Relaxation of restrictions

housemouse wrote: »

This is not an argument. I can also mention countries to you: Iceland, Sweden, South Korea.

Iceland/South Korea implemented intensive testing.
The UK were going to take the approach of seeking herd immunity but could not do anything like the testing done elsewhere so the made a rapid change.

So, what do you think countries who cannot do widespread testing should do?

Blueshoe

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Exactly. And once the peak is over and the number of cases has stabilised, ideally at a low level, the lockdown has to end.

Anyone who thinks we'll all be sitting at home until this is 'over' is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Restrictions will have to be eased back for sure.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

They had blackout wardens but pubs etc were still open once they adhered to blackout rules. The British understood that whilst being open could cost some lives, morale of the population took precedence.

This is why it's so ironic that people keep comparing it to the blitz and the war. It's the exact opposite approach of what was done then. It's obviously not the same situation given that we're dealing with a virus, but back then it was 'keep calm and carry on', not 'shut everything down'.

This particular situation has never been seen before in our lifetimes (in this country) and is uniquely challenging.

niallo27

Tell me how wrote: »

So, do you think what has happened in Italy/Spain would be good to see replicated worldwide?

It shouldnt though with proper social distancing and lighter restrictions. These countries went crazy because nobody knew it even existed until it was too late. The vulnerable in these countries had no chance to isolate.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

They had blackout wardens but pubs etc were still open once they adhered to blackout rules. The British understood that whilst being open could cost some lives, morale of the population took precedence.

You are not comparing like with like.

Do you think the pubs would have been open if the mode of attack was suicide bombers bringing grenades in to each pub?

housemouse

Tell me how wrote: »

So, do you think what has happened in Italy/Spain would be good to see replicated worldwide?

This is not an argument. I can also mention countries to you: Iceland, Sweden, South Korea.

Idbatterim

Nermal wrote: »

Forcing us to stay indoors in case we catch a virus with a 0.25% chance of killing us is the stoic course of action, then?

way less than .25% chance if you are young right? assuming that is the average for entire population...

Blueshoe wrote: »

The idea is to support our healthcare system by reducing numbers as much as possible so they don't become overwhelmed and people are given sedatives and let die because there isn't enough equipment to go around.

Basic stuff. Has been repeated since day 1

Exactly. And once the peak is over and the number of cases has stabilised, ideally at a low level, the lockdown has to end.

Anyone who thinks we'll all be sitting at home until this is 'over' is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I thought everything had to be shut down at night, the blackout etc.

They had blackout wardens but pubs etc were still open once they adhered to blackout rules. The British understood that whilst being open could cost some lives, morale of the population took precedence.

housemouse wrote: »

Or it will prolong the crisis, since it will take longer for the virus to spread (which it will do anyway).

Social distancing means that the old and vulnerable will need to be sheltered from contact with the young and healthy for longer.

So, do you think what has happened in Italy/Spain would be good to see replicated worldwide?

Bandana boy wrote: »

Well then I think if you can not be moved by a missing 1.4M dead Chinese people to your theories then I am pretty sure their is no evidence can break through to you.

Continue on so

Mao was responsible for the death of over 20 million of his people, yet he is revered by their descendants. Again I would not be surprised at what official China is capable of. There was a cover up of this virus until a brave Chinese doctor broke the news. The Chinese were aware of the outbreak well before November last year.

Glenomra

The Swedish approach looking more and more the correct one imo.

Blueshoe

Nermal wrote: »

Forcing us to stay indoors in case we catch a virus with a 0.25% chance of killing us is the stoic course of action, then?

The idea is to support our healthcare system by reducing numbers as much as possible so they don't become overwhelmed and people are given sedatives and let die because there isn't enough equipment to go around.

Basic stuff. Has been repeated since day 1

ITman88

Nermal wrote: »

Forcing us to stay indoors in case we catch a virus with a 0.25% chance of killing us is the stoic course of action, then?

Convince people something is dangerous enough, and they will beg for protection at all costs.

Thelonious Monk

Nermal wrote: »

Forcing us to stay indoors in case we catch a virus with a 0.25% chance of killing us is the stoic course of action, then?

Making the most of the situation and taking it one day at a time would be my approach anyway

housemouse

Tell me how wrote: »

FFS. That is the intent of everyone! Especially the people who have implemented these short term rules.

The better we adhere to them, the shorter the time they will be there for.

Or it will prolong the crisis, since it will take longer for the virus to spread (which it will do anyway).

Social distancing means that the old and vulnerable will need to be sheltered from contact with the young and healthy for longer.

Thelonious Monk

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Actually Pubs, parks, cinemas, theatres were all open during the Blitz, I'm not suggesting these should be open but it's best if you're going to use an analogy you chose something more relevant.

I thought everything had to be shut down at night, the blackout etc.

Nermal

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

have you tried being more stoic about the situation?

Forcing us to stay indoors in case we catch a virus with a 0.25% chance of killing us is the stoic course of action, then?

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

It's like calling measures taken during the blitz draconian, things had to be done for the greater good

Actually Pubs, parks, cinemas, theatres were all open during the Blitz, I'm not suggesting these should be open but it's best if you're going to use an analogy you chose something more relevant.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

No. I'm pointing out that this strict lockdown will inevitably need to end within the next 6 weeks. People simply will not keep it up any longer, and there aren't the resources to police it.

FFS. That is the intent of everyone! Especially the people who have implemented these short term rules.

The better we adhere to them, the shorter the time they will be there for.

Blueshoe

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Where do you live, Blueshoe? Do you live in an overcrowded city which is a hotspot for coronavirus, in a tiny flat with no outside space? Do you have to go out into crowded streets to get food?

Pretty similar actually. Theres a bit of a carpark though. I can also go outside to walk within a 2k radius. Il drive to the local SuperValu for provisions.

Imagine how much of a "hotspot for coronavirus" that city would be without these restrictions in place.
Until the threat disappears we will hold our resolve. Stay strong.

If you deliberately flout the restrictions you are possibly putting the lives of others at risk. This should be a criminal offence and heavily punished

seamusk84

I would love the restrictions to be lifted on Sunday.

But I am also not an idiot....

brutes1 wrote: »

936 deaths. Only 46 of those without other health conditions .
The numbers quoted hide the true picture. How many actually die because of Covid? Or how many die with it but as a result of their underlying condition. ?The vast majority I suspect

Media and propaganda works. Question more.

from BBC
Britain's deadliest day since the Covid-19 outbreak began saw 936 more people die after testing positive.

The Department for Health confirmed the UK-wide total of 7,172 included 828 deaths in England.

Patients were aged between 22 and 103, including 46 people who had no known underlying conditions.

Think you replied to the wrong post here...? This is nothing to do with what I wrote.

Tell me how wrote: »

Anyone considering the rules as draconian at this point in time are either being ignorant or selfish.

The ignorance on display here is your insistence that self imposed restrictions are no different than what has been imposed by law with accompanying penalties on the general population here.
YOU have a choice, the people in this country at present don't enjoy that particular freedom you have.

Tell me how wrote: »

Are you not advocating for a reduction in restrictions?

Surely then the streets will only be busier?

No. I'm pointing out that this strict lockdown will inevitably need to end within the next 6 weeks. People simply will not keep it up any longer, and there aren't the resources to police it.

lainey_d_123 wrote: »

Where do you live, Blueshoe? Do you live in an overcrowded city which is a hotspot for coronavirus, in a tiny flat with no outside space? Do you have to go out into crowded streets to get food?

Are you not advocating for a reduction in restrictions?

Surely then the streets will only be busier?

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

have you tried being more stoic about the situation? your constant moaning isn't going to make anything better, just accept it how it is, it wont be forever.

I'm not saying it will make anything better. I'm saying that a huge proportion of people are simply not going to hack this too much longer. That's a fact.

Just because you people living in nice, comfortable houses with gardens and a fully stocked freezer can't imagine any other reality doesn't make it untrue.