FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Should we sacrifice the few...
Should we sacrifice the few...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be?" What do you think the policy should be ? | |||
| |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? What do you think the policy should be ?" Well it does seem to me that there are a relatively small number of people that are happy to put the lives of many at risk. Justice would seem better served to make those few pay the price, rather than a much greater number of innocent people who have gone through months of hardship and sacrifice, made much harder by the actions of those few. | |||
"The answer probably lies somewhere in between. We can't save everyone and it is pointless trying. It's a virus and does what virus's do." The scientific term is called mitigation I believe. | |||
| |||
| |||
"I'd do what they've done in Australia. I think at the beginning breaking lockdown in Sydney (except for specified reasons) carried a fine of up to $10 000. Australia is largely closed, and if you return you are in mandatory (your expense) quarantine for 14 days. I think it was still Sydney (NSW), this is run by the army. You get a hotel room and food/ essentials delivered. You must apply to leave (and I believe enter) Australia, and my understanding is that most requests to leave have been denied. You must have good reason. Their testing regime makes ours look like a joke. A lot of the messaging has been good (not all of it obviously). Eliminate threat. Reduce movement. Test, test, test." I'd hate to live in Australia right now. It sounds like a dictatorship is taking shape there. | |||
"I'd do what they've done in Australia. I think at the beginning breaking lockdown in Sydney (except for specified reasons) carried a fine of up to $10 000. Australia is largely closed, and if you return you are in mandatory (your expense) quarantine for 14 days. I think it was still Sydney (NSW), this is run by the army. You get a hotel room and food/ essentials delivered. You must apply to leave (and I believe enter) Australia, and my understanding is that most requests to leave have been denied. You must have good reason. Their testing regime makes ours look like a joke. A lot of the messaging has been good (not all of it obviously). Eliminate threat. Reduce movement. Test, test, test. I'd hate to live in Australia right now. It sounds like a dictatorship is taking shape there." It’s not so bad at all. Only a few states having issues. Most are coming back to normal. | |||
"I'd do what they've done in Australia. I think at the beginning breaking lockdown in Sydney (except for specified reasons) carried a fine of up to $10 000. Australia is largely closed, and if you return you are in mandatory (your expense) quarantine for 14 days. I think it was still Sydney (NSW), this is run by the army. You get a hotel room and food/ essentials delivered. You must apply to leave (and I believe enter) Australia, and my understanding is that most requests to leave have been denied. You must have good reason. Their testing regime makes ours look like a joke. A lot of the messaging has been good (not all of it obviously). Eliminate threat. Reduce movement. Test, test, test. I'd hate to live in Australia right now. It sounds like a dictatorship is taking shape there. It’s not so bad at all. Only a few states having issues. Most are coming back to normal. " Thanks for the update. To be honest I am glad I live where I live. I have relations all around the world and by the sounds of it things are much much worse there for different reasons. | |||
"I'd do what they've done in Australia. I think at the beginning breaking lockdown in Sydney (except for specified reasons) carried a fine of up to $10 000. Australia is largely closed, and if you return you are in mandatory (your expense) quarantine for 14 days. I think it was still Sydney (NSW), this is run by the army. You get a hotel room and food/ essentials delivered. You must apply to leave (and I believe enter) Australia, and my understanding is that most requests to leave have been denied. You must have good reason. Their testing regime makes ours look like a joke. A lot of the messaging has been good (not all of it obviously). Eliminate threat. Reduce movement. Test, test, test. I'd hate to live in Australia right now. It sounds like a dictatorship is taking shape there." Apparently Australians are fine with it. They realise it has to be done. I'm Australian, and I know if I go to see my family I won't be let out again. So I park my arse in Manchester (I'm a legal resident obviously). This dictatorship, communism, rights shit is really immature tantrum sounding stuff. Australians are getting their lives back (not entirely, there have been fuckups). Meanwhile we're holding our breath and hoping for the best, which probably doesn't bode well. | |||
| |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't." Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. | |||
| |||
| |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away." I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it | |||
"Polly, let's be fair, Patient Zero who travelled and spread in Europe etc most likely didn't know they were ill, possibly asymptomatic and even if they did eventually get symptoms, mild disease is like a weird cold or throat infection (I speak from experience). We can't lay the blame on Patient Zero for being a spreader. " Maybe not patient zero, but I'm in favour of patient "I deserve to go to Spain and I can't be arsed quarantining yay pub" being smacked. | |||
| |||
"No, we should not implement a policy of mass genocide, just because world governments didn't manage this well from the start. It would be completely abhorrent. We should make sure that leaders are fully accountable, such that they become liable to the same extent as any other massacre etc, that is operated under their control. In the instances of much of the worst countries' death tolls, it's evident that leaders have been behind the terrible problems that they have enabled, Trump, Bolsonaro, Johnson etc. Rather than having somewhat powerless citizens taking the blame and carrying the cost, this should be borne by those controlling resources. It would motivate a keen response from leaders if this were to happen. Some people would still likely tragically lose their lives or sustain lasting damage - this should be minimised. The strength of each country is in large part, its people. They should be given the fullest respect, care and service from their leaders that they rightfully deserve. " Yes, I agree with this. Strong non punitive measures (forced quarantine isn't punishment, it's treatment). Robust support, and proportionate punishment of rule breakers. Punishment of leaders that fuck up in proportion with the rivers of blood that they inflict upon us | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away."  and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to. "... And this is how the virus spreads. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it " But where does it end? What if they decide to imprison infected patients? What if they decided to exterminate infected patients? For the good of us all? No. I’m not happy with the route this is taking AT ALL. If they outlined an exit strategy- fine. But at the moment all we see is imposition upon imposition. So I agree- I’m also glad you aren’t in charge. Ethnic cleansing.... cleansing people on the basis of health- it’s the same side of the same grubby little coin, as far as I’m concerned. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to. "People don't need to keep pushing, its a choice. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
... And this is how the virus spreads."That’s exactly how propaganda works- blame the “other” for the disease. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
People don't need to keep pushing, its a choice."Oh I absolutely agree. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
... And this is how the virus spreads.
That’s exactly how propaganda works- blame the “other” for the disease. "So. How does the virus spread? | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it " Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
People don't need to keep pushing, its a choice.
Oh I absolutely agree. "A choice between being selfish and being responsible. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
... And this is how the virus spreads.
That’s exactly how propaganda works- blame the “other” for the disease.
So. How does the virus spread?"As far as I am aware it’s through droplets transmitted by things like cough, sneeze, shouting and stuff like that- via saliva. I’m not an expert (as you may have already guessed!!) That’s not really my point though - the death rate from this thing is minimal. We have Covid wards laying empty. We have people terrified of stepping outside of their front door. With a recovery rate so high, we need to get ourselves out of the fear zone. You are telling me to basically shut up, because you don’t like what I’m saying... telling me I’m the reason the virus spreads because I don’t agree with your viewpoint. Well..... statistically, I’m not so sure you can support your Black Death standpoint. And I do think you are being draconian. I have seen on other threads that you were taken ill with the Rona (oh yeah, I said it!! The Rona!) - maybe that is clouding your viewpoint. Just a suggestion. | |||
| |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now." And what do you propose we do in the meantime? | |||
"I have to say the majority on these threads have become so sanctimonious and holier than though. I didn't expect the spanish inquisition. It does get kinda boring being lectured to all the time about how we should or shouldn't behave. The more you do it, the more I want to rebel LOL. " Just be sensible and be careful of the risks . That's all we do really. Just common sense really. To many people are just griped by fear with this virus. Fuck I would hate to live in Australia. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now. And what do you propose we do in the meantime? " Keep calm and carry on with our lives  | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
People don't need to keep pushing, its a choice.
Oh I absolutely agree.
A choice between being selfish and being responsible."So you would accept a dictatorial government to save a few theoretical lives? Is that correct? | |||
"The answer probably lies somewhere in between. We can't save everyone and it is pointless trying. It's a virus and does what virus's do." I agree. We're so used to there being a cure for nearly everything that this has knocked the wind out of a lot of people's sails. A lot more people are going to catch it, a lot more will die, a lot more will suffer long term effects. We need to adapt. I don't think that throwing the elderly and vulnerable to the lions is the answer. As my mum says "I'm going to die soon anyway but I'd rather not die of this". It's the mark of a civilised society that we care for the vulnerable surely. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now." Sure. And the less background risk we have in the population, the more we can have our lives back in the meantime. So if we reduce outside risks (quarantine, actually enforced), and do what we can to reduce the risk we pose ourselves, we'll get there faster. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now. And what do you propose we do in the meantime? Keep calm and carry on with our lives "lol we are on the same team then! Thank god for that  | |||
| |||
"So... risk reduction is holier than thou. So... wanting to reduce the risk to the general population via long established principles of quarantine, which is being shown to work in Australia and New Zealand, is treating people with Covid-19 as different, which is bad, which is (hop, skip, jump, leap) like ethnic cleansing. Apparently I'm irrational, although treating someone who's had Covid-19 as different is bad, because I've had Covid-19. Apparently, as an Australian (who understands the ins and outs of the way the slang forms), I'm going to be offended by the use of "Rona", which is the established Australian slang for Covid-19. Is that right?" We have had it . Now we are getting on with our lives. We dont dictate to anyone else. Everybody has a different reality. You seem to want to push yours onto other people. We have to work. At the height of the virus my wife was seeing death on a daily basis But she wont dictate to anyone hos to live their lifes. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now. Sure. And the less background risk we have in the population, the more we can have our lives back in the meantime. So if we reduce outside risks (quarantine, actually enforced), and do what we can to reduce the risk we pose ourselves, we'll get there faster." I 100% get that. My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. At the beginning of the whole drama, I was all for it. I was so strict- protecting others was my main game. I lost so much due to the new rules.. my entire income, as a self employed person, for example, was halted. I’m lucky I had family to help me out. At the time I said to myself- do this now and it will be over sooner. But I feel like we are kidding ourselves- the death rate keeps falling, the Covid wards are empty, but we as a country are still living in terror. | |||
"So... risk reduction is holier than thou. So... wanting to reduce the risk to the general population via long established principles of quarantine, which is being shown to work in Australia and New Zealand, is treating people with Covid-19 as different, which is bad, which is (hop, skip, jump, leap) like ethnic cleansing. Apparently I'm irrational, although treating someone who's had Covid-19 as different is bad, because I've had Covid-19. Apparently, as an Australian (who understands the ins and outs of the way the slang forms), I'm going to be offended by the use of "Rona", which is the established Australian slang for Covid-19. Is that right? We have had it . Now we are getting on with our lives. We dont dictate to anyone else. Everybody has a different reality. You seem to want to push yours onto other people. We have to work. At the height of the virus my wife was seeing death on a daily basis But she wont dictate to anyone hos to live their lifes." Public health is communal responsibility. I see it every day in the suffering faced by the people I assist. I have my views. You have yours. I'm not stopping you expressing your views. I can't, and I don't want to. But I'm allowed to express mine. I want my life back. I'm not going to get it back until we have a vaccine or an extremely low rate of infection in the community. None of us will, entirely. I am doing my bit and reducing my contact with other people to almost zero. I would take on the risk for other people, but I cannot. You may make of that what you will. That is, as always, your prerogative. I will make of things what I will, and express my view. That is, as always, my prerogative. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now. Sure. And the less background risk we have in the population, the more we can have our lives back in the meantime. So if we reduce outside risks (quarantine, actually enforced), and do what we can to reduce the risk we pose ourselves, we'll get there faster. I 100% get that. My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. At the beginning of the whole drama, I was all for it. I was so strict- protecting others was my main game. I lost so much due to the new rules.. my entire income, as a self employed person, for example, was halted. I’m lucky I had family to help me out. At the time I said to myself- do this now and it will be over sooner. But I feel like we are kidding ourselves- the death rate keeps falling, the Covid wards are empty, but we as a country are still living in terror. " I think we're broadly in agreement on whether the government can be trusted. I don't do it much here, but I also follow people who talk about judicial review of government action taken throughout this. I was super behind the government when this started. Now, I am not. They can't distinguish their arse from their elbow. I just think if we had knuckled down with an *actual* lockdown at the start (at the start we all were technically under house arrest), if quarantine entering the country had been strict, and if testing had been better, we could be almost out of this. Like New Zealand or Australia. I don't trust politicians. I do know that quarantine and testing is the answer here. | |||
"So... risk reduction is holier than thou. So... wanting to reduce the risk to the general population via long established principles of quarantine, which is being shown to work in Australia and New Zealand, is treating people with Covid-19 as different, which is bad, which is (hop, skip, jump, leap) like ethnic cleansing. Apparently I'm irrational, although treating someone who's had Covid-19 as different is bad, because I've had Covid-19. Apparently, as an Australian (who understands the ins and outs of the way the slang forms), I'm going to be offended by the use of "Rona", which is the established Australian slang for Covid-19. Is that right?" Im not aware of any comparable quarrantine of this scale- happy to be corrected though. Im asking you where does it end- interesting that you would rather deflect than answer the question. As for you being Australian, I have no idea where you are from or what your history is. As for the term “the Rona”, I also have no idea where it originated from and I don’t really care. I have no idea why I should, tbh? | |||
"So... risk reduction is holier than thou. So... wanting to reduce the risk to the general population via long established principles of quarantine, which is being shown to work in Australia and New Zealand, is treating people with Covid-19 as different, which is bad, which is (hop, skip, jump, leap) like ethnic cleansing. Apparently I'm irrational, although treating someone who's had Covid-19 as different is bad, because I've had Covid-19. Apparently, as an Australian (who understands the ins and outs of the way the slang forms), I'm going to be offended by the use of "Rona", which is the established Australian slang for Covid-19. Is that right? We have had it . Now we are getting on with our lives. We dont dictate to anyone else. Everybody has a different reality. You seem to want to push yours onto other people. We have to work. At the height of the virus my wife was seeing death on a daily basis But she wont dictate to anyone hos to live their lifes. Public health is communal responsibility. I see it every day in the suffering faced by the people I assist. I have my views. You have yours. I'm not stopping you expressing your views. I can't, and I don't want to. But I'm allowed to express mine. I want my life back. I'm not going to get it back until we have a vaccine or an extremely low rate of infection in the community. None of us will, entirely. I am doing my bit and reducing my contact with other people to almost zero. I would take on the risk for other people, but I cannot. You may make of that what you will. That is, as always, your prerogative. I will make of things what I will, and express my view. That is, as always, my prerogative." I can agree with what your are saying. But then you post stuff about people wanting to go to spain of pubs. It's their choice. Obviously they should follow quarantine guidelines after a holiday. Or test and trace if they go for a meal. The test and trace is quick and easy to do on your phone. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. I'm in support of doing what we need to do to get the virus under control. If I were in charge it would be only for that purpose and no other. And I'd put numerous safeguards into place to prevent abuse of power. I just want this over with. And saying "I donwanna stay home" is only going to prolong it Its wont be over until we have a vaccine or the virus mutated in to some even less lethal than in is now. Sure. And the less background risk we have in the population, the more we can have our lives back in the meantime. So if we reduce outside risks (quarantine, actually enforced), and do what we can to reduce the risk we pose ourselves, we'll get there faster. I 100% get that. My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. At the beginning of the whole drama, I was all for it. I was so strict- protecting others was my main game. I lost so much due to the new rules.. my entire income, as a self employed person, for example, was halted. I’m lucky I had family to help me out. At the time I said to myself- do this now and it will be over sooner. But I feel like we are kidding ourselves- the death rate keeps falling, the Covid wards are empty, but we as a country are still living in terror. I think we're broadly in agreement on whether the government can be trusted. I don't do it much here, but I also follow people who talk about judicial review of government action taken throughout this. I was super behind the government when this started. Now, I am not. They can't distinguish their arse from their elbow. I just think if we had knuckled down with an *actual* lockdown at the start (at the start we all were technically under house arrest), if quarantine entering the country had been strict, and if testing had been better, we could be almost out of this. Like New Zealand or Australia. I don't trust politicians. I do know that quarantine and testing is the answer here." You are so disparaging of everyones efforts though. Make out as if Australia has got it oh so right. Well if they had it oh so right, why did they go ahead with the Australian open and the Melbourne Grand prix which is probably why there is an endemic problem in Melbourne right now. It was obvious even then that they were inviting trouble holding a Pan asian sporting event with people from all over that part of the world coming to see a major sporting event. So you see Australian Politicians haven't been that marvellous have they ? | |||
"I can agree with what your are saying. But then you post stuff about people wanting to go to spain of pubs. It's their choice. Obviously they should follow quarantine guidelines after a holiday. Or test and trace if they go for a meal. The test and trace is quick and easy to do on your phone." Some people (I've overheard them talking myself) choose not to quarantine. Some people fake things on their phone. Test and trace uptake has been low and isn't doing its job. I just think that minimising risk - and I'm not saying that everyone should be locked at home and given food parcels from the army, I'm saying people should be mindful of a global health crisis and think of others - is the answer here. Every choice has knock on effects. Someone gave me Covid-19 despite me only going to the supermarket (probably while I was waiting for my masks to arrive in April - which was my choice to order long before it became the norm here). We're all in this together, like it or not. Do I want to restrict everyone's freedom? No. But I want to be able to release the vulnerable people I assist who have been prisoners in their homes since February or March (no that's not changing). I want the general public to have advice they can trust. I want my life back. I want us all to have our lives back. And just taking my life back isn't going to help us get out of this mess. | |||
"So... risk reduction is holier than thou. So... wanting to reduce the risk to the general population via long established principles of quarantine, which is being shown to work in Australia and New Zealand, is treating people with Covid-19 as different, which is bad, which is (hop, skip, jump, leap) like ethnic cleansing. Apparently I'm irrational, although treating someone who's had Covid-19 as different is bad, because I've had Covid-19. Apparently, as an Australian (who understands the ins and outs of the way the slang forms), I'm going to be offended by the use of "Rona", which is the established Australian slang for Covid-19. Is that right? We have had it . Now we are getting on with our lives. We dont dictate to anyone else. Everybody has a different reality. You seem to want to push yours onto other people. We have to work. At the height of the virus my wife was seeing death on a daily basis But she wont dictate to anyone hos to live their lifes. Public health is communal responsibility. I see it every day in the suffering faced by the people I assist. I have my views. You have yours. I'm not stopping you expressing your views. I can't, and I don't want to. But I'm allowed to express mine. I want my life back. I'm not going to get it back until we have a vaccine or an extremely low rate of infection in the community. None of us will, entirely. I am doing my bit and reducing my contact with other people to almost zero. I would take on the risk for other people, but I cannot. You may make of that what you will. That is, as always, your prerogative. I will make of things what I will, and express my view. That is, as always, my prerogative. I can agree with what your are saying. But then you post stuff about people wanting to go to spain of pubs. It's their choice. Obviously they should follow quarantine guidelines after a holiday. Or test and trace if they go for a meal. The test and trace is quick and easy to do on your phone." This is the frustrating thing for me about these conversations- I absolutely agree with the last two posts made- we all need to work together to get things back to normal. What my particular issue is- I’m not sure that we ever will! And people will keep bending ever over backwards to achieve this goal. As long as there is no exit strategy there will be no end to this shit. And that is why the people need to keep pushing, instead of accepting and hoping. I hope that clarifies my position, since it seems we are actually more or less singing from the same Choir sheet. | |||
" You are so disparaging of everyones efforts though. Make out as if Australia has got it oh so right. Well if they had it oh so right, why did they go ahead with the Australian open and the Melbourne Grand prix which is probably why there is an endemic problem in Melbourne right now. It was obvious even then that they were inviting trouble holding a Pan asian sporting event with people from all over that part of the world coming to see a major sporting event. So you see Australian Politicians haven't been that marvellous have they ?" I'm making a comparison. You want me to rip into Australia? OK. Scotty from Marketing, who hopes to be a big boy like John Howard when he grows up, happened to get it right with Australia's unwise hostile stance towards China when he imposed quarantine. Idiots are occasionally right. "Every job is essential?" ScoMo don't make me laugh you moron. He had to be bullied by Gladys and Dan to get his bloody act together. The states blaming NSW for the Ruby Princess - sure, a huge fuck up. But then complacency on their own part. The private contractors in Melbourne boning the woman in quarantine. Christ. That fucking moron breaking the state closure and going to one pub in Sydney because they thought it was safe - thanks, idiot, now my family are in danger. Make you feel any better? I can hate on Australia for days. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. " Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed." I think people are powerless and feel scared. This is where conspiracy theories abound. Particularly when governments are showing themselves to be untrustworthy. Public health requires a bunch of unpleasant measures. But we can hold the government to account at a safe distance with our masks on. | |||
"I think whats more interesting is the willingness of the general public to spend unimaginable amounts of money on saving not very many people, regardless of age. Estimates on the cost of Covid so far to the UK are in the order of £390bn (source: OBR, Aug 2020). This will undoubtably increase, not to mention the knock on effects on the economy and impending cataclysmic recession, unemployment, borrowing, etc. Lets say the total cost is going to be £500bn - it will probably be more, but its a nice round number! Scientists predict that lockdown and the other mitigations put in place saved approximately 470,000 lives in the UK (source: Nature, Jul 2020), giving a total cost for each life saved of £1.06m. Now, imagine this... there is a fatal disease affecting 0.007% of the UK population. It is entirely cureable, but it costs £1.06m to treat each individual. Do we think that treatment would be available on the NHS? (spoiler alert: nope) Another way of looking at it... Cancer Research UK's annual spending is approximately £500m (source: CRUK 2019 annual report). That means we could fund 1000 YEARS of cancer research for the cost of the Covid mitigation measures. I'm betting that in that time, we'd have a cure for cancer, and that would save immeasurably more pain and suffering for centuries to come when compared to 470,000 Covid deaths. This becomes even more of a no-brainer when you look at the demographics of those affected by Covid vs those affected by cancer, and the metric of lifetime increase as opposed to a simple mortality figure. Not an easy conversation to have, and I'm forever glad I'm not the one making the decisions, but the truth is sometimes unpleasant." Good Post shame it was overlooked in this discussion as it highlights the true costs from the health provisions and stand point. That's before the rest of the devastation lockdown caused both the people and economy. The council I work for are erecting barriers at the cliff edge of a local beauty spot as we are now averaging 2 suicide jumpers every week instead a few a year. It's young and old many who we knew personally from our council services and support project. Their lives, mental health, jobs, livelihood, businesses etc have been destroyed by the lockdown and subsequently measures. KJ | |||
"I think whats more interesting is the willingness of the general public to spend unimaginable amounts of money on saving not very many people, regardless of age. Estimates on the cost of Covid so far to the UK are in the order of £390bn (source: OBR, Aug 2020). This will undoubtably increase, not to mention the knock on effects on the economy and impending cataclysmic recession, unemployment, borrowing, etc. Lets say the total cost is going to be £500bn - it will probably be more, but its a nice round number! Scientists predict that lockdown and the other mitigations put in place saved approximately 470,000 lives in the UK (source: Nature, Jul 2020), giving a total cost for each life saved of £1.06m. Now, imagine this... there is a fatal disease affecting 0.007% of the UK population. It is entirely cureable, but it costs £1.06m to treat each individual. Do we think that treatment would be available on the NHS? (spoiler alert: nope) Another way of looking at it... Cancer Research UK's annual spending is approximately £500m (source: CRUK 2019 annual report). That means we could fund 1000 YEARS of cancer research for the cost of the Covid mitigation measures. I'm betting that in that time, we'd have a cure for cancer, and that would save immeasurably more pain and suffering for centuries to come when compared to 470,000 Covid deaths. This becomes even more of a no-brainer when you look at the demographics of those affected by Covid vs those affected by cancer, and the metric of lifetime increase as opposed to a simple mortality figure. Not an easy conversation to have, and I'm forever glad I'm not the one making the decisions, but the truth is sometimes unpleasant. Good Post shame it was overlooked in this discussion as it highlights the true costs from the health provisions and stand point. That's before the rest of the devastation lockdown caused both the people and economy. The council I work for are erecting barriers at the cliff edge of a local beauty spot as we are now averaging 2 suicide jumpers every week instead a few a year. It's young and old many who we knew personally from our council services and support project. Their lives, mental health, jobs, livelihood, businesses etc have been destroyed by the lockdown and subsequently measures. KJ" Suicide rates are rising up here in Newcastle too. It will only get worse . | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed." Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. I think people are powerless and feel scared. This is where conspiracy theories abound. Particularly when governments are showing themselves to be untrustworthy. Public health requires a bunch of unpleasant measures. But we can hold the government to account at a safe distance with our masks on." I pretty much agree, except for the last sentence. The way democracy should work is- we hold the government to account and *then* we follow orders | |||
"I think whats more interesting is the willingness of the general public to spend unimaginable amounts of money on saving not very many people, regardless of age. Estimates on the cost of Covid so far to the UK are in the order of £390bn (source: OBR, Aug 2020). This will undoubtably increase, not to mention the knock on effects on the economy and impending cataclysmic recession, unemployment, borrowing, etc. Lets say the total cost is going to be £500bn - it will probably be more, but its a nice round number! Scientists predict that lockdown and the other mitigations put in place saved approximately 470,000 lives in the UK (source: Nature, Jul 2020), giving a total cost for each life saved of £1.06m. Now, imagine this... there is a fatal disease affecting 0.007% of the UK population. It is entirely cureable, but it costs £1.06m to treat each individual. Do we think that treatment would be available on the NHS? (spoiler alert: nope) Another way of looking at it... Cancer Research UK's annual spending is approximately £500m (source: CRUK 2019 annual report). That means we could fund 1000 YEARS of cancer research for the cost of the Covid mitigation measures. I'm betting that in that time, we'd have a cure for cancer, and that would save immeasurably more pain and suffering for centuries to come when compared to 470,000 Covid deaths. This becomes even more of a no-brainer when you look at the demographics of those affected by Covid vs those affected by cancer, and the metric of lifetime increase as opposed to a simple mortality figure. Not an easy conversation to have, and I'm forever glad I'm not the one making the decisions, but the truth is sometimes unpleasant. Good Post shame it was overlooked in this discussion as it highlights the true costs from the health provisions and stand point. That's before the rest of the devastation lockdown caused both the people and economy. The council I work for are erecting barriers at the cliff edge of a local beauty spot as we are now averaging 2 suicide jumpers every week instead a few a year. It's young and old many who we knew personally from our council services and support project. Their lives, mental health, jobs, livelihood, businesses etc have been destroyed by the lockdown and subsequently measures. KJ Suicide rates are rising up here in Newcastle too. It will only get worse . " It's heart breaking we forget whole industries are still unable to trade yet. Our death rates from covid are so low now I.E single daily figures nationwide that we will end up in a situation soon if not already where we will be losing more people to excess suicide rates directly caused by anti covid restrictions. Sad but its the truth. Add to that all the extra deaths caused by delayed treatments and people still to terrifed to go to A and E. The government played this thing the apocalypse and now people are terrified of something that has a very low mortality rate. The fact infections have risen but deaths have dropped right down suggest its mutating to be weaker as well. KJ | |||
| |||
| |||
"I think whats more interesting is the willingness of the general public to spend unimaginable amounts of money on saving not very many people, regardless of age. Estimates on the cost of Covid so far to the UK are in the order of £390bn (source: OBR, Aug 2020). This will undoubtably increase, not to mention the knock on effects on the economy and impending cataclysmic recession, unemployment, borrowing, etc. Lets say the total cost is going to be £500bn - it will probably be more, but its a nice round number! Scientists predict that lockdown and the other mitigations put in place saved approximately 470,000 lives in the UK (source: Nature, Jul 2020), giving a total cost for each life saved of £1.06m. Now, imagine this... there is a fatal disease affecting 0.007% of the UK population. It is entirely cureable, but it costs £1.06m to treat each individual. Do we think that treatment would be available on the NHS? (spoiler alert: nope) Another way of looking at it... Cancer Research UK's annual spending is approximately £500m (source: CRUK 2019 annual report). That means we could fund 1000 YEARS of cancer research for the cost of the Covid mitigation measures. I'm betting that in that time, we'd have a cure for cancer, and that would save immeasurably more pain and suffering for centuries to come when compared to 470,000 Covid deaths. This becomes even more of a no-brainer when you look at the demographics of those affected by Covid vs those affected by cancer, and the metric of lifetime increase as opposed to a simple mortality figure. Not an easy conversation to have, and I'm forever glad I'm not the one making the decisions, but the truth is sometimes unpleasant. Good Post shame it was overlooked in this discussion as it highlights the true costs from the health provisions and stand point. That's before the rest of the devastation lockdown caused both the people and economy. The council I work for are erecting barriers at the cliff edge of a local beauty spot as we are now averaging 2 suicide jumpers every week instead a few a year. It's young and old many who we knew personally from our council services and support project. Their lives, mental health, jobs, livelihood, businesses etc have been destroyed by the lockdown and subsequently measures. KJ Suicide rates are rising up here in Newcastle too. It will only get worse . It's heart breaking we forget whole industries are still unable to trade yet. Our death rates from covid are so low now I.E single daily figures nationwide that we will end up in a situation soon if not already where we will be losing more people to excess suicide rates directly caused by anti covid restrictions. Sad but its the truth. Add to that all the extra deaths caused by delayed treatments and people still to terrifed to go to A and E. The government played this thing the apocalypse and now people are terrified of something that has a very low mortality rate. The fact infections have risen but deaths have dropped right down suggest its mutating to be weaker as well. KJ " I honestly do think the government has scared the living daylights out of people. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. I think people are powerless and feel scared. This is where conspiracy theories abound. Particularly when governments are showing themselves to be untrustworthy. Public health requires a bunch of unpleasant measures. But we can hold the government to account at a safe distance with our masks on. I pretty much agree, except for the last sentence. The way democracy should work is- we hold the government to account and *then* we follow orders" I don't distance/ wear a mask because the government told me to. I do it because I understand the risks, have looked into it myself from reputable sources (I've been ignoring the government since April), and don't want to hurt people. | |||
"The media plays its part though- they could be assuring us, with the actual facts. But would that sell papers? The media has played a massive place in hyping the fear instead of sending out actual information. " Entirely agree. Why I'm ignoring. | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? What do you think the policy should be ? Well it does seem to me that there are a relatively small number of people that are happy to put the lives of many at risk. Justice would seem better served to make those few pay the price, rather than a much greater number of innocent people who have gone through months of hardship and sacrifice, made much harder by the actions of those few." Is there a social responsibility not to catch the virus ? Regardless of what others are doing if you socially distance, wear masks in public places and keep good hand hygene you won’t catch it or many other bugs. It’s not in the flipping water | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. " Well the rules were there to drive down the infection rates amongst the most vulnerable. That's started to pay off now and they've slowly started easing the restrictions, essentially to see what happens next I think. As for an exit strategy, I don't think any government in the world has one of those at the moment - they're dealing with the here and now. Personally, there have been some low points (Cummings etc) and massive mistakes (care homes) have been made and it appears that no fucker can count in a sensible manner any more (I'd quite happily throttle anyone who attacks me with an unsheathed percentage these days). We're just going to have to play this one by ear for now, but, as I pointed out above, there's absolutely no value to any government on the planet to keep the rules in place any longer than they need to... | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. I think people are powerless and feel scared. This is where conspiracy theories abound. Particularly when governments are showing themselves to be untrustworthy. Public health requires a bunch of unpleasant measures. But we can hold the government to account at a safe distance with our masks on. I pretty much agree, except for the last sentence. The way democracy should work is- we hold the government to account and *then* we follow orders I don't distance/ wear a mask because the government told me to. I do it because I understand the risks, have looked into it myself from reputable sources (I've been ignoring the government since April), and don't want to hurt people." I don’t want to hurt people either, and I’m entirely respectful of people’s fears. I keep my distance when I am with them. I think there is this middle ground where people like me understand people’s fear but can mitigate it against actual risk and say- okay- I will socially distance, but I’m not going to wear a mask. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. Well the rules were there to drive down the infection rates amongst the most vulnerable. That's started to pay off now and they've slowly started easing the restrictions, essentially to see what happens next I think. As for an exit strategy, I don't think any government in the world has one of those at the moment - they're dealing with the here and now. Personally, there have been some low points (Cummings etc) and massive mistakes (care homes) have been made and it appears that no fucker can count in a sensible manner any more (I'd quite happily throttle anyone who attacks me with an unsheathed percentage these days). We're just going to have to play this one by ear for now, but, as I pointed out above, there's absolutely no value to any government on the planet to keep the rules in place any longer than they need to..." Again- I absolutely agree until the final paragraph. Can you please tell me any other society in the known history of man that has deliberately hidden the faces of its population? By law? | |||
"Covid was so prevailant in society during Jan/Feb/Mar that I don’t think we had any other choice but to lock down, it was everywhere, silently spreading and taking down people with pneumonia of unknown origin (me included). That said, the peak was in mid-April (and it was not as bad as what was expected) yet we are still living in what feels at times to be under nanny state conditions. 2m when the WHO said 1m, face masks in shops, track & trace in pubs, restaurants, hairdressers, beuticians etc, limits on who you can see one day yet you can see other people from other households the day after. You couldn’t write some of this shit. As a middle-aged hard working tax payer, I know I’m going to be picking up the bill for this until the day I retire - which will no doubt be moved to recoup some of the financial loss to the country. Due to lockdown, thousands of people have lost their jobs, hundreds of businesses have gone under and worst of all, gallons and gallons of beer we’re poured down the drain (joke). That’s some price to pay to protect a sector of society that could have still been protected without such a devastating and long lockdown. I’m privy to facts that cannot be shared, but what the general public are being led to believe and what actually happened are two very different things. If/when the public find out the truth, the shit will hit the fan. I’ll finish off with this After purchasing millions of antibody testing kits that are 98% accurate, why haven’t the Government sent them out to the general public? 98% is pretty damn good when it comes to investigating something. It’s because they are shit scared of what they’ll find. Covid has been here for a while " I work for council who block purchased those 98% antibody tests for staff. Over 1000 staff were tested. The total results have not been disclosed to staff outside of Gold Command. We were only told our own result. Out of everyone I work closely with and know personally enough to share results with i.e about 25 people only 3 tested negative for antibodies. Make of that what you will. When i had covid19 I did 2 tests at the drive to centres 1 was negative and the 2nd inconclusive. I was told by the test centre tester and NHS 111 accuracy is only 70% at best (common knowledge). 6 weeks later I was positive on the antibody test I mentioned above which is 98% acurate. KJ | |||
" Is there a social responsibility not to catch the virus ? Regardless of what others are doing if you socially distance, wear masks in public places and keep good hand hygene you won’t catch it or many other bugs. It’s not in the flipping water " Shhhhh - the lizard people will hear... 
I'd say that following the basic rules would keep most people out of harms reach. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. Well the rules were there to drive down the infection rates amongst the most vulnerable. That's started to pay off now and they've slowly started easing the restrictions, essentially to see what happens next I think. As for an exit strategy, I don't think any government in the world has one of those at the moment - they're dealing with the here and now. Personally, there have been some low points (Cummings etc) and massive mistakes (care homes) have been made and it appears that no fucker can count in a sensible manner any more (I'd quite happily throttle anyone who attacks me with an unsheathed percentage these days). We're just going to have to play this one by ear for now, but, as I pointed out above, there's absolutely no value to any government on the planet to keep the rules in place any longer than they need to... Again- I absolutely agree until the final paragraph. Can you please tell me any other society in the known history of man that has deliberately hidden the faces of its population? By law?" Where they stone people for not wearing the face covering, for example? I mean- it’s a long way off, but a slippery slope has to start somewhere, doesn’t it? And where better than the “diseased”. | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. Well the rules were there to drive down the infection rates amongst the most vulnerable. That's started to pay off now and they've slowly started easing the restrictions, essentially to see what happens next I think. As for an exit strategy, I don't think any government in the world has one of those at the moment - they're dealing with the here and now. Personally, there have been some low points (Cummings etc) and massive mistakes (care homes) have been made and it appears that no fucker can count in a sensible manner any more (I'd quite happily throttle anyone who attacks me with an unsheathed percentage these days). We're just going to have to play this one by ear for now, but, as I pointed out above, there's absolutely no value to any government on the planet to keep the rules in place any longer than they need to... Again- I absolutely agree until the final paragraph. Can you please tell me any other society in the known history of man that has deliberately hidden the faces of its population? By law?" Shariah (is that how you spell it?). The mask thing is just unfortunate - covid uses the respiratory system as its way in and out, therefore we need to cover up at the moment. If it was purely by touch then we'd all be wearing gloves instead. | |||
| |||
"A much more pertinent question is should we bring back the death penalty for disobeying lockdown or quarantine for those who are positive and go to work." Death penalty is a bit extreme
A potential £10,000 fine would probably focus the mind suitably and remove any "misunderstanding".
I do wonder if intentional infections shoukd be treated as manslaughter though... | |||
"A much more pertinent question is should we bring back the death penalty for disobeying lockdown or quarantine for those who are positive and go to work." | |||
"A much more pertinent question is should we bring back the death penalty for disobeying lockdown or quarantine for those who are positive and go to work." Or for leaders who knowingly work against the best interests of the people | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? What do you think the policy should be ? Well it does seem to me that there are a relatively small number of people that are happy to put the lives of many at risk. Justice would seem better served to make those few pay the price, rather than a much greater number of innocent people who have gone through months of hardship and sacrifice, made much harder by the actions of those few. Is there a social responsibility not to catch the virus ? Regardless of what others are doing if you socially distance, wear masks in public places and keep good hand hygene you won’t catch it or many other bugs. It’s not in the flipping water " Could you provide evidence of this? .
Many people don't live alone and won't be socially distanced at every moment of the day. As many people have no symptoms, people will often be around others who they will infect.
Good luck with enforcing people to be unable to contract a miniscule virus particle at every moment of their lives | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? What do you think the policy should be ? Well it does seem to me that there are a relatively small number of people that are happy to put the lives of many at risk. Justice would seem better served to make those few pay the price, rather than a much greater number of innocent people who have gone through months of hardship and sacrifice, made much harder by the actions of those few." | |||
" ... And this is how the virus spreads." I don't know if you really don't understand or just don't want to understand. Hiding from covid will not make it go away. You are NEVER going to quarantine covid out of existance - New Zealand is proof of that. No matter what we do the virus will spread, sooner or later. It will infect anyone who's succeptable to it. Hiding will not prevent that, it will only make it take longer. There is no sign of mass hospitalizations, even in countries seeing a rapid upswing in infections. There is evidence that many more than originally thought have some degree of pre-existing resistance to covid, likewise evidence that many more than originally thought are asymptomatic. I am not callous. We should do our best to protect those most vulnerable BUT we cannot, should not and must not allow that desire to be the only consideration - the rest of the population must live their lives and must have a quality of life worth living. We can't exist on government handouts forever. | |||
"I think whats more interesting is the willingness of the general public to spend unimaginable amounts of money on saving not very many people, regardless of age. Estimates on the cost of Covid so far to the UK are in the order of £390bn (source: OBR, Aug 2020). This will undoubtably increase, not to mention the knock on effects on the economy and impending cataclysmic recession, unemployment, borrowing, etc. Lets say the total cost is going to be £500bn - it will probably be more, but its a nice round number! Scientists predict that lockdown and the other mitigations put in place saved approximately 470,000 lives in the UK (source: Nature, Jul 2020), giving a total cost for each life saved of £1.06m. Now, imagine this... there is a fatal disease affecting 0.007% of the UK population. It is entirely cureable, but it costs £1.06m to treat each individual. Do we think that treatment would be available on the NHS? (spoiler alert: nope) Another way of looking at it... Cancer Research UK's annual spending is approximately £500m (source: CRUK 2019 annual report). That means we could fund 1000 YEARS of cancer research for the cost of the Covid mitigation measures. I'm betting that in that time, we'd have a cure for cancer, and that would save immeasurably more pain and suffering for centuries to come when compared to 470,000 Covid deaths. This becomes even more of a no-brainer when you look at the demographics of those affected by Covid vs those affected by cancer, and the metric of lifetime increase as opposed to a simple mortality figure. Not an easy conversation to have, and I'm forever glad I'm not the one making the decisions, but the truth is sometimes unpleasant." I really could not agree more. | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to. " | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
... And this is how the virus spreads.
That’s exactly how propaganda works- blame the “other” for the disease. " | |||
"Public health measures need to be Draconian. I'd trust most of the Australian politicians a touch more than British politicians, which is, not at all. But if we eliminate the threat we can have our lives back. If we don't, we can't. Well I for one am glad you are not in charge but I accept you are entitled to your opinion as am I, at the moment. That could change though if a more dictatorial stance is taken in the future which I personally think is just a few months away. and that is exactly why people need to keep pushing against the tide, despite the peer pressure not to.
... And this is how the virus spreads.
That’s exactly how propaganda works- blame the “other” for the disease.
So. How does the virus spread?
As far as I am aware it’s through droplets transmitted by things like cough, sneeze, shouting and stuff like that- via saliva. I’m not an expert (as you may have already guessed!!)
That’s not really my point though - the death rate from this thing is minimal. We have Covid wards laying empty. We have people terrified of stepping outside of their front door. With a recovery rate so high, we need to get ourselves out of the fear zone. You are telling me to basically shut up, because you don’t like what I’m saying... telling me I’m the reason the virus spreads because I don’t agree with your viewpoint. Well..... statistically, I’m not so sure you can support your Black Death standpoint. And I do think you are being draconian. I have seen on other threads that you were taken ill with the Rona (oh yeah, I said it!! The Rona!) - maybe that is clouding your viewpoint. Just a suggestion.
" | |||
"I have to say the majority on these threads have become so sanctimonious and holier than though. I didn't expect the spanish inquisition. It does get kinda boring being lectured to all the time about how we should or shouldn't behave. The more you do it, the more I want to rebel LOL. " | |||
"I think whats more interesting is the willingness of the general public to spend unimaginable amounts of money on saving not very many people, regardless of age. Estimates on the cost of Covid so far to the UK are in the order of £390bn (source: OBR, Aug 2020). This will undoubtably increase, not to mention the knock on effects on the economy and impending cataclysmic recession, unemployment, borrowing, etc. Lets say the total cost is going to be £500bn - it will probably be more, but its a nice round number! Scientists predict that lockdown and the other mitigations put in place saved approximately 470,000 lives in the UK (source: Nature, Jul 2020), giving a total cost for each life saved of £1.06m. Now, imagine this... there is a fatal disease affecting 0.007% of the UK population. It is entirely cureable, but it costs £1.06m to treat each individual. Do we think that treatment would be available on the NHS? (spoiler alert: nope) Another way of looking at it... Cancer Research UK's annual spending is approximately £500m (source: CRUK 2019 annual report). That means we could fund 1000 YEARS of cancer research for the cost of the Covid mitigation measures. I'm betting that in that time, we'd have a cure for cancer, and that would save immeasurably more pain and suffering for centuries to come when compared to 470,000 Covid deaths. This becomes even more of a no-brainer when you look at the demographics of those affected by Covid vs those affected by cancer, and the metric of lifetime increase as opposed to a simple mortality figure. Not an easy conversation to have, and I'm forever glad I'm not the one making the decisions, but the truth is sometimes unpleasant. Good Post shame it was overlooked in this discussion as it highlights the true costs from the health provisions and stand point. That's before the rest of the devastation lockdown caused both the people and economy. The council I work for are erecting barriers at the cliff edge of a local beauty spot as we are now averaging 2 suicide jumpers every week instead a few a year. It's young and old many who we knew personally from our council services and support project. Their lives, mental health, jobs, livelihood, businesses etc have been destroyed by the lockdown and subsequently measures. KJ Suicide rates are rising up here in Newcastle too. It will only get worse . It's heart breaking we forget whole industries are still unable to trade yet. Our death rates from covid are so low now I.E single daily figures nationwide that we will end up in a situation soon if not already where we will be losing more people to excess suicide rates directly caused by anti covid restrictions. Sad but its the truth. Add to that all the extra deaths caused by delayed treatments and people still to terrifed to go to A and E. The government played this thing the apocalypse and now people are terrified of something that has a very low mortality rate. The fact infections have risen but deaths have dropped right down suggest its mutating to be weaker as well. KJ " | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. I think people are powerless and feel scared. This is where conspiracy theories abound. Particularly when governments are showing themselves to be untrustworthy. Public health requires a bunch of unpleasant measures. But we can hold the government to account at a safe distance with our masks on. I pretty much agree, except for the last sentence. The way democracy should work is- we hold the government to account and *then* we follow orders I don't distance/ wear a mask because the government told me to. I do it because I understand the risks, have looked into it myself from reputable sources (I've been ignoring the government since April), and don't want to hurt people. I don’t want to hurt people either, and I’m entirely respectful of people’s fears. I keep my distance when I am with them. I think there is this middle ground where people like me understand people’s fear but can mitigate it against actual risk and say- okay- I will socially distance, but I’m not going to wear a mask. " | |||
"I have to say the majority on these threads have become so sanctimonious and holier than though. I didn't expect the spanish inquisition. It does get kinda boring being lectured to all the time about how we should or shouldn't behave. The more you do it, the more I want to rebel LOL. Just be sensible and be careful of the risks . That's all we do really. Just common sense really. To many people are just griped by fear with this virus. Fuck I would hate to live in Australia. " totally | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"I'd do what they've done in Australia. I think at the beginning breaking lockdown in Sydney (except for specified reasons) carried a fine of up to $10 000. Australia is largely closed, and if you return you are in mandatory (your expense) quarantine for 14 days. I think it was still Sydney (NSW), this is run by the army. You get a hotel room and food/ essentials delivered. You must apply to leave (and I believe enter) Australia, and my understanding is that most requests to leave have been denied. You must have good reason. Their testing regime makes ours look like a joke. A lot of the messaging has been good (not all of it obviously). Eliminate threat. Reduce movement. Test, test, test." We have just returned to Australia from uk still in quarentine we get out on Tuesday Been tested 3 times now It’s good the way they are doing it to stop the spread shame the uk government are not taking the samehard line with people landing in the uk  | |||
| |||
"The vulnerable isn’t just some limited pool of people that will all die off and leave healthy people remaining only. There will always be healthy people becoming vulnerable. If you’ve been arguing that it just accelerated the death of people who would have died anyway. Then if we allow the virus to stay in circulation, it will accelerate the death of anyone who is health and becomes vulnerable at some point in time."
This in a nutshell, those who are happy to sacrifice the old, infirm and those with health conditions need to understand that age affects us all and most of the above will affect many of us..
Amongst all the good we've seen this far the entitlement, selfishness and arrogance in some albeit a minority is frankly abhorrent at times..
| |||
| |||
"The vulnerable isn’t just some limited pool of people that will all die off and leave healthy people remaining only. There will always be healthy people becoming vulnerable. If you’ve been arguing that it just accelerated the death of people who would have died anyway. Then if we allow the virus to stay in circulation, it will accelerate the death of anyone who is health and becomes vulnerable at some point in time.
This in a nutshell, those who are happy to sacrifice the old, infirm and those with health conditions need to understand that age affects us all and most of the above will affect many of us..
Amongst all the good we've seen this far the entitlement, selfishness and arrogance in some albeit a minority is frankly abhorrent at times..
"
I was saying only yesterday that I feel almost embarrassed to be part of the human race of late.
I don't know if we're just attracting people who lack the mental agility to cope with the current situation and are just lashing out or if we have become sociopath central.
| |||
| |||
| |||
"There comes a point where we have to stop hiding away and fearing for our lives. I don’t want to go over percentages of how many that this thing affects, but we’ve seen pictures of packed beaches, packed parks, BLM protests and by rights if this thing was the the new ‘Black Death’ we’d be opening up mass graves by the hundreds to bury people ! With no vaccine on the horizon there comes a point where you have to balance living an existence against living a life !" Hear hear! | |||
"There comes a point where we have to stop hiding away and fearing for our lives. I don’t want to go over percentages of how many that this thing affects, but we’ve seen pictures of packed beaches, packed parks, BLM protests and by rights if this thing was the the new ‘Black Death’ we’d be opening up mass graves by the hundreds to bury people ! With no vaccine on the horizon there comes a point where you have to balance living an existence against living a life ! Hear hear! " Heat minds and all that ! lol | |||
"There comes a point where we have to stop hiding away and fearing for our lives. I don’t want to go over percentages of how many that this thing affects, but we’ve seen pictures of packed beaches, packed parks, BLM protests and by rights if this thing was the the new ‘Black Death’ we’d be opening up mass graves by the hundreds to bury people ! With no vaccine on the horizon there comes a point where you have to balance living an existence against living a life !" Anyone with underlying health issues plus being elderly etc is possibly fearful and given how that demographic has been the hardest hit earlier in the pandemic I think totally understandably so given some of the mistakes made.. Had we not locked down, shielded other vulnerable people then yes the number would have been higher.. It's easy I know for us to all use hindsight now on whichever side we sit if the how's and why's and whilst I am critical of several things the government did had they not locked down the death toll would have been a lot higher and I don't think that would have been a price worth paying for us as a society.. | |||
| |||
"Is every one under 55 willing to go into semi isolation when they hit 55?" I’m retiring at 55 fuck that and I aim to misbehave. | |||
"Is every one under 55 willing to go into semi isolation when they hit 55? I’m retiring at 55 fuck that and I aim to misbehave. "That's what we did | |||
"Is every one under 55 willing to go into semi isolation when they hit 55?" Dont mention 55 on here ffs  | |||
"There comes a point where we have to stop hiding away and fearing for our lives. I don’t want to go over percentages of how many that this thing affects, but we’ve seen pictures of packed beaches, packed parks, BLM protests and by rights if this thing was the the new ‘Black Death’ we’d be opening up mass graves by the hundreds to bury people ! With no vaccine on the horizon there comes a point where you have to balance living an existence against living a life ! Anyone with underlying health issues plus being elderly etc is possibly fearful and given how that demographic has been the hardest hit earlier in the pandemic I think totally understandably so given some of the mistakes made.. Had we not locked down, shielded other vulnerable people then yes the number would have been higher.. It's easy I know for us to all use hindsight now on whichever side we sit if the how's and why's and whilst I am critical of several things the government did had they not locked down the death toll would have been a lot higher and I don't think that would have been a price worth paying for us as a society.." The reason we locked down was because the NHS had been badly run for decades and we had PPE out of date and a lack of ventilators, does everyone remember we were placing orders at the start of this pandemic for ventilators like kids buying sweets in a sweet shop. With no vaccine on the horizon there will come a point where most of the population will have had this thing and in a perverse way I think that’s what the government is hoping for, otherwise we are going to have lockdowns for the next two or three years for a virus we can’t eradicate ! Let’s not forget we’ve never found a vaccine for any Coronavirus as of yet and they’ve been trying to find one for SARS for 17 years ! | |||
"Is every one under 55 willing to go into semi isolation when they hit 55?" It needs to be full isolation. No visitors because the oldies could get infected. Too risky. Get the vulnerable locked up too. Youngsters gotta partaaay!  | |||
| |||
"Is every one under 55 willing to go into semi isolation when they hit 55? It needs to be full isolation. No visitors because the oldies could get infected. Too risky. Get the vulnerable locked up too. Youngsters gotta partaaay! "But, but I'm a youngster. In my head | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be?" The future of our children! I’d happily sacrifice myself for my children and everybody else’s | |||
"Two events have got my head scratching this weekend. One is a travellers horse fair down the road where for three days hundreds of people are all just associating together and having a good time with zero social distancing before splitting up and heading back all over the country and abroad. In a county with very high rates of infection. Two. The Football box park down in Wembley where fans are coming together with hardly any thought of social distancing before heading home all round the country. It’s all gone out the window. People are going back to normal. " I'm St Leonards which is down the road from Hastings they've recently held three big events. I have no idea how they managed regs at the fair or the circus. The other one was a kind of motorbike event which seemed more manageable to me. | |||
| |||
"Two events have got my head scratching this weekend. One is a travellers horse fair down the road where for three days hundreds of people are all just associating together and having a good time with zero social distancing before splitting up and heading back all over the country and abroad. In a county with very high rates of infection. Two. The Football box park down in Wembley where fans are coming together with hardly any thought of social distancing before heading home all round the country. It’s all gone out the window. People are going back to normal. I'm St Leonards which is down the road from Hastings they've recently held three big events. I have no idea how they managed regs at the fair or the circus. The other one was a kind of motorbike event which seemed more manageable to me. " In St Leonards that should say | |||
"Is every one under 55 willing to go into semi isolation when they hit 55? It needs to be full isolation. No visitors because the oldies could get infected. Too risky. Get the vulnerable locked up too. Youngsters gotta partaaay!
But, but I'm a youngster. In my head "I'll sneak you out at 9pm when the oldies are asleep!  | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be?" The next pandemic could kill 95% of those that get it, unlike Covid killing less than 5%,a policy would need to fit the pendemic. One policy does not fit all I'm afraid. | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be?" No. | |||
"I'd do what they've done in Australia. I think at the beginning breaking lockdown in Sydney (except for specified reasons) carried a fine of up to $10 000. Australia is largely closed, and if you return you are in mandatory (your expense) quarantine for 14 days. I think it was still Sydney (NSW), this is run by the army. You get a hotel room and food/ essentials delivered. You must apply to leave (and I believe enter) Australia, and my understanding is that most requests to leave have been denied. You must have good reason. Their testing regime makes ours look like a joke. A lot of the messaging has been good (not all of it obviously). Eliminate threat. Reduce movement. Test, test, test." Geography and population allows Australia to do this, the distances between large cities are vast compared to the UK and states are governed seperatly to a certain degree to do the same here in UK would be impossible with the population and land mass here. | |||
"... The government played this thing the apocalypse and now people are terrified of something that has a very low mortality rate. The fact infections have risen but deaths have dropped right down suggest its mutating to be weaker as well. KJ " More tests will find more infections. Don't forget we had no representation of infection figures during the peak cos only the hospitalised were tested. However, a Singapore study suggests there is a less severe strain of covid-19. I'll have to look for it if anyone is interested. It suggests that this particular strain could be useful for vaccine research. | |||
"Covid was so prevailant in society during Jan/Feb/Mar that I don’t think we had any other choice but to lock down, it was everywhere, silently spreading and taking down people with pneumonia of unknown origin (me included). That said, the peak was in mid-April (and it was not as bad as what was expected) yet we are still living in what feels at times to be under nanny state conditions. 2m when the WHO said 1m, face masks in shops, track & trace in pubs, restaurants, hairdressers, beuticians etc, limits on who you can see one day yet you can see other people from other households the day after. You couldn’t write some of this shit. As a middle-aged hard working tax payer, I know I’m going to be picking up the bill for this until the day I retire - which will no doubt be moved to recoup some of the financial loss to the country. Due to lockdown, thousands of people have lost their jobs, hundreds of businesses have gone under and worst of all, gallons and gallons of beer we’re poured down the drain (joke). That’s some price to pay to protect a sector of society that could have still been protected without such a devastating and long lockdown. I’m privy to facts that cannot be shared, but what the general public are being led to believe and what actually happened are two very different things. If/when the public find out the truth, the shit will hit the fan. I’ll finish off with this After purchasing millions of antibody testing kits that are 98% accurate, why haven’t the Government sent them out to the general public? 98% is pretty damn good when it comes to investigating something. It’s because they are shit scared of what they’ll find. Covid has been here for a while " If the pneumonia has been caused by covid-19, then it's not an unknown origin  .
Lockdown successfully flattened the curve as it was designed, so what's the problem? | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. Well the rules were there to drive down the infection rates amongst the most vulnerable. That's started to pay off now and they've slowly started easing the restrictions, essentially to see what happens next I think. As for an exit strategy, I don't think any government in the world has one of those at the moment - they're dealing with the here and now. Personally, there have been some low points (Cummings etc) and massive mistakes (care homes) have been made and it appears that no fucker can count in a sensible manner any more (I'd quite happily throttle anyone who attacks me with an unsheathed percentage these days). We're just going to have to play this one by ear for now, but, as I pointed out above, there's absolutely no value to any government on the planet to keep the rules in place any longer than they need to..." Too logical... Too smooth | |||
" My issue is the measures being imposed now may never be given up. Look at those measures: Wearing a mask - makes identification of people difficult, why would any government want to keep that in place? Fining people for non adherance to rules - very few fines issued and the cost of processing them outweighs the value of the fine - why would any governments want to keep that in place? Shutting down various businesses - costing governments a fortune in lost taxation and unemployment benefit - why would any government want to keep that in place? Social distancing - costing governments a fortune in lost revenue again and are next to impossible to enforce anyway. There's absolutely no sense in any government keeping any of the rules we currently have for any longer than they are needed. Well! Without wishing to sound like a paranoid loon- exactly!!! There’s no sense in it at all. So why do they keep imposing these rules? And why is there no exit strategy? That’s all I want- at the start of the situation we gathered around the tv to hear what boris and Chris Whitty had to say. We (by which I mean- me and my grown up children) took on board the seriousness of the situation and we behaved accordingly. There now seems little evidence to suggest that this virus is any more serious than any other seasonable virus. The government is begging the unions to get the children back to school and ending the furlough scheme to get adults back to work. A CLEAR exit strategy is needed to end this madness. Boris was the funny, charming oafish, speak it like it is type big brother. That might work in the good times, and even the negotiating times like brexit. He managed to talk an entire country into terror. He needs to use all of his political skill to talk us back out of it- and if he doesn’t- we have to ask why. Well the rules were there to drive down the infection rates amongst the most vulnerable. That's started to pay off now and they've slowly started easing the restrictions, essentially to see what happens next I think. As for an exit strategy, I don't think any government in the world has one of those at the moment - they're dealing with the here and now. Personally, there have been some low points (Cummings etc) and massive mistakes (care homes) have been made and it appears that no fucker can count in a sensible manner any more (I'd quite happily throttle anyone who attacks me with an unsheathed percentage these days). We're just going to have to play this one by ear for now, but, as I pointed out above, there's absolutely no value to any government on the planet to keep the rules in place any longer than they need to... Again- I absolutely agree until the final paragraph. Can you please tell me any other society in the known history of man that has deliberately hidden the faces of its population? By law?" We all just too ugly to be seen by the aliens coming to take over our planet. They look very swine like with bat wings | |||
"https://youtu.be/hrTFXwLXUC8 this "Feel free to give a synopsis. I for one won't view it. | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be?" Anyone who says or believes "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". Is seriously retarded. The virus doesn't just affect old people. | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be?" Anyone who says or believes "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". Is seriously stupid. The virus doesn't just affect old people. | |||
| |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? Anyone who says or believes "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". Is seriously stupid. The virus doesn't just affect old people. " My question here would be to ask, who actually decides which life is more valuable than another? Every life, no matter how old or young, no matter what creed, race or religion, matters and is valuable! Unfortunately disease is a part of life, as is death! I would suggest that you look at the analysis that has been done to try to establish the amount of deaths that will result from this "pandemic" that won't be from the virus, let alone the fact that there are many more people than the 800,000 that have died worldwide to date, have had their lives and livelihood destroyed, been put to financial ruin, I'm sure not without consequence to mental health! This has happened because of the decisions made by various world governments. The figures that I have come across on a BBC article, are suggesting that due to demand and supply of health care in low-income countries and supply issues with food, over a million children and 56,000 mothers could die as an indirect result of the pandemic. The WPF is currently providing food to nearly 100 million people every single day, 30 million of those depend on that for their survival. If their ability to provide this food is disrupted 300,000 people could starve to death EACH day. This is NOT including those who are newly impoverished by the pandemic itself. The current pandemic is likely to tip an extra 130 million people into near starvation, and threatens the donations this program relies on!!! As for the wealthier countries...in the UK, with lockdown had, 1600 cases of cancer which are uncovered monthly would have gone undetected during the usual screening processes which had come to a halt... oncologists estimate 60,000 cancer patients could die in the UK alone as a result of late diagnosis and treatment! The impending recession is expected to be the most severe since the Great Depression! If this is going to be the outcome of the pandemic as predicted here, and those are only some of the examples of the consequences, because of how world governments have acted to "protect the elderly and vulnerable" - do you really think that those that have died with or from Covid 19, would want their death to have this kind of an outcome for the entire planet?! Kinky | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? Anyone who says or believes "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". Is seriously stupid. The virus doesn't just affect old people. " I've seen a 21 year old with it, boy, did it kick her sideways for a week and half. The Koreans had the same test as the UK at the same time, they used it as they took the opinion that event at 90% accurate it still allowed them to track 9 out of 10, the UK government refused to use the same test as it was not 100% - what fools. They could not find and track 9 out of 10. | |||
"I have to say the majority on these threads have become so sanctimonious and holier than though. I didn't expect the spanish inquisition. It does get kinda boring being lectured to all the time about how we should or shouldn't behave. The more you do it, the more I want to rebel LOL. Just be sensible and be careful of the risks . That's all we do really. Just common sense really. To many people are just griped by fear with this virus. Fuck I would hate to live in Australia. " Common sense is overrated ! | |||
"... for the sake of the many? There keeps being voices saying words to the effect of "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". An alternative view - this infection was spread world wide by a very small number of people who placed the importance of their holiday or business travel above the well being of everybody else, even after it was known about the outbreak. Should we have just said "you went there, you stay there, you die there". The sacrifice of a small number who brought it on themselves, could have saved a million lives and trillions of pounds. So, next potential epidemic - what should the policy be? Anyone who says or believes "it's just a few old people and they were going to die anyway, forget about them and let everyone else get back to their lives". Is seriously stupid. The virus doesn't just affect old people. My question here would be to ask, who actually decides which life is more valuable than another? Every life, no matter how old or young, no matter what creed, race or religion, matters and is valuable! Unfortunately disease is a part of life, as is death! I would suggest that you look at the analysis that has been done to try to establish the amount of deaths that will result from this "pandemic" that won't be from the virus, let alone the fact that there are many more people than the 800,000 that have died worldwide to date, have had their lives and livelihood destroyed, been put to financial ruin, I'm sure not without consequence to mental health! This has happened because of the decisions made by various world governments. The figures that I have come across on a BBC article, are suggesting that due to demand and supply of health care in low-income countries and supply issues with food, over a million children and 56,000 mothers could die as an indirect result of the pandemic. The WPF is currently providing food to nearly 100 million people every single day, 30 million of those depend on that for their survival. If their ability to provide this food is disrupted 300,000 people could starve to death EACH day. This is NOT including those who are newly impoverished by the pandemic itself. The current pandemic is likely to tip an extra 130 million people into near starvation, and threatens the donations this program relies on!!! As for the wealthier countries...in the UK, with lockdown had, 1600 cases of cancer which are uncovered monthly would have gone undetected during the usual screening processes which had come to a halt... oncologists estimate 60,000 cancer patients could die in the UK alone as a result of late diagnosis and treatment! The impending recession is expected to be the most severe since the Great Depression! If this is going to be the outcome of the pandemic as predicted here, and those are only some of the examples of the consequences, because of how world governments have acted to "protect the elderly and vulnerable" - do you really think that those that have died with or from Covid 19, would want their death to have this kind of an outcome for the entire planet?! Kinky"
The future history books will show the cost in terms lives lost and destroyed due to anti covid measures and the impending global depression will far eclipse the lives lost to covid19 directly.
I've mentioned it in this thread but in our area alone suicide rates have skyrocketed since May 20. Many people believe daily excess UK suicide rates are already higher than the daily death rates to covid19. Working on the frontline in a relatively small size council area its not hard to see that just through looking at our own council areas increased rates of suicides.
KJ | |||
| |||
"So... risk reduction is holier than thou. So... wanting to reduce the risk to the general population via long established principles of quarantine, which is being shown to work in Australia and New Zealand, is treating people with Covid-19 as different, which is bad, which is (hop, skip, jump, leap) like ethnic cleansing. Apparently I'm irrational, although treating someone who's had Covid-19 as different is bad, because I've had Covid-19. Apparently, as an Australian (who understands the ins and outs of the way the slang forms), I'm going to be offended by the use of "Rona", which is the established Australian slang for Covid-19. Is that right? We have had it . Now we are getting on with our lives. We dont dictate to anyone else. Everybody has a different reality. You seem to want to push yours onto other people. We have to work. At the height of the virus my wife was seeing death on a daily basis But she wont dictate to anyone hos to live their lifes. Public health is communal responsibility. I see it every day in the suffering faced by the people I assist. I have my views. You have yours. I'm not stopping you expressing your views. I can't, and I don't want to. But I'm allowed to express mine. I want my life back. I'm not going to get it back until we have a vaccine or an extremely low rate of infection in the community. None of us will, entirely. I am doing my bit and reducing my contact with other people to almost zero. I would take on the risk for other people, but I cannot. You may make of that what you will. That is, as always, your prerogative. I will make of things what I will, and express my view. That is, as always, my prerogative." I fail to understand your logic in, you being very vocal with your view/opinion — public health being a communal responsibility: by legally enforcing global lockdowns, mandatory face mask wearing (although not proved to do much, unless worn 24/7) and imprisonments if different views expressed (as seen in Australia). COVID-19 is a real threat. But so was SARS, MERS, Influenza, HIV, AIDS, eBola and H1N1 to name a few. Not to mention suicide, road/traffic deaths and smoking/tobacco products. If we compare the global response for the above to COVID-19, the measures taking place today, on a scale of 10... is 1000000000000... without proper scientific research into the virus, treatment, prevention (WHO had conflicting recommendations) mental health and economy. This is a flex of authoritarian regime, not a fight to save lives. Those in need of saving, as an example of many, were the ones left by the government without proper care in the elderly care homes. But of course, these measures are indeed needed to save us all. Sweden doesn’t exist. It’s a fairy tale land. Only the WHO, authoritarian governments and mainstream media are our reality. I do respect your view. I may not understand it fully, or your drivers to think that way, but I don’t have to agree to your views. | |||
| |||
" I fail to understand your logic in, you being very vocal with your view/opinion — public health being a communal responsibility: by legally enforcing global lockdowns, mandatory face mask wearing (although not proved to do much, unless worn 24/7) and imprisonments if different views expressed (as seen in Australia). COVID-19 is a real threat. But so was SARS, MERS, Influenza, HIV, AIDS, eBola and H1N1 to name a few. Not to mention suicide, road/traffic deaths and smoking/tobacco products. If we compare the global response for the above to COVID-19, the measures taking place today, on a scale of 10... is 1000000000000... without proper scientific research into the virus, treatment, prevention (WHO had conflicting recommendations) mental health and economy. This is a flex of authoritarian regime, not a fight to save lives. Those in need of saving, as an example of many, were the ones left by the government without proper care in the elderly care homes. But of course, these measures are indeed needed to save us all. Sweden doesn’t exist. It’s a fairy tale land. Only the WHO, authoritarian governments and mainstream media are our reality. I do respect your view. I may not understand it fully, or your drivers to think that way, but I don’t have to agree to your views. " ... I never said you had to agree. I will continue to be vocal. Which is my prerogative. If you want to interpret things in your idiosyncratic way, that is your prerogative. I'm writing things on a forum, not kicking your door down. | |||
| |||
