Lockdowns

[James Wood]

Don’t think you’ve got my point yet...

Revisit excess deaths in Sweden in 5 years time. People there are not missing hospital appointments.

Lockdowns are short-termism. Sacrificing tens or hundreds of thousands in the long term.

Lockdowns will kill far more than Covid will in the long run.

An inconvenient truth....

Read your original post Andy. You were championing the ‘relaxed’ Swedish approach v that which others that had instigated that had had more restrictions. Initially it did seem to have worked, but Sweden is a vastly different country than the U.K., France, Spain etc all of which have very mobile populations and lots of visitors. Now they are almost as bad as the U.K. re number of deaths per head of population.
A very inconvenient truth...,

 

[Knutsfordian]

Looks like Germany is now running at rates not far off the UK with 30,000 new cases and 600 deaths

RKI registriert 11.644 Corona-Neuinfektionen – Inzidenz steigt leicht - WELT

Die Gesundheitsämter in Deutschland meldeten dem RKI binnen eines Tages 11.644 Corona-Neuinfektionen. Die 7-Tage-Inzidenz ist im Vergleich zum Vortag leicht auf 62,6 gestiegen. Ein Überblick in Zahlen und Grafiken.

www.welt.de

 

[Andy]

Read your original post Andy. You were championing the ‘relaxed’ Swedish approach v that which others that had instigated that had had more restrictions. Initially it did seem to have worked, but Sweden is a vastly different country than the U.K., France, Spain etc all of which have very mobile populations and lots of visitors. Now they are almost as bad as the U.K. re number of deaths per head of population.
A very inconvenient truth...,

Well James, you’re clearly picking and choosing what you read of mine, for whatever reason.
So below are a few posts where I’ve continuously banged on about the collateral damage caused by lockdowns outweighing Covid. Something Sweden won’t be hit by as badly as the UK will.

Countries that lockdown in Europe aren’t control the virus. The same curve is followed regardless of locking down or not locking down.

An Indian restaurant in Warrington wrote in the Guardian how the 10pm curfew has hit their profits by something like 60%.

Busiest time for curry houses for example is 9pm to 12pm.

The restaurant is socially distanced, following all the correct procedures. Just as safe being in there at 11pm than it is a 6pm.

the curfew is crippling business. Of all the U-turns from the government, it’s unbelievable they won’t reverse this ridiculous decision.

They did, but they also went down in Nations that used common sense rather than lockdowns.

The reality of lockdown for Covid is the medicine is more deadly than the disease. Even the WHO are advising against lockdowns.

SAGE did indeed want a full lockdown, and thank christ Rishi Sunak Opposed it. The only person in Westminister seemingly looking at the bigger picture.

You’ve only just realised? They’ve been ignoring the science for months

Lockdown 'could kill 200,000 people' with hospital delays & recession

AN official government report warned more than 200,000 could die from the impact of the coronavirus lockdown as a result of hospital delays and a severe economic downturn. In the report, published …

www.thesun.co.uk

Despite all that I still think the Government over reacted in March. But with hindsight now we know there isn’t any conclusive proof that this approach works, but there is conclusive proof that there’s catastrophic collateral damage from it.

Jesus, have you read a single thing anyone has actually written?

No ones disputed that “cases“ are slowly rising. The point people are making is that quarantining the healthy, is draconian, destructive to the medium and long term health and futures of everyone. LOCKING DOWN ISNT THE ONLY WAY.

In March the World knew very little. Now we know much more. The Mortality rate for Under 70s is 0.05%.

Hide away if you wish, but you have no right to sneer at those worried about the unnecessary destruction because caused to the future physical health, mental health and financial security if everyone.

View attachment 2055

The conclusion states: “The inferred infection fatality rates tended to be MUCH LOWER than estimates made earlier in the pandemic”

Sweden has been a leading light of rational thinking throughout

The elderly are paying a terrible price for being protected from Covid

Sweden’s decision to abolish restrictions on the over-70s raises important questions for Britain

www.telegraph.co.uk

McMillan estimate that there have been 50,000 Cancer cases gone undiagnosed due to lockdown. It’s criminal

That’s the point an increasing number of people are making. Protect the few people that this virus is dangerous to. The virus could be here for a few years. Destroy your economy and you destroy any chance you have of actually being able to protect the vulnerable.

I hope MPs take time to look at this website before voting.

Home - Collateral Global

Cultivating a better understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 responses

collateralglobal.org

 

[James Wood]

Well James, you’re clearly picking and choosing what you read of mine, for whatever reason.
So below are a few posts where I’ve continuously banged on about the collateral damage caused by lockdowns outweighing Covid. Something Sweden won’t be hit by as badly as the UK will.

Countries that lockdown in Europe aren’t control the virus. The same curve is followed regardless of locking down or not locking down.

And you clearly have not paid due regard to the point I have been consistently making.
I totally agree with you about the impact that lockdowns have had on the economy and ongoing treatment of people with existing or emerging health issues.
The point that I have made from hour one of day one is that if we didn’t take action immediately and continue to do so to suppress the virus then Covid could overwhelm the NHS and result in a huge backlog in elective surgery and other testing for potentially major diseases

 

[Ben]

Wales is going back in another lockdown after Christmas just weeks after finishing their last one, while the UK has recorded more than 25k cases and 600 deaths today, just 2 weeks after England exited theres. We’re now in the same situation again.

Do lockdowns really work?

 

[Knutsfordian]

Nope only social distancing works but people won't fecking listen !!!

 

[Ben]

Nope only social distancing works but people won't fecking listen !!!

You look at some of the Asian countries and Australia and New Zealand and there have been some success stories with lockdowns and test and trace. However, taking a look at Western Europe as a whole, then the UK isn’t the only country struggling to contain the virus as Italy, France, Germany and Spain are all having their struggles.

Yes people not following rules and social distancing doesn’t help but are we really saying that all of Europe’s and most of the UKs citizens aren’t trying their best? This isn’t just a British problem, it’s a global one and wherever you look, most aren’t dealing with this virus. It is after all a virus, that in the winter will be most prevalent like all viruses are, so what do you do?

Whether it’s lockdowns, fire breakers, circuit breakers, tier restrictions, call them whatever, they don’t seem to be working. Time for a plan B or do we just sit it out stay in lockdown and restrictions and wait for these vaccines to be fully rolled out? I think we all know what governments will do (what they’ve been doing for the last 9 months) but we can have the discussion at least.

 

[Knutsfordian]

lockdowns show that if you stop social interaction you break the virus being passed on.

People, wherever they are, are incapable of reducing their social interaction and that's why we keep having all the rules imposed. That's why the messaging should be banging on relentlessly about reducing social interaction

 

[James Wood]

lockdowns show that if you stop social interaction you break the virus being passed on.

People, wherever they are, are incapable of reducing their social interaction and that's why we keep having all the rules imposed. That's why the messaging should be banging on relentlessly about reducing social interaction

Agree 100%. By their very nature viruses spread through contact between living species, whether they be humans, cows, sheep, dogs or birds. Cut and / or restrict contact between them and you restrict the spread of the virus. That was shown during the first lockdown and cases went up when the restrictions were relaxed. As the Meerkat says ‘Simples’.

 

[James Wood]

You look at some of the Asian countries and Australia and New Zealand and there have been some success stories with lockdowns and test and trace. However, taking a look at Western Europe as a whole, then the UK isn’t the only country struggling to contain the virus as Italy, France, Germany and Spain are all having their struggles.

Yes people not following rules and social distancing doesn’t help but are we really saying that all of Europe’s and most of the UKs citizens aren’t trying their best? This isn’t just a British problem, it’s a global one and wherever you look, most aren’t dealing with this virus. It is after all a virus, that in the winter will be most prevalent like all viruses are, so what do you do?

Whether it’s lockdowns, fire breakers, circuit breakers, tier restrictions, call them whatever, they don’t seem to be working. Time for a plan B or do we just sit it out stay in lockdown and restrictions and wait for these vaccines to be fully rolled out? I think we all know what governments will do (what they’ve been doing for the last 9 months) but we can have the discussion at least.

And Plan B might be what?

In the meantime the advice from Boris and his chums re Christmas have couldn’t be clearer.

You can visit your Grandparents over the festive season but only if they live in an odd-numbered house, own a cat, are aged under 60, are left-handed and were married in the month of March??

 

[Andy]

People are going to do what they’re going to do over Christmas, regardless of what the government say.

So from a behavioural science point of view it’s not a bad idea to not reverse the rules.

People will do what they will do, if you tell them it’s breaking the rules, they’ll be more inclined to break the rules again in the future.

I hate seeing people blaming the public “for not following the rules”. Stop attacking people for living their lives. The facts are lockdowns don’t work.

if you want to blame someone, blame the government and opposition parties for not having the nous to change approach. Everyone can see lockdowns aren’t working anywhere in Europe.

 

[Knutsfordian]

Well looks like, so far, no one has come up with an alternative that works because people won't voluntarily reduce their social interaction. It's not about blaming the people, but it's only people who can pass it on to each other. Its not the fault of the government, the scientists, the opposition parties, Donald Trump, the NHS or anyone else that they can't stop the virus spreading. Only the collective population can do that by looking after ourselves and thereby others too

 

[Ben]

Knutsfordian, I’m sorry but I don’t agree. Covid-19 is a virus and like any virus it will spread and be more prevalent at winter.

You can take precautions which will reduce its threat but you ultimately can’t stop it. When are we going to come to that point of acceptance and take a more personal responsibility approach rather than enforcing rules on people like you can’t trust them?

James, my plan B is more personal responsibility, let’s see how it goes over Christmas and make the ‘rules’ more advisory so people can use their own common sense and make their own judgments. But let’s absolutely stop punishing and closing sectors of society where there is little evidence that they account for a significant number of infections such as pubs and restaurants.

 

[Knutsfordian]

Knutsfordian, I’m sorry but I don’t agree. Covid-19 is a virus and like any virus it will spread and be more prevalent at winter.

You can take precautions which will reduce its threat but you ultimately can’t stop it. When are we going to come to that point of acceptance and take a more personal responsibility approach rather than enforcing rules on people like you can’t trust them?

James, my plan B is more personal responsibility, let’s see how it goes over Christmas and make the ‘rules’ more advisory so people can use their own common sense and make their own judgments. But let’s absolutely stop punishing and closing sectors of society where there is little evidence that they account for a significant number of infections such as pubs and restaurants.

Because the bottom line is Ben that you can't trust people to do the right thing ! The government is trying to get people to take more personal responsibility - but numbers are still climbing. Hence the government is forced to act by closing all places where people gather, because they won't do it for themselves !!

 

[Edge]

I would say lockdowns work but every country appears to be doing a watered-down version of a lockdown.

 

[James Wood]

People are going to do what they’re going to do over Christmas, regardless of what the government say.

So from a behavioural science point of view it’s not a bad idea to not reverse the rules.

People will do what they will do, if you tell them it’s breaking the rules, they’ll be more inclined to break the rules again in the future.

I hate seeing people blaming the public “for not following the rules”. Stop attacking people for living their lives. The facts are lockdowns don’t work.

if you want to blame someone, blame the government and opposition parties for not having the nous to change approach. Everyone can see lockdowns aren’t working anywhere in Europe.

For Christ’s sake Andy when will you accept that lockdowns do work? We saw that when the first one was introduced in March. The one in Leicester worked. The ones on Greater Manchester have worked (hence all the hoo-haa from Graham Brady wanting Trafford taken out of Tier 3). Liverpool was one of the areas with highest incidence of cases per 100,000 of population. Tough restrictions and they are now lower than many other urban areas.
I think that you are in denial about what the facts clearly demonstrate and what all the highly experienced and qualified experts - plus our old friend Knutsfordian- say about this matter. Limit contact between people and you restrict the spread of this virus. It really is as simple as that!

 

[James Wood]

You can hammer the government if you think there should have never been a full lockdown in the first place, So I will. They were set on a course similar to Sweden, and a Neil Ferguson published an absolutely bogus model, and a few people shouted “that’s problematic” and the government lost its bottle and changed direction, U turn number one.

Fast forward 7 months, life in Stockholm is looking sweet. Cases aren’t rising sharply, life is relatively normal, and the mental health of the nation is very well, not in tatters in like in this country where people have frightened themselves stiff.

Essential to protect the vulnerable, and it’s hard to protect the vulnerable in a collapsed economy. The virus endemic, it’s here to stay - protect the vulnerable, and rather than place perfectly healthy people under house arrest, allow them to keep the country going so it is in a strong enough position to properly care for the Vulnerable.

What I find interesting, is when you look on Social Media and the news, those people that were so concerned about how Brexit might damage the futures of young people, now don’t give two hoots about how these lockdowns will effect the futures of young people. Funny that, maybe caring about the young is only an argument they pretend to care about when it suits them?

More about the ‘sweet life’ in Stockholm

Coronavirus: Swedish King Carl XVI Gustaf says coronavirus approach 'has failed'

Sweden has been criticised for its more relaxed approach to handling the pandemic.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Knutsfordian]

For Christ’s sake Andy when will you accept that lockdowns do work? We saw that when the first one was introduced in March. The one in Leicester worked. The ones on Greater Manchester have worked (hence all the hoo-haa from Graham Brady wanting Trafford taken out of Tier 3). Liverpool was one of the areas with highest incidence of cases per 100,000 of population. Tough restrictions and they are now lower than many other urban areas.
I think that you are in denial about what the facts clearly demonstrate and what all the highly experienced and qualified experts - plus our old friend Knutsfordian- say about this matter. Limit contact between people and you restrict the spread of this virus. It really is as simple as that!

Thank you James - good to see you acknowledge my status at last lol

 

[Knutsfordian]

For Christ’s sake Andy when will you accept that lockdowns do work? We saw that when the first one was introduced in March. The one in Leicester worked. The ones on Greater Manchester have worked (hence all the hoo-haa from Graham Brady wanting Trafford taken out of Tier 3). Liverpool was one of the areas with highest incidence of cases per 100,000 of population. Tough restrictions and they are now lower than many other urban areas.
I think that you are in denial about what the facts clearly demonstrate and what all the highly experienced and qualified experts - plus our old friend Knutsfordian- say about this matter. Limit contact between people and you restrict the spread of this virus. It really is as simple as that!

I don't think there is anyone who is a fan of lockdowns (The impact on people and business is horrendous), but would anyone really swap places with those that have to make the decisions they do? On one hand there are those screaming that lockdowns don't happen soon enough, and then there are those who complain about the impact on business and people. Who would really have that dilemma on their crop? Pundits like Piers Morgan have relentlessly attacked ministers for
their lack of action and tried to pi on them the responsibility for all those dreadful deaths. Why would they do anything different under that onslaught?

 

[G Edge]

I don't think there is anyone who is a fan of lockdowns (The impact on people and business is horrendous), but would anyone really swap places with those that have to make the decisions they do? On one hand there are those screaming that lockdowns don't happen soon enough, and then there are those who complain about the impact on business and people. Who would really have that dilemma on their crop? Pundits like Piers Morgan have relentlessly attacked ministers for
their lack of action and tried to pi on them the responsibility for all those dreadful deaths. Why would they do anything different under that onslaught?

The 65k+ people who have sadly passed away from Covid wish they could be part of any lockdown.
GE