Are You Pro Lock Down Or Against?

[dave50]

It seems that the country is divided.
On one side is those who say let's get things back to normal and the consequences of the devistation of the economy is not a price worth paying against the relatively small number of deaths (50000 out of a population of 67 million).
The other side says full lock down must continue until there are no deaths and we have a vaccine, ie lives are more important than the economy.
I am in the get things back to normal camp ASAP, as we are a lot better capable of treating the illness than we were before and its something we will just have to live with, like flu deaths.
What do others think?

[murraymints]

a difficult balance...folk can't be trusted to distance as has been demonstrated widely..think alcohol needs to be removed from the equation and there may be a fighting chance of some kind of responsible behaviour..speaking as one who fell to the covid my opinion is somewhat flavoured..6 weeks on I am still suffering post viral effects..this is NOT just a flu as we know it

[naomi24]

The vulnerable must continue to take care but the rest of the country has to return to normal life. If it doesn’t, the cure will prove more devastating than the disease.

[murraymints]

agree Naomi.... people need to be a bit more aware and considerate when going about their business...it could work if that awareness and responsibility is practised

[ummmm]

As Naomi says.

Alcohol can't be taken out of the equation. You're talking about peoples livelihoods and remember many landlords also live on site.

[woofgang]

I am neither. We aren't in full lock down now and I think that Chris Whitty is right to say right now that in order to do some things, we must pause doing others. Apart from vaccine and better treatments, I think that society must learn to do things differently as it has done before to face health challenges. We have had Acts of Parliament to clean up that air and the drinking water, we've had vaccination, we have learned to manage HIV, MRSA and so on, but we have to use the blunt tools we have until we develop sharper ones. We don't know what the effects of mass infection would be. We don't know if catching it a second time would be more dangerous.
So no, not infavour of complete lockdown unless things get much worse. Not in favour of complete back to old normal.
Dave50 have you known someone who has died of Covid or been badly affected?

[naomi24]

//we have learned to manage HIV, MRSA and so on//

But none of that has resulted in the situation that Covid19 has caused - in effect, the world closing down. There is no comparison.

[woofgang]

isn't that an argument for taking more care and not less?

[murraymints]

alcohol in public places outwith a controlled licenced premises Ummmm... it is actually illegal to drink in public up here...and the polis have been up to their eyes in confiscating booze from public gatherings that have resulted in all manner of disorder !

[mushroom25]

// We don't know if catching it a second time would be more dangerous. //

further, we still don't yet know if catching it a second time is possible, or not. there have allegedly been a few recorded cases of re-infection in the far east, but the medicos were divided whether this was true re-infection, or misinterpretation of test results.

[davebro]

Back to normal please. Let those who are worried take whatever measures they think necessary to protect themselves.

[postman44]

Depends how sensible people are behaving. If they are abusing the rules we have been given lockdown will happen again. Everyone wants some kind of normality again.

[Jackdaw33]

I am fervently against lockdown even though I am classed as vulnerable. I think that for the survival of the country as a whole we have to take the risk and let nature takes its course.

[Peter Pedant]

of course the two choices you have offered is a social construct !
a false dichotomy even
( erm yeah in that kinda mood)
Do I agree with central authority instituting measures to limit a lethal infection
yes
then the only discussion is 1) what should we do and why
2) to what extent does "You will do this because I am the central authority" run ?

we can even draw conclusions from other real lie experiments
Jair Bolsano has called it a "leedol flu"
and by that he is saying in his country of 220 000 000, that 22 000 000 ( yup 10% is 22m ) deaths is acceptable

Melbourne is going froo a spazzy because they are getting 1000 cases a day

[Peter Pedant]

// further, we still don't yet know if catching it a second time is possible,//

BA to that one - amidst all the usual AB carping and I dont know what (*)

* I do really

[Kathyan]

Have you noticed now how they are using cases instead of deaths and coronavirus instead of Covid 19? It's all to keep the fear going! Same with people dying with Covid not of Covid. It's all in the wording.

[jno]

it sounds as though there will be fewer but better Britons (to quote Ninotchka).

[Peter Pedant]

yeah - a friend said "but they are all still dead of course"

[woofgang]

I am not sure how saying corona virus instead of covid keeps the fear going?

[ParsleyDumpling]

Against lockdown for me. As Kathyan wrote, the goalposts seem to have moved, to infections and not deaths. Yes, protect the vulnerable (if they so wish), but otherwise, we need to get back to old normal, not new.

[woofgang]

can you not understand that the old normal has gone? It has gone as irreversibly as England before the war has gone.