 |
By *rouble1998 OP Woman
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
Is lockdown actually effective?
I’ve seen several articles that have said current lockdown measures (particularly in the north) aren’t actually helping much.
and as a result of lockdowns, suicide rates are increasing, diagnosis of cancer is down dramatically, people are having surgeries and treatments for pre-existing conditions postponed, any thoughts on this? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ty31Man
over a year ago
NW London |
Lockdown as a strategy to control a virus isn't effective as it causes as many (if not more) deaths. The only theoretical reason to implement a lockdown is to act as a brake give hospitals and services a chance to stop being overwhelmed.
There was however evidence to suggest that infection rates were decreasing anyway prior to the lockdown in March. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rouble1998 OP Woman
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
I’ve heard Boris is going to be announcing even tighter restrictions for the North on Monday which is very disappointing. Although our number of new cases is up the majority of these are students which was guaranteed to happen when universities went back.
Just wondering how long we’re going to have to live under such strict measures of the general consensus is that they aren’t effective  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’ve heard Boris is going to be announcing even tighter restrictions for the North on Monday which is very disappointing. Although our number of new cases is up the majority of these are students which was guaranteed to happen when universities went back.
Just wondering how long we’re going to have to live under such strict measures of the general consensus is that they aren’t effective "
It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rouble1998 OP Woman
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants "
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?"
But proper lockdown was when nearly everything was closed.
It just seems a fucking mess and they seem to be making it up as they go along.
I think the masks is more in outdoors areas where there is no social distancing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ty31Man
over a year ago
NW London |
"I do agree they seem to just be pulling rules out their arse as they go along. Hopefully, the announcement on Monday will bring some clarity "
It all just seems to be out of desperation now using flimsy junk science as a cover. I think it will get to the point soon where people stop listening and ignore all the new rules and regulations |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I do agree they seem to just be pulling rules out their arse as they go along. Hopefully, the announcement on Monday will bring some clarity "
They havint even told the local councils yet..its absolutely farcical. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rouble1998 OP Woman
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
"I do agree they seem to just be pulling rules out their arse as they go along. Hopefully, the announcement on Monday will bring some clarity
It all just seems to be out of desperation now using flimsy junk science as a cover. I think it will get to the point soon where people stop listening and ignore all the new rules and regulations "
I think a lot of people are already at that point to be honest. There’s only so long you can follow these ‘rules’ that have such little effect |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
but dont worry while loads of people are losing their jobs the lovely mp's who decided on how to react to this virus are awarding themselves over this year a pay rise near 15%
did anyone get a pay rise of 15%?
were you allowed to claim compensation for employing family members to help with the work at home during the virus?
no? well your mp was.
new zealands leaders are taking a 20% pay cut to show solidarity with the public.
are this lot here?
tossers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
My Sister has a long standing (serious) health history.
She was due to have to wait until June/July 2021 to even get started on a process for a Cancer scare.(lives near Leicester)
Have forced her (having been a stranger for 20 years) (and will pay for) her to go private. So far, confirmed endometriosis - tbc uterine cancer - none of which would have been addressed mid next year by NHS (Covid) and at that point her life is in questionable. Two children under 6.
The NHS are unbeatable - every human in that service should have at least triple pay rise - at least - fully backed up family care - when in an emergency- which was have been in - those humans are the best in the world- no question- the best of the best- we must not doubt or allow any doubt or shackle them with underfunded rhetorical electioneering...
Not having it. So, sadly, Had to make sister reluctantly go private, -
Seen and diagnosed in less than a week..
It is not the NHS' fault. The levers to make this all work have been quietly destroyed by the Tories for the last decade. NHS staff/resources/brexit t&c on those working day and night in hospital to skilfully care - abandoned- - police - cut. Councils - starved. Wake up uk - we are marching to disaster under Boris and the Tories
Have to say this, sorry for rant, what a ridiculous nightmare that need not be as bad eh? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"My Sister has a long standing (serious) health history.
She was due to have to wait until June/July 2021 to even get started on a process for a Cancer scare.(lives near Leicester)
Have forced her (having been a stranger for 20 years) (and will pay for) her to go private. So far, confirmed endometriosis - tbc uterine cancer - none of which would have been addressed mid next year by NHS (Covid) and at that point her life is in questionable. Two children under 6.
The NHS are unbeatable - every human in that service should have at least triple pay rise - at least - fully backed up family care - when in an emergency- which was have been in - those humans are the best in the world- no question- the best of the best- we must not doubt or allow any doubt or shackle them with underfunded rhetorical electioneering...
Not having it. So, sadly, Had to make sister reluctantly go private, -
Seen and diagnosed in less than a week..
It is not the NHS' fault. The levers to make this all work have been quietly destroyed by the Tories for the last decade. NHS staff/resources/brexit t&c on those working day and night in hospital to skilfully care - abandoned- - police - cut. Councils - starved. Wake up uk - we are marching to disaster under Boris and the Tories
Have to say this, sorry for rant, what a ridiculous nightmare that need not be as bad eh?"
Imagine what's it's going to be like in 4 years time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Following evidence driven decisions is what is needed. I don't hold much faith in this lot to do the right things. The most effective results that we get seemed to come from the March lockdown. Since then it's been patchy |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We need the nightingales to open, as there is a high risk of catching sars-cov-2 in hospital. You go in for an non essential op and end up with Covid-19, this is the fear of why people are not attending nhs hospitals again, they don't want to be a burden or catch sars-cov-2.
Lockdown only works when people are not willing to comply and work together to slow this virus down, we can live with this, we choose not to, gov are not spreading sars-cov-2 around, we are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oodmessMan
over a year ago
yumsville |
If people did what they were supposed to do instead of trying to blame others, there would likely be no need for current measures.
What we now have is people saying they acted responsibly when they haven't - likely because it is affecting them financially.
If people are not social distancing outside and can walk past sanitising stations in supermarkets they are likely not sticking to the same guidelines at home, washing their hands or surfaces.
If say 25% of people bother, the idea it's not going to keep transmitting is laughable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We need the nightingales to open, as there is a high risk of catching sars-cov-2 in hospital. You go in for an non essential op and end up with Covid-19, this is the fear of why people are not attending nhs hospitals again, they don't want to be a burden or catch sars-cov-2.
Lockdown only works when people are not willing to comply and work together to slow this virus down, we can live with this, we choose not to, gov are not spreading sars-cov-2 around, we are."
Dont we need the staff to fill them, |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We need the nightingales to open, as there is a high risk of catching sars-cov-2 in hospital. You go in for an non essential op and end up with Covid-19, this is the fear of why people are not attending nhs hospitals again, they don't want to be a burden or catch sars-cov-2.
Lockdown only works when people are not willing to comply and work together to slow this virus down, we can live with this, we choose not to, gov are not spreading sars-cov-2 around, we are.
Dont we need the staff to fill them,"
Unfortunately too many people were happy to stop EU medics working here, vote for a party that wanted to cut the NHS etc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?"
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life "
Because unfortunately too many people think that the old and the vulnerable are collateral damage. They think that their right to do whatever they like is more important than other people's lives.
What they are forgetting Is the people that they think Should just be shut away or should just take their chances are the very people but have sacrificed the most for this country already and given us the freedoms that we now take for granted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life
Because unfortunately too many people think that the old and the vulnerable are collateral damage. They think that their right to do whatever they like is more important than other people's lives.
What they are forgetting Is the people that they think Should just be shut away or should just take their chances are the very people but have sacrificed the most for this country already and given us the freedoms that we now take for granted. "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Without the local lockdown rules there could be millions -not thousands- of infected people.
I think some people would only be happy when the streets are full of dead and dying people because the hospitals can't cope.
They'd still be stepping over them to get to the pub. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rouble1998 OP Woman
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life "
As much as I have ‘the essentials to live’ that’s not a life worth anything really? It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months, I dont think it’s unreasonable to be disappointed that COVID is still an issue |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life
As much as I have ‘the essentials to live’ that’s not a life worth anything really? It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months, I dont think it’s unreasonable to be disappointed that COVID is still an issue "
But what's the answer to shut away a huge portion of the population for an indefinite amount of time with absolutely no connection with the outside world.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rouble1998 OP Woman
over a year ago
Newcastle upon Tyne |
"
As much as I have ‘the essentials to live’ that’s not a life worth anything really? It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months, I dont think it’s unreasonable to be disappointed that COVID is still an issue
But what's the answer to shut away a huge portion of the population for an indefinite amount of time with absolutely no connection with the outside world.
"
that’s my point exactly, we can’t just be locked up indefinitely. The government is going to have to come up with another solution, whether that be heard immunity, vaccines or something else |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life
As much as I have ‘the essentials to live’ that’s not a life worth anything really? It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months, I dont think it’s unreasonable to be disappointed that COVID is still an issue "
perfectly entitled to be disappointed yes, i font think anyone in favour of lockdowns actually enjoys them ... its an all round shit situation for everyone
but while i feel for you particularly if your mental health is suffering i still dont think it justifies opening up and letting people die .,, its 2020 and there are numerous online avenues to reduce isolation ... we are using one now... unfortunately we dont have the technology to save the life of all covid patients ... we have ways around the isolation that still allow us to limit the deaths |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
As much as I have ‘the essentials to live’ that’s not a life worth anything really? It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months, I dont think it’s unreasonable to be disappointed that COVID is still an issue
But what's the answer to shut away a huge portion of the population for an indefinite amount of time with absolutely no connection with the outside world.
that’s my point exactly, we can’t just be locked up indefinitely. The government is going to have to come up with another solution, whether that be heard immunity, vaccines or something else "
They are working on a vaccine there are currently 2 in late stage trials in the UK alone.
Herd immunity means loosing a lot of people unless we shut them away. What do you suggest? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said."
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated."
Oh you do like using a good insult . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated."
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated.
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ... "
I suppose some would say that those who dismiss people who have lost everything because of lockdown could be classed as selfish.
Both sides could make the same arguments. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Lockdown isn't supposed to stop it. It's supposed to slow the spread down to give the NHS time to treat people."
it will still be around when we come out of lockdown then back to square one. Isnt progress great
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovelybumCouple
over a year ago
Tunbridge Wells |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated."
Using qualification such as "stupid" in an argument, where the opponent expresses different than your opinion, simply shows the level of education the user has. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Lockdown isn't supposed to stop it. It's supposed to slow the spread down to give the NHS time to treat people.it will still be around when we come out of lockdown then back to square one. Isnt progress great "
Ha. Yeah. It's the story of this country lately.
I assume that the hope is, a vaccine will come to our rescue |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated.
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ...
I suppose some would say that those who dismiss people who have lost everything because of lockdown could be classed as selfish.
Both sides could make the same arguments."
who dismissed anyone that had lost everything?
what do you lose in life by wearing a mask to protect those around you and keeping a safe distance? absolutely nothing... so yes those that can’t even manage to abide by those rules are selfish no natter what they lost
and if their reasoning is well i lost my job so to hell with anyone elses health then i would extend selfish to also bitter |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"It's not really proper lockdown up here though is it?
Just the 10 pm curfew .rule of 6 etc..its expected next week they are gonna shut pubs but not restaurants
In newcastle, it’s illegal to meet anyone outside your household. Pub and bars closing, restrictions on leaving your area/travel. They’re talking about bringing in masks in all work places. You can literally go to work, come home and maybe have a meal with your household?
so income, roof over your head , food and family ... not exactly deprived of the essentials for living is it? i can’t understand people that think their social life is more important than someone else's actual life
As much as I have ‘the essentials to live’ that’s not a life worth anything really? It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months, I dont think it’s unreasonable to be disappointed that COVID is still an issue "
“..... It been really taxing on my mental well-being to be so isolated for the last 8 months....”
———————————-
And don’t you think it will be equally tasking on the mental well-being of the vulnerable as well: - if we ask them to isolate indefinitely while the rest of us just get on with life ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated.
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ...
I suppose some would say that those who dismiss people who have lost everything because of lockdown could be classed as selfish.
Both sides could make the same arguments.
who dismissed anyone that had lost everything?
what do you lose in life by wearing a mask to protect those around you and keeping a safe distance? absolutely nothing... so yes those that can’t even manage to abide by those rules are selfish no natter what they lost
and if their reasoning is well i lost my job so to hell with anyone elses health then i would extend selfish to also bitter "
I’m talking about people who are losing businesses and often their homes and you respond by talking about masks.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated.
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ...
I suppose some would say that those who dismiss people who have lost everything because of lockdown could be classed as selfish.
Both sides could make the same arguments.
who dismissed anyone that had lost everything?
what do you lose in life by wearing a mask to protect those around you and keeping a safe distance? absolutely nothing... so yes those that can’t even manage to abide by those rules are selfish no natter what they lost
and if their reasoning is well i lost my job so to hell with anyone elses health then i would extend selfish to also bitter
I’m talking about people who are losing businesses and often their homes and you respond by talking about masks.
"
keep rolling those eyes but its not my fault that you made an assumption about my original comment when you commented on it the first time
i responded to some talking about how educating folk would be a good idea but they seem to stupid to take it in ... that would be educating them on proper hygiene distancing, mask wearing etc ... why would we want to educate them on how to lose a business?
where are the statistics about all these lost homes btw? mortgages were given up to 6 month payment holidays and legislation was introduced so that people couldnt be evicted from rentals at the moment so while i am not naive to the fact we are about to get into a pretty rough economic phase ... these “often lost homes” that you suggest is already in existence just hasn’t happened yet |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said."
This deserves its own thread, i just literally had just seen this on one of my news feeds and wondered if anyone else had seen it on here.
That is a huge backflip from the WHO.
Wonder if it will make anyone on here have a rethink on their stance.
I doubt it but maybe because its the WHO saying it this time that it might sink in that lock down and restrictions are not the answer to this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated.
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ...
I suppose some would say that those who dismiss people who have lost everything because of lockdown could be classed as selfish.
Both sides could make the same arguments.
who dismissed anyone that had lost everything?
what do you lose in life by wearing a mask to protect those around you and keeping a safe distance? absolutely nothing... so yes those that can’t even manage to abide by those rules are selfish no natter what they lost
and if their reasoning is well i lost my job so to hell with anyone elses health then i would extend selfish to also bitter
I’m talking about people who are losing businesses and often their homes and you respond by talking about masks.
keep rolling those eyes but its not my fault that you made an assumption about my original comment when you commented on it the first time
i responded to some talking about how educating folk would be a good idea but they seem to stupid to take it in ... that would be educating them on proper hygiene distancing, mask wearing etc ... why would we want to educate them on how to lose a business?
where are the statistics about all these lost homes btw? mortgages were given up to 6 month payment holidays and legislation was introduced so that people couldnt be evicted from rentals at the moment so while i am not naive to the fact we are about to get into a pretty rough economic phase ... these “often lost homes” that you suggest is already in existence just hasn’t happened yet "
This thread is about is about lockdown. I posted a quote from Dr David Nabarro from the WHO which included lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer .
The usual suspect was the first to reply and call people who don’t agree with them stupid. You then join in and accuse them of being selfish. Then start bringing masks into it for some reason.
So yes that made me roll my eyes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
Education would be a far better method but unfortunately the UK has too many stupid people who can't be educated.
i actually think its too many selfish people who dont want to be educated ...
I suppose some would say that those who dismiss people who have lost everything because of lockdown could be classed as selfish.
Both sides could make the same arguments.
who dismissed anyone that had lost everything?
what do you lose in life by wearing a mask to protect those around you and keeping a safe distance? absolutely nothing... so yes those that can’t even manage to abide by those rules are selfish no natter what they lost
and if their reasoning is well i lost my job so to hell with anyone elses health then i would extend selfish to also bitter
I’m talking about people who are losing businesses and often their homes and you respond by talking about masks.
keep rolling those eyes but its not my fault that you made an assumption about my original comment when you commented on it the first time
i responded to some talking about how educating folk would be a good idea but they seem to stupid to take it in ... that would be educating them on proper hygiene distancing, mask wearing etc ... why would we want to educate them on how to lose a business?
where are the statistics about all these lost homes btw? mortgages were given up to 6 month payment holidays and legislation was introduced so that people couldnt be evicted from rentals at the moment so while i am not naive to the fact we are about to get into a pretty rough economic phase ... these “often lost homes” that you suggest is already in existence just hasn’t happened yet
This thread is about is about lockdown. I posted a quote from Dr David Nabarro from the WHO which included lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer .
The usual suspect was the first to reply and call people who don’t agree with them stupid. You then join in and accuse them of being selfish. Then start bringing masks into it for some reason.
So yes that made me roll my eyes."
okay ... maybe don't post threads on an open forum if you can’t handle the fact that discussion might branch off a little   |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The price of 1 single human life is the complete decimation of our hospitality and entertainment industry. Yes that is the reality we face. We are not allowed to have a night out and enjoy ourselves while other people are having a bad night in. We are to be made to feel guilty about going on holiday and eventually the attrition will make us all compliant and unable to have any joy or excitement in our life except for watching a few elite sports women and men who will be allowed to entertain us on TV for exorbitant amounts of money.
This is the bright future we all face.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said."
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
"
He is basically saying dont lock down if your health service can cope and ours can. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
He is basically saying dont lock down if your health service can cope and ours can."
"...He is basically saying dont lock down if your health service can cope and ours can..."
------------------------------
And you don't wait until your health services get to the stage where it 'cannot cope'.
You lock down *Before* it gets to that stage. And that's what we did in March. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
"
We did lockdown in March to buy time. In that time we built nightingale hospital’s, in that time we discovered better treatments.
I am not saying lift all restrictions just that if we have to resort to a lockdown again then what the hell has the government and PHE been doing over the summer months.
It’s not like this wasn’t predicted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
We did lockdown in March to buy time. In that time we built nightingale hospital’s, in that time we discovered better treatments.
I am not saying lift all restrictions just that if we have to resort to a lockdown again then what the hell has the government and PHE been doing over the summer months.
It’s not like this wasn’t predicted."
"...We did lockdown in March to buy time..."
-------------------------------
At least you agree that the lockdown in March was justified, which is the point I am making above.
In your comments about Dr Nabarro, you seemed to have cherry-picked the parts of his statement where he advices against lockdown, while failing to include the bits of the same statement where he explains possible scenarios where lockdown can be justified.
The government and PHE are not planning to announce a full National lockdown tomorrow. They are only likely to do so as a last resort if hospital admissions starts reaching full capacity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is lockdown actually effective?
I’ve seen several articles that have said current lockdown measures (particularly in the north) aren’t actually helping much.
and as a result of lockdowns, suicide rates are increasing, diagnosis of cancer is down dramatically, people are having surgeries and treatments for pre-existing conditions postponed, any thoughts on this? "
I think you are confusing the larger scale ‘lockdown’ from earlier in the year, where hospitals moved almost entirely to Covid related activity, to the more recent local restrictions which aren’t anywhere near as strict. Currently very few, if any, hospitals are cancelling elective surgery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
We did lockdown in March to buy time. In that time we built nightingale hospital’s, in that time we discovered better treatments.
I am not saying lift all restrictions just that if we have to resort to a lockdown again then what the hell has the government and PHE been doing over the summer months.
It’s not like this wasn’t predicted.
"...We did lockdown in March to buy time..."
-------------------------------
At least you agree that the lockdown in March was justified, which is the point I am making above.
In your comments about Dr Nabarro, you seemed to have cherry-picked the parts of his statement where he advices against lockdown, while failing to include the bits of the same statement where he explains possible scenarios where lockdown can be justified.
The government and PHE are not planning to announce a full National lockdown tomorrow. They are only likely to do so as a last resort if hospital admissions starts reaching full capacity."
From the horses mouth
https://youtu.be/eNOxl6kH4QQ
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
We did lockdown in March to buy time. In that time we built nightingale hospital’s, in that time we discovered better treatments.
I am not saying lift all restrictions just that if we have to resort to a lockdown again then what the hell has the government and PHE been doing over the summer months.
It’s not like this wasn’t predicted.
"...We did lockdown in March to buy time..."
-------------------------------
At least you agree that the lockdown in March was justified, which is the point I am making above.
In your comments about Dr Nabarro, you seemed to have cherry-picked the parts of his statement where he advices against lockdown, while failing to include the bits of the same statement where he explains possible scenarios where lockdown can be justified.
The government and PHE are not planning to announce a full National lockdown tomorrow. They are only likely to do so as a last resort if hospital admissions starts reaching full capacity.
From the horses mouth
https://youtu.be/eNOxl6kH4QQ
"
“..... From the horses mouth...”
——————————-
A lot has be said from the horses mouth.
I’ve given you a more rounded view of what Dr Nabarro said. He doesn’t want endless lockdowns, but under the same breath he explains scenarios where lockdown is justified. He is also not in favour of lifting restrictions and letting the virus spread.
You seem to cherry-pick and highlight only the bits that suit your narrative. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
We did lockdown in March to buy time. In that time we built nightingale hospital’s, in that time we discovered better treatments.
I am not saying lift all restrictions just that if we have to resort to a lockdown again then what the hell has the government and PHE been doing over the summer months.
It’s not like this wasn’t predicted.
"...We did lockdown in March to buy time..."
-------------------------------
At least you agree that the lockdown in March was justified, which is the point I am making above.
In your comments about Dr Nabarro, you seemed to have cherry-picked the parts of his statement where he advices against lockdown, while failing to include the bits of the same statement where he explains possible scenarios where lockdown can be justified.
The government and PHE are not planning to announce a full National lockdown tomorrow. They are only likely to do so as a last resort if hospital admissions starts reaching full capacity.
From the horses mouth
https://youtu.be/eNOxl6kH4QQ
“..... From the horses mouth...”
——————————-
A lot has be said from the horses mouth.
I’ve given you a more rounded view of what Dr Nabarro said. He doesn’t want endless lockdowns, but under the same breath he explains scenarios where lockdown is justified. He is also not in favour of lifting restrictions and letting the virus spread.
You seem to cherry-pick and highlight only the bits that suit your narrative. "
I didn’t edit the video so I’m not cherry picking anything. I agreed with the first lockdown. This thread is about further lockdowns.
I don’t think there’s a case for another one. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The World Health Organisation has backflipped on its original COVID-19 stance after calling for world leaders to stop locking down their countries and economies.
Dr. David Nabarro from the WHO appealed to world leaders yesterday, telling them to stop “using lockdowns as your primary control method” of the coronavirus.
He also claimed that the only thing lockdowns achieved was poverty – with no mention of the potential lives saved.
“Lockdowns just have one consequence that you must never ever belittle, and that is making poor people an awful lot poorer,” he said.
---------------------------------
Dr Nabarro did not say lock down was not needed, neither did he imply that lockdown was unnecessary.
What he said was : - that lockdown should not be used as the 'PRIMARY' control method. In words lockdown can be used; but best used in conjunction with other methods. Just don't make lockdown the primary method is what he is saying.
You also seem to have overlooked part of his same statement which says:
**"The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted. But by and large, we'd rather not do it."**
In other words he is saying lock down can be JUSTIFIED to "buy you time" to achieve all that has been said on the quote above.
The same Dr Nabarro also stated on another article on 4SD that:
"A middle path is needed…. Too many restrictions damage people’s livelihoods and provoke resentment. ‘Virus run wild’ will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people."
As you can see from that quote above, Nabarro is not in favour of lifting all restrictions and allowing the virus to run wild. He says doing so will lead to lots of deaths as well as debilitating long-Covid among younger people.
We did lockdown in March to buy time. In that time we built nightingale hospital’s, in that time we discovered better treatments.
I am not saying lift all restrictions just that if we have to resort to a lockdown again then what the hell has the government and PHE been doing over the summer months.
It’s not like this wasn’t predicted.
"...We did lockdown in March to buy time..."
-------------------------------
At least you agree that the lockdown in March was justified, which is the point I am making above.
In your comments about Dr Nabarro, you seemed to have cherry-picked the parts of his statement where he advices against lockdown, while failing to include the bits of the same statement where he explains possible scenarios where lockdown can be justified.
The government and PHE are not planning to announce a full National lockdown tomorrow. They are only likely to do so as a last resort if hospital admissions starts reaching full capacity.
From the horses mouth
https://youtu.be/eNOxl6kH4QQ
“..... From the horses mouth...”
——————————-
A lot has be said from the horses mouth.
I’ve given you a more rounded view of what Dr Nabarro said. He doesn’t want endless lockdowns, but under the same breath he explains scenarios where lockdown is justified. He is also not in favour of lifting restrictions and letting the virus spread.
You seem to cherry-pick and highlight only the bits that suit your narrative.
I didn’t edit the video so I’m not cherry picking anything. I agreed with the first lockdown. This thread is about further lockdowns.
I don’t think there’s a case for another one."
Nor did I say there was a case for another. ( at least not at the moment, but will not rule it out)
You were cherry-picking in your comments about Dr Nabarro, hence why I pointed out to you that Dr Nabarro supports lockdowns in certain scenarios. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
