, get the plague, reaping what the toad sowed.

Leave the politics out of the discussion. Adds nothing to the debate. No doubt you'll find many to engage with you on Facebook. 

AdrianC

Stating that the NHS is underfunded and overstretched is hardly "politics". It's more of a blatant truism.

Thrugelmir

AdrianC said:

Stating that the NHS is underfunded and overstretched is hardly "politics". It's more of a blatant truism.

If the population of the UK wasn't generally obese. Didn't misuse A&E. Treated children properly. Didn't miss around 20% of booked appointments. Then resources would be more effectively used. 

Covid has merely highlighted the culture that prevails in a broad section of society.