ChatterBank1 min ago
Is It Almost Time For People To Take Responsibility For Themselves?
129 Answers
Isolation is creating serious social and personal problems so since the situation with the virus seems to be stabilising somewhat, when this current session of lockdown ends should people be allowed to take responsibility for themselves? Whilst the vulnerable may - and must - choose to remain in isolation, should those who aren’t designated vulnerable be allowed to return to work and to normal life with businesses, pubs and clubs opening up again resulting in life, for them - and the economy - returning to normal?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Most of us under ‘house arrest’ seem to forget that many thousands have continued to work since the beginning, and it’s not only NHS staff, care workers, policemen, postmen, shop assistants, delivery drivers, and farmers - it’s those who fix roads, and telephone lines, and water leaks and electrical faults and those who mend buses and trains, etc., too. All of those people have been ensuring that the necessities remain. So many carrying on unseen.
Furthermore, the scientist playing with sums (as my quite brilliant mathematician friend would have it) from whom the government is taking advice has a track record of getting it wrong. We’ve seen enormous figures bandied around, even from armchair amateurs on here, with no indication that they are accurate or even likely to prove accurate in the future. Meanwhile businesses are folding, jobs are being lost, the economy is being trashed, people’s mental health is suffering, their physical health is often being compromised, marriages are cracking, children, confined to barracks, are going without formal education, and in some cases suffering abuse at the hands of those who either struggle to control their frustration - or don’t care to control it. I’m not entirely convinced that the realistic effects of the virus justify the damage that such extreme counter-measures are inflicting.
Chris, I added ‘must’ as an afterthought. If I hadn’t there’s a very good chance I’d have been jumped upon by people saying ‘The vulnerable don’t have a choice’.
Furthermore, the scientist playing with sums (as my quite brilliant mathematician friend would have it) from whom the government is taking advice has a track record of getting it wrong. We’ve seen enormous figures bandied around, even from armchair amateurs on here, with no indication that they are accurate or even likely to prove accurate in the future. Meanwhile businesses are folding, jobs are being lost, the economy is being trashed, people’s mental health is suffering, their physical health is often being compromised, marriages are cracking, children, confined to barracks, are going without formal education, and in some cases suffering abuse at the hands of those who either struggle to control their frustration - or don’t care to control it. I’m not entirely convinced that the realistic effects of the virus justify the damage that such extreme counter-measures are inflicting.
Chris, I added ‘must’ as an afterthought. If I hadn’t there’s a very good chance I’d have been jumped upon by people saying ‘The vulnerable don’t have a choice’.
I am not sure what has changed to make you suggest that now is the right time to ease off on the preventative measures? I mean either something has changed and if so what? or nothing has changed yet and we need to continue with the same precautions. I agree that the curves seem to be flattening but that just means that the rate of infection is being slowed by the actions being taken....like rolling down hill and applying a brake. the brake slows the descent but only while you are using it. Stop using it and you will quickly speed up again.
I think it's perfectly fair for those who wish to question the efficacy of the lockdown should do so. I don't understand why we assume what the Govt is telling us to do is the right thing - this is as much an unknown to them as it is for us.
I know it's awful for those who have lost loved ones but they still remain very much in the minority. I find it interesting that Sweden's graphs seem to be performing the same as everyone else's but they didn't lockdown. That must say something, surely? At least it's a fair question to ask?
I know it's awful for those who have lost loved ones but they still remain very much in the minority. I find it interesting that Sweden's graphs seem to be performing the same as everyone else's but they didn't lockdown. That must say something, surely? At least it's a fair question to ask?
Hii woofgang- naomi is talking about when the latest lockdown ends but I'm not sure whether she means we should open up in the way she suggests irrespective of what the data shows or only if the data shows it's safe to relax things significantly. I think even when this lockdown is reviewed there will be a call for 'one last push'- all the furloughing and other measures are in place for 3 months so maybe that's the govt's expected time scale
There are so many factors though- age profile, underlying health, population density, compliance levels with restrictions, testing regimes, climate, % of BAME, household sizes, reliability/consistency of data- that it's difficult to make meaningful comparisons between countries.
I think it's very hard to argue that a lockdown makes no difference- we can see the R0 value has fallen from 2.3 to below 1 here already so our deaths would certainly have been higher, maybe far higher, without a lockdown.
Another factor is the NHS's ability to cope and the availability of PPE. The government cannot risk another prolonged spike
I think it's very hard to argue that a lockdown makes no difference- we can see the R0 value has fallen from 2.3 to below 1 here already so our deaths would certainly have been higher, maybe far higher, without a lockdown.
Another factor is the NHS's ability to cope and the availability of PPE. The government cannot risk another prolonged spike
population density has something to do with it but it's not the only factor. Taiwan's is more than twice Britain's and yet its death rate is 0.3 compared with Britain's 243 (currently the seventh highest). Japan's density, in a country of similar size, is a lot more than Britain's too, but their death rate is 2. Australia and NZ, also island nations, both have rates of 3.
There are an awful lot of countries doing better than here. I feel we should be looking at how they're achieving it.
There are an awful lot of countries doing better than here. I feel we should be looking at how they're achieving it.
Every country is trying to juggle their economic survival with the need to protect their health systems and save lives. There are no easy answers, but an easing of the lockdown must be coming fairly soon, as it is in places that we're a few weeks behind like Italy and Spain.
What they don't want to do is lift it too suddenly or too soon and see that curve heading up steeply again.
What they don't want to do is lift it too suddenly or too soon and see that curve heading up steeply again.
Latest Posts
Spectator N0 2653 By Cheesecracker
Crosswords7 mins ago
Crosswords8 mins ago
News28 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.