Stay at home this Easter Weekend

[frangar]

37 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

We don’t know. We don’t know whether or not a significant chunk of the population have already had it with only very mild symptoms. Testing for the antibody would of course help massively on that one. But until we know, is it your contention that the government should gamble with the lives of hundreds of thousands of people just to see if your point might be correct?

Yet they will be gambling with lives if the lockdown goes on for a year as some are predicting in the news this morning...just the cause of death will be different and no doubt twisted to show the powers that be made the right choice. 

[nicknorman]

6 minutes ago, frangar said:

Yet they will be gambling with lives if the lockdown goes on for a year as some are predicting in the news this morning...just the cause of death will be different and no doubt twisted to show the powers that be made the right choice. 

Agreed, however I can’t see the lockdown in its present form lasting a year. Too much collateral damage, as you suggest.

[Dav and Pen]

According to my doctor grandchild in her hospital many of the deaths are of patients who were already in hospital for other treatments and caught the virus in the hospital. Obviously the existing controls are not good enough. The social distancing  in our village Is working really well with the locals but there are still idiots coming on mountain bikes and to ride their horses up and down the road. Soon the bluebells will be out in the wood and usually hundreds of people come to see them!

Edited April 11, 2020 by Dav and Pen

[Quattrodave]

57 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

We don’t know whether or not a significant chunk of the population have already had it with only very mild symptoms. Testing for the antibody would of course help massively on that one.

You've hit the nail on the head there! I read a white paper last week that said the same thing.

[john6767]

4 hours ago, Athy said:

Surely the "big over-arching reason" is to prevent as many people as possible from catching the bug at all.

I don’t really think that is true.
 

I don’t know how you see the exit strategy, but with perhaps 5% of the population having had it so far, that is 60 odd million people with no immunity, and in the absence of a vaccine,  you can’t just leave it there as this will no go away.  The only viable way out at this time is to let people get this in controlled numbers so the NHS can cope, otherwise we just stay in lockdown for perhaps the next 18 months.  Whilst that is probably the right answer medically, which is why that seems to be the WHO stance, I think that is a hard one politically, and that some compromise like the tracking app will be the only way out in the reasonably short term.

[mrsmelly]

1 hour ago, john6767 said:

I don’t really think that is true.
 

I don’t know how you see the exit strategy, but with perhaps 5% of the population having had it so far, that is 60 odd million people with no immunity, and in the absence of a vaccine,  you can’t just leave it there as this will no go away.  The only viable way out at this time is to let people get this in controlled numbers so the NHS can cope, otherwise we just stay in lockdown for perhaps the next 18 months.  Whilst that is probably the right answer medically, which is why that seems to be the WHO stance, I think that is a hard one politically, and that some compromise like the tracking app will be the only way out in the reasonably short term.

yep, its nowt to do with medical reasons. If it were then the lockdown would be for five years, job done. It is all about what everything in this world is about and that of course is money. So the financial impact of each day of lockdown is far more important than a few deaths as the rich have enough money to get them through anyway. This is costing very serious amounts of dosh.

[frangar]

2 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

yep, its nowt to do with medical reasons. If it were then the lockdown would be for five years, job done. It is all about what everything in this world is about and that of course is money. So the financial impact of each day of lockdown is far more important than a few deaths as the rich have enough money to get them through anyway. This is costing very serious amounts of dosh.

It’s not just money tho. It’s peoples mental health...whilst that’s sometimes an overused term nowadays an enforceced extended lockdown I feel will cause far more issues than the virus even for people who are privileged enough to afford the reduced income and have a nice house to while away the days....those on zero hour contracts living in a high rise will really pay the price in all sorts of ways. 

[mrsmelly]

19 minutes ago, frangar said:

It’s not just money tho. It’s peoples mental health...whilst that’s sometimes an overused term nowadays an enforceced extended lockdown I feel will cause far more issues than the virus even for people who are privileged enough to afford the reduced income and have a nice house to while away the days....those on zero hour contracts living in a high rise will really pay the price in all sorts of ways. 

Ive said that on here from day one. all we get daily is the deaths of those ( with ) covid. There will be a hell of a lot who commit suicide who were already on the edge. Violence in the home will rise steeply but the figures will be " massaged " it happens, I have first hand real knowledge of how its done. I am not saying the gov has it wrong or indeed right as its a new one for the whole world but just putting out nonsense figures means diddly squat.