Forum menu
Because there’s a huge number of people who are struggling as right now it feels like there is little or no joy in their lives and that they have nothing to look forward to. And giving them some hope would really help them?
Surely better to be overly cautious even if it doesn't give people joy. Other alternative is say go for and then have to back track, cancel holidays and leave everyone royally pissed off.
smells a bit like the Great Barrington declaration to me…
Rather than destroying everyone’s way of life to protect said demographic?
Is that such a stupid idea? Protect (by way of vaccination and/or shielding) those most at risk and let those that are not such high risk get on with life.
We're essentially curbing our lives and staying indoors to protect a demographic that, for the most part, have already lived their best lives. They are not giving up their education or putting their lives on hold. They're not worrying about their jobs or suffering financially. They've got their pensions. They're not going to suffer for the next ten, twenty, thirty years with mental health problems.
Society needs to serve everyone, but shouldn't deprive the majority for the sake of the few.
From the start I've felt that full on lockdowns are out of proportion. Whole sections of society/economy have essentially been sacrificed.
The over 65s I know have carried on their lives pretty much as normal. Our neighbours continue to go away every other week to their holiday home on the lake. They've not had to tighten their belts with regards to spending. In fact, they've just bought a new flat to rent out.
The wealth continues to grow in the over 65s pockets whilst the Millennials get shit on.
@chrispo another few months of edging.... Just imagine the eruption when she finally touches the tip....
🌋 💦
Some of us think that the current “lockdown” and half the deaths we have had in the last 12 months were entirely avoidable. Ending measures early last year, and then avoiding measures in the Autumn, has resulted in the current shit show. I’m angry about the current harsh restrictions, because they are the result of people (government in the main) not doing what was required last year. We shouldn’t be in lock down now. There didn’t need to be a “Kent strain”. Schools should be fully open now. This was all avoidable… but now it’s necessary… and if we make the mistake again of removing restrictions too early again, or not acting on rising numbers soon enough again, we’re in for another round of this… which, despite what some might think, WE HATE AND DO NOT WANT.
Absolutely. The current lockdown could and should have been unnecessary. Direct your anger and frustration at those responsible for it, not those of us who are hating it but understand why it's necessary.
It's not like I don't understand the impact on the young. I have a 17 and 14 year old who both represent GB nationally and internationally at events. Eldest is in his A level year, trying to pass his driving test, looking for a summer job and a holiday with mates before he goes to university. Don't try and ****ing hold court to me about it's impact on the young.
https://twitter.com/Unlocked_UK_/status/1359215513906253828
A calmer, somewhat more rational, less sentimental view of things for those who are interested.
"Unlocked" can get in the sea. Check out the rest of their twitter stream... it's full of the "somewhat more rational" content created by Kate Hoey and Lawrence Fox. It's all the kind of stuff we have to spend time carefully talking through with our elderly relatives... I'd rather read what the columnists for the Daily Mail are saying than have to wade through any of the stuff they put out. So, no thanks.
"Why YOU Should Worry About Woke"
Meh...
https://twitter.com/MartinDaubney/status/1329720735523287040?s=20
Oh, they do sound lovely, calm and rational.
Society needs to serve everyone, but shouldn’t deprive the majority for the sake of the few.
people have been saying that for millennia, a few years of covid and not going on holiday isn’t going to change that. if anything it reinforces the position of the monied elite.
There didn’t need to be a “Kent strain”.
No, but then there would be the Dutch or Floridian variant turning up at some point. There may well be at some point. And the vaccines may not work against those same as the AZ/SA....
And how to landlocked/continental countries close their borders...?
And what do we do next winter when they're are new variants around?
As sad and depressing as it all is, we're nowhere near the numbers, let alone the percentage of deaths per population, as recorded during the first wave of the Spanish Flu.
Look at numbers for the Black Death!
This is still, despite the numbers a very mild "pandemic".
I thought one of the measures of society was how it protected the vulnerable few, but I've obviously been wrong.
Sorry alpin.. what are you saying...?
Play the ball not the man Kelvin.
anything it reinforces the position of the monied elite.
Exactly... Be that Amazon (et al) vs the local specialist shop or the retired couple who have nice safe pensions and a couple of BTL vs the 20-30 something who is trapped in a cycle of renting and low paid work.
This is still, despite the numbers a very mild “pandemic”.
100k+ dead despite lockdown - what do we think the numbers eould be without lockdown?
The over 65s I know have carried on their lives pretty much as normal. Our neighbours continue to go away every other week to their holiday home on the lake. They’ve not had to tighten their belts with regards to spending. In fact, they’ve just bought a new flat to rent out.
I'd be dobbing those ****ers straight in. Mrs Pondo's parents have been absolute in terms of following the rules, the neighbours one side of them have, the neighbours the other side haven't. So don't make the mistake of thinking all the over 65s have been having it large while the streets are quiet.
Play the ball not the man Kelvin.
What does that mean? I want to know the point alpin is trying to make... that because we're not losing people in Black Death numbers we should abandon attempts to reduce the number of deaths? What is his point?
As for "unlocked"... they are a disinformation channel and should be avoided, and passing on their bollocks should also be avoided and resisted. Ignore it, bin it, block it, report it, avoid it.
Sorry alpin.. what are you saying…?
I'm saying (I think) either way we're ****ed.
We shut up, suck it up and do as we're told. Wait for the vulnerable to be vaccinated (here in Germany I know of no one who has received a vaccine) only for the next mutation to come along and have us all back in lockdown.
Or, we try and get on with some form of normality and have to come to terms with the fact that the hospitals are full, doctors are going to play a sad game of yay/nay with their patients and lots of folk are going to die.
Perhaps with a side of shielding for the elderly.
23% of the UK population are over 60. How do you propose we shield over 15 million people?
Is it really too much for people to accept that they have to put an 18 month hold on some aspects of their cosy 21st century lifestyles like annual holidays, getting pissed down the pub etc until we get on top of this with vaccination in another 6 months. If there was no vaccine on the horizon I'd be agreeing we have to start working out ways to live with COVID but in the current circumstances with vaccines being rolled out why can't people show a bit of patience?
This is still, despite the numbers a very mild “pandemic”.
This pandemic in the UK alone has caused something like 80,000 excess deaths* (about 1 in every 5 deaths) despite all the lockdown measures you say you don't want...Can I ask you, just for a moment, to imagine what that excess death number, and perhaps the smoking ruin where the NHS used to be would look like, if we had not?
*just for clarity, that's a guess (the official numbers aren't in) and includes ALL age groups. from teeny babies all the way to nonagenarians and beyond.
You simply can't counternance any opposing point of view. I'm giving you the new name of The Covidmentalist. Why are you so precious about it anyway?
Ignore it, bin it, block it, report it, avoid it
This really rather sums you up doesn't it.
I’d be dobbing those **** straight in......
The house is only 25km away and is their second residence. In fact, I think she is registered here and he is registered there (due to tax) . They're well within their rights and the law.
...doctors are going to play a sad game of yay/nay with their patients and lots of folk are going to die
That's entirely avoidable. If you think we should accept that, well, let's just strongly disagree and leave it at that.
a few years of covid and not going on holiday isn’t going to change that.
its not just "not going on holiday". that may be the soundbite for unneccesary travel and interaction for you but everyone is different.
It could be:
holiday
visiting relatives
standing in a pub with a draught pint
going to one of the other home nations to ride your mountain bike
having a few freinds round to sit in your living room
doing a group zumba class at the gym
seeing your school friends in person
or any number of others.
We have (selfish rule breakers aside) given up pretty much everything that makes life worth living for (if you spent summer in tier 3) almost a year now.
thats ~2% of an adult life. If you hit the STW average mid forties, ~3% of your remaining life.
For some, that suffering will continue for years due to financial difficulty.
I'm not saying it shouldnt have been done, or that it needs to end right now; but we have as a country/planet made sacrifices for a future greater good and people want to know what and when the end game is going to be.
Agreed.
100k+ dead despite lockdown – what do we think the numbers eould be without lockdown?
We aren't in lockdown because of deaths - the government really don't care how many die. We're in lockdown to 'ease the strain on the NHS' ie to prevent a massively incompetent government being chucked out of power when the news shows how the NHS can't cope. That's why we're encouraged to clap for our heroes, and not question why one of the richest countries in the world has a health service that falls over every single winter, never mind in the middle of a pandemic.
Anyway, if the stats are right, and Sweden really had a 'lighter' lockdown, then scaled up, they've got less deaths than us.
Is it really too much for people to accept that they have to put an 18 month hold on some aspects of their cosy 21st century lifestyles like annual holidays, getting pissed down the pub etc until we get on top of this with vaccination in another 6 months.
Socialising and going to the pub are not "cosy 21st century lifestyles", they are a key part of the human condition and have existed for centuries. Don't downplay those things as frivolities, they're much more important than that.
As for putting that on hold for 18 months, well, I suggest that depends who you are and where you are in your life will be a factor in that. A middle aged, 40 something person with a partner, a house and a high speed internet connection may be fine as that 18 months will have a limited impact on their life. A 90 year old with 6 months to live? Maybe not. A 22 year old living at home who's not met their mates for a year and is still living with their parents? Again, probably not.
We shut up, suck it up and do as we’re told. Wait for the vulnerable to be vaccinated (here in Germany I know of no one who has received a vaccine) only for the next mutation to come along and have us all back in lockdown.
the U.K will probably give just about all the adult population it’s first dose in 120 days
(back of envelope 450k x 120 = 54million)
you would expect Germany to be quite efficient in their roll-out once the E.U supplies get going and their side deals. i would imagine they would do it quicker than the U.K.
this is a calculated gamble that is likely to enable families to meet up, the NHS to not be swamped with IC cases etc.
i think most governments would take this option if they had the resources, as for mutations and modified vaccines yearly? thats to be expected and covered by those in the industry posting in this thread.
I really don’t understand anybody who advocates zero COVID now in this country, you seriously need to have a word with yourself.
Maybe it’s because you are retired and financially ok or you work in an industry which has done ok out of this mess.
Have a thought for those of us here, who have lost their jobs, going to lose their jobs or have no idea what’s going to happen to them.
I could express my other thoughts but probably would get banned...
people want to know what and when the end game is going to be.
will be dictated by the vaccine rollout across the world. There will be (in all probability) an outbreak next winter that will require vaccine and perhaps lockdown (if there isn't a good enough test, trace and isolate system in place) this will continue for a few years yet,
You simply can’t counternance any opposing point of view. I’m giving you the new name of The Covidmentalist. Why are you so precious about it anyway?
On the contrary, I'm just seeing two people who disagree. Only one is labelling and being provocative.
Great to see so much prejudice against the elderly. The majority, like the rest of the population, have tried to stick to the rules. The majority aren't "monied elite" with several buy to let's supplementing gold plated pensions. Quite a lot are quite poor, quite isolated and at real risk from this virus. And most of them are worried about the effect that the virus is having on their children and grandchildren.
23% of the UK population are over 60. How do you propose we shield over 15 million people?
21.5% of the population in Germany.
That's 17.4 million people.
It's not going to be 18 months though, is it? Each time politicians get together to discuss the current situation they just extend the current rules for another month or more.
And it's not about "cosy" holidays or having a few beers. It's about people's livelihoods and people's future.
Personally I can't see the vulnerable being vaccinated in Germany /France /Italy /America within the next six months. And even if they were, what do we do when the next mutation comes along? We all go back into lockdown and start again?
I've got friends with three school age kids. They haven't the space to have three work stations in their flat. They don't the money to fork out for three laptops.
I've one friend who opened a restaurant three years ago. Several thousand euros credit that he can't pay back. A landlord that has suspended his rent, but still wants arrears paid by the end of 2021. How is he going to survive? He isn't in the middle of town. He is atop a hill with a lovely panoramic view of the alps. It's a day trip location. I was last there in November. He's screwed.
. A 90 year old with 6 months to live? Maybe not. A 22 year old living at home who’s not met their mates for a year and is still living with their parents? Again, probably not.
I know plenty who fall broadly into those two general categories who are reluctantly but willingly putting up with it. Because they want to see it brought under control so that one group can enjoy what's left of their time, and the other can start to rebuild their futures. Because they don't want to write off the other group.
another few months of edging…. Just imagine the eruption when she finally touches the tip….
Lol but how do you know it’s not a he and/or I’m not a she?
It’s nice to see a bit of discussion here by the way. My understanding of the stats is that my home county now has ZERO new cases of Covid. Where is the rationale for continued full lockdown here?
And it’s not about “cosy” holidays or having a few beers. It’s about people’s livelihoods and people’s future.
This is what people forget.
All those people who work in the service industry (who once again are generally younger) are being screwed over. "Opening the pubs" isn't just about going for a pint which is what so many people seem to think, it's also about getting those people back to work.
Like Alpin, I know many great people in hospitality and they are stuffed. Yes, they could be supported by the government, but people need work to give them purpose, it not all about the money...
We aren’t in lockdown because of deaths – the government really don’t care how many die. We’re in lockdown to ‘ease the strain on the NHS’ ie to prevent a massively incompetent government being chucked out of power when the news shows how the NHS can’t cope. That’s why we’re encouraged to clap for our heroes, and not question why one of the richest countries in the world has a health service that falls over every single winter, never mind in the middle of a pandemic.
This UK centric idea I find odd. So if the UK is in lockdown because the government are scared, then why are other rich countries with private health care systems placing their populace under even tighter lockdown rules than the UK? Surely they could blame the private hospitals for the deaths?
I know plenty who fall broadly into those two general categories who are reluctantly but willingly putting up with it. Because they want to see it brought under control so that one group can enjoy what’s left of their time, and the other can start to rebuild their futures. Because they don’t want to write off the other group.
Good for you.
I know plenty of people in those age groups understand the need to control it but feel they're being screwed by the measures and think a discussion need to be had about the impact on their lives.
Both are valid viewpoints.
why are other rich countries with private health care systems placing their populace under even tighter lockdown rules than the UK? Surely they could blame the private hospitals for the deaths?
Are you suggesting that they only care about the blame and not the actual fatalities?
And when all the hospitals are full of dying Covid patients, who is going to look after the mountain biker who falls off and hits a rock?
I can see from this thread that tempers are understandably fraying due to the current lockdown and possibly reflect the wider feelings of the population. I've been quite lucky and have stayed in work but even so I'm getting frustrated with constant news of further mutations etc and worrying this is going to go on for a few years yet.
It's not just the obvious, customer facing jobs like hospitality and hairdressers that are currently screwed.
The last 10 years I've been working in the event industry... Big one off events, corporate shite, trade shows, exhibitions, private parties....
In the last year I had I think three or four jobs tied to the event industry. All of them were livestream studio set ups. Soon enough all companies who want a studio will have one in place and work will dry up again.
(I've been lucky/creative and have turned my hand to other things,but lots of the guys I know don't possess skills that carry over elsewhere.)
I know of several large event companies, in Munich alone, that have closed their doors. Workshops, staging, logistic, light and sound tech, catering, furniture rental.... There is a whole raft of business and workers out there that the general public don't see.
It's debatable whether these jobs will ever come back.
This UK centric idea I find odd. So if the UK is in lockdown because the government are scared, then why are other rich countries with private health care systems placing their populace under even tighter lockdown rules than the UK? Surely they could blame the private hospitals for the deaths?
That's where my argument falls down! I've no idea. 😀
Am expecting lockdown to continue until at least all over 60's have had their first dose of the vaccine.
Then a slight release, as the nhs should be a bit less pressured then.
I can't see the government not doing that as its headbanger back benchers will be going nuts around that time.
Shame some of them didn't get a bad but not fatal dose
Both are valid viewpoints.
They are indeed. And not mutually exclusive.
people need work to give them purpose, it not all about the money…
The voluntary sector has been crying out for people this last 12 months, for those able and willing to help out.
My understanding of the stats is that my home county now has ZERO new cases of Covid. Where is the rationale for continued full lockdown here?
Because we haven't yet trained the virus to stop spreading when it reaches an arbitrary geographical border. The people who might be at risk of carrying it are a little easier to deal with. Sometimes.
Are you suggesting that they only care about the blame and not the actual fatalities?
@scotroutes. I'm not at all suggesting that. It seemed to me, that is what the other guy was suggesting.... My point being, why is it only the UK gov is worried about blame, not other nations taking similar/more stringent measures.
So the vaccination doesn’t get is “back to normal”. Fine, so what does? Tell us that so we know where we stand.
Well for a start bear in mind the 12 week wait for the 2nd jab. "Giving people hope" is a bit like "it'll all be over by Christmas". Let's follow the science and respond to the progress of the pandemic.
visiting relatives
standing in a pub with a draught pint
going to one of the other home nations to ride your mountain bike
having a few freinds round to sit in your living room
Those are the biggies for me. And I was going to add in going to gigs as well, that’s a huge gap in my life.
On the upside, I’ve only lost a few relatives and neighbours to this over the last year, which I sadly accept as an upside, considering it could easily have been much worse.
But, again, the harsh restrictions now are needed because of the way we lifted restrictions last year, didn’t support social distancing in schools and workplaces, and refused to control our borders.
Well for a start bear in mind the 12 week wait for the 2nd jab. “Giving people hope” is a bit like “it’ll all be over by Christmas”. Let’s follow the science and respond to the progress of the pandemic.
Again, fine, I'm happy to follow science, it's exactly what we should have done from the start.
But given the research into the virus, how it mutates, how it transmits, and how the various vaccines work, to my mind we should then have a rough idea of what happens when 100,000/1 million/10 million people are vaccinated. And if we have that then we'll know what measures can be lifted and when.
In doing that i'd suggest you would be following the science, as opposed to waiting to see what happens which is not and is just being reactive.
I do wonder when you hear people going on about back to normal...... does anyone actually think that we will go back to the pre covid normal?
I just can't see it, this virus is with us for a long time now (hopefully it will get less dangerous through either attenuation and or vaccination) but i can't see things like more social distancing and reduced numbers in buildings going away for some time.
Just to update @tpbiker re the asthma thing, no one on the meeting last night had any reason to believe that it wouldn’t be all patients who normally get a flu jab in group 6.
In doing that i’d suggest you would be following the science, as opposed to waiting to see what happens which is not and is just being reactive.
You have to wait for the data. You can take that as “waiting to see what happens” and “being reactive”… or as basing your response on data we have yet to see. You are portraying Science as if you can fully predict the effects of the measures. Where as others see Science as always being prepared to change tack based on the most up to date evidence available. I think I’m defending the government’s current approach now, aren’t I?
normal - for the folk whose livelihoods are physically and mentally ruined, for the teens that watched their vital school point washed down the drain... same as for that tiny minority of old folk that didnt make it.
that tiny minority of old folk that didnt make it
One in every five hundred people have died from this. Most of them old folk. That is not a tiny minority. And that figure is with the measures taken. We could have been looking at one in every two hundred people without those measures. In a single year.
And we haven’t even got any reasonable data on the health outcomes of all those “old folk” who survived past 28 days yet.
we haven’t yet trained the virus to stop spreading when it reaches an arbitrary geographical border.
Well, we clearly have!
Why should people in the sticks have to suffer just because people in a distant city can’t follow a few simple rules?
We could quite easily open rural Wales as normal, barring a few sensible precautions and border controls.
It’s all a bit like at school when the whole class got detention.
I do wonder when you hear people going on about back to normal…
Without the promise of getting back to normal people won't put up with the rest of it. It seems to me that dismissing the possibility of achieving what Australia or New Zealand have removes much of the motivation for observing lockdowns. People would accept much stricter and longer restrictions combined with closed borders if they promised being able to open up again. This half-arsed effort where we only do enough to prevent mass death in a minority of the population is self-defeating. Support will fade away and we'll end up with more deaths anyway. Better to do whatever it takes now.
Why should people in the sticks have to suffer just because people in a distant city can’t follow a few simple rules?
The regional tiered approach gave is the Kent variant. A lesson needs to be learnt. You can’t carve the UK mainland up successfully. It’s not about punishing areas.
normal – for the folk whose livelihoods are physically and mentally ruined, for the teens that watched their vital school point washed down the drain… same as for that tiny minority of old folk that didn't make it.
This.
Plus, for the teens that have had their university time stuffed.
For the early 20's who've had their early careers, their social lives and their chance to meet their partner destroyed.
I’m just going to luxuriate in the feeling of agreeing with Dazh completely about something on this forum. It’s been too long, and I was missing it.
Thanks for confirming doc. Asthma uk officially confirmed yesterday that most of us aren't in scope for group 6 so obviously it's going to be largely pot luck who gets it based on the gp practice.
It's all kicking off on the asthma FB group I'm a member of, as most of the members have been told they don't meet the criteria either.
Appreciate you coming back to me.
One in every five hundred people have died from this. Most of them old folk.
Old people die. All the time. It's never stopped life. Why now? What's changed? You must see that the route to "Zero Covid" is not realistic. Depriving people of their livelihoods and liberty might be justified to stop the collapse of our health systems as a last resort, given their importance in sustaining life, esp. for those who've got yet lived much of it. I don't see that anyone here is disagreeing with this. Are you advocating that we basically suspend 'life' as we knew it for as long as it takes to achieve "Zero Covid". What are you actually advocating?
The regional tiered approach gave is the Kent variant. A lesson needs to be learnt. You can’t carve the UK mainland up successfully. It’s not about punishing areas.
Now extrapolate that to the large landmass to the east of the UK..... 🤔
One in every five hundred people have died from this. Most of them old folk. That is not a tiny minority.
watching with interest as you describe 499/500 not being a majority
or even 1/500 isnt tiny
While everyone would have welcomed a more normal school year, a better life for undergrads, businesses working as usual and taking on more schools leavers as staff… you have or balance that we accepting more than twice the death count, and millions of lives effected by lack of NHS availability. It’s a horrible balancing act. There are no good options. Don’t assume that the bad options we have been through were even close to the worst options.
Dazh. The problem is that without a vaccine that provides sterile immunity and a world beating track and trace i just don't see zero covid being achievable.
Due to the length of time of a person being infectious coupled with the level of infectivity of the virus we will always have outbreaks happening if people are in close contact without protection.
Look at the various superspreader events that have happened.
Best case we can hope for is to prevent severe disease in nearly everyone and take as many precautions (facemasks, handwashing, air handling, and not going into work if you are sick) to keep the low level infections down. We just can't eradicate this virus
it’s going to be largely pot luck who gets it based on the gp practice.
well, hopefully not "Pot Luck" it'll be down to coding (ie has your GP correctly assessed you as either Asthma, or Severe Asthma)
watching with interest as you describe 499/500 not being a majority
or even 1/500 isnt tiny
The claim was a tiny minority of old folk have died from this. It’s bullshit. 1/500 of the entire population has died, and most of those deaths were older people. The ratio in the over 70s must be shocking. Someone will have access to the stats… I’ll guess at 1/50… a significant minority, when we are talking deaths not preference of Pepsi vs Coke.
Aren't 1 in 3 asymptomatic with covid? Test and trace are never going to be able to track all those once we're all back on trains, planes, pubs etc!
The regional tiered approach gave is the Kent variant. A lesson needs to be learnt. You can’t carve the UK mainland up successfully. It’s not about punishing areas.
That was a chance occurrence that could have happened anywhere.
I saw somewhere that Wales as a a whole is back to no excess deaths. So yes you clearly can carve it up.
It’s a lot easier complying with a lockdown when there is a clear reason for it than when there isn’t.
I think a return to a differentiated approach would be a good idea.
i just don’t see zero covid being achievable.
Clearly not.
In terms of Aus/NZ, how sustainable are their measures long-term? Will they have closed borders for the next decade? Countries like Spain, which depend on tourism, simply cannot sustain that. We really are in a mess here.
Old people die. All the time. It’s never stopped life. Why now? What’s changed?
Approx 80,000 or so folk (of all ages) who didn't expect to die. That's what's changed. From a disease that some folks spread without even knowing they have it.
Now extrapolate that to the large landmass to the east of the UK…..
Yea, we have and advantage over them. Have we made the most of that advantage?
From Google.
significant minority. less than half, but still quite a large number. Explanation: A minority means less than 50%. A tiny minority would be a very small proportion - e.g. just 1% or 2% of the total, whereas a "significant" minority is a reasonably large number
I'm not denying it's a lot of people, but there's no way you can say 1/50 is a significant minority, by that definition above it's a tiny minority.
The ratio in the over 70s must be shocking. Someone will have access to the stats… I’ll guess at 1/50… a significant minority, when we are talking deaths not preference of Pepsi vs Coke.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02483-2
UK:
11.6% in the over 75
0.03%for the under 44
Depends what it is. If it was 2% of the land mass of the UK was covered in land mines, you’d call it significant. A truck load of old people have died. Trying to diminish the seriousness of that is just weaselling.
11.6% in the over 75
So 1/10 ? That is depressing. Others can decide on whether, when talking about the deaths of humans, that is significant or not.
I have no idea what nz and aus can do.
I would assume vaccinate as many as possible and test like hell when people enter the country. Accepting that some cases will always happen.
Wasn't it only 388 people under 60 with no underlying health probs for the whole of last year?
Old people die. All the time. It’s never stopped life. Why now? What’s changed?
Can I just throw long covid into the mix as well. It's not as if people either die or just get a mild, flu-like illness, huge numbers are rendered chronically ill for months, as in economically and socially unproductive with all the misery and life-wrecking consequences that entails. But I guess your answer would be along the lines of 'Some people get chronic post-viral infections. All the time. It's never stopped life. Why now? What's changed?'
The claim was a tiny minority of old folk have died from this. It’s bullshit. 1/500 of the entire population has died, and most of those deaths were older people. The ratio in the over 70s must be shocking. Someone will have access to the stats… I’ll guess at 1/50… a significant minority, when we are talking deaths not preference of Pepsi vs Coke.
What's shocking about an 80 year old dying? Sorry, I'm not being obtuse on purpose. I really can't see anything 'wrong' with it. I cannot fathom stopping life indefinitely to prevent this. Preventing collapse of the healthcare system, I absolutely agree - but what's the way out of that? Are we going to see massive redistribution of resources to our health systems? NHS staff shortages were chronic before the pandemic.
So 1/10 ? That is depressing. Others can decide on whether, when talking about the deaths of humans, that is significant or not
At some point we have to mate. In ideal world, we'd all live happily ever after but that's not how it works, is it?
Wasn’t it only 388 people under 60 with no underlying health probs for the whole of last year?
No. It was much earlier in the year. And means nothing ‘till you use it with the knowledge of what proportion of the population fall under the “underlying health problems” categorisation used.
Wasn’t it only 388 people under 60 with no underlying health probs for the whole of last year?
So what? Folk who are dying with underlying health issues have often got chronic issues that can be managed well to give them loads of years, things like Diabetes, and COPD and Asthma most of the people who've died from COVID died before their time.
I really can’t see anything ‘wrong’ with it.
Trolling, or just a [ mods insert acceptable word here please ] ?
We’re in lockdown to ‘ease the strain on the NHS’ ie to prevent a massively incompetent government being chucked out of power when the news shows how the NHS can’t cope.
Some truth in that..
Decades of underfunding & mismanagement have led us to where the NHS is now. It is, fundamentally, not fit for purpose & needs restructuring. It was designed to look after a smaller, healthier population. Not to say it hasn’t grown with its role - but it hasn’t kept up with a growing population that are living longer & are more unhealthy. No amount of money is going to fix the NHS if we don’t restructure how it’s accessed & secondly the general state of the health in the population it will continue to struggle.
I'm sorry you can't discuss this without resorting to name calling. I'm really trying to understand your perspective here. If I live till I'm eighty, I'd see no tragedy in that whatsoever.
What’s shocking about an 80 year old dying? Sorry, I’m not being obtuse on purpose. I really can’t see anything ‘wrong’ with it
but what about the 80yr old Capt. Tom? (That was in 2001, obviously) The stats suggest that if you reach 80, you'll probably get to 85 at least...
And what about the people in their 70s? Can you not see “anything wrong” in thousands of them dying now of a novel disease that we are getting to understand well enough to avoid most deaths in the very near future?
With your approach, why have any healthcare or public health measures that benefit older people?
It was designed to look after a smaller, healthier population
population of the UK was 49 million in 1948, so it's gone up by a massive ooohhh, 17 million or so, and "most" of those are healthy young folk and no, it wasn't healthier either, as a nation we live longer and suffer less malnutrition and disease. We've swapped things like measles and cholera for type 2 diabetes, and asthma, so things that killed you, for things that, managed, will limit your life, but you'll still have years (that you wouldn't have had pre war).