The Covid-19 serious chat thread

[JuliusHMarx]

First topic message reminder :

Self-isolating, social distancing, locked down thread split.

[Duty281]

There is the possibility that instead of "mad" which is one of those abstract, catch all blame no-one for anything specific, terms maybecthis government should be judged in terms of "competence", " legality:"  and " honesty". With specific ministers being held accountable for specific actions.
Or we could just hold an annual Festival Of Celebration to thank Boris for delivering us from Europe.

I'm not saying the government is mad, more the collective nation as a whole. But, yes, the government has behaved almost entirely with incompetence, dishonesty and illegality, which isn't surprising given that it's led by Johnson and has taken on board all manner of strange advice.

[Duty281]

Vaccine passports must be opposed.

Why?

Seems common sense to me to implement such a measure.

1) Further state intrusion. Further erosion of civil liberty.
2) Vaccine efficacy not 100%/multiple strains of Covid-19, means that having a vaccination may not prevent a person from catching/spreading Covid-19, making the intended use of a vaccine passport redundant.
3) Legal nightmare, in terms of GDPR, human rights laws (both national/supranational), equality/discrimination laws, labour laws etc.

[Soul Requiem]

Vaccine passports must be opposed.

Why?

Seems common sense to me to implement such a measure.

1) Further state intrusion. Further erosion of civil liberty.
2) Vaccine efficacy not 100%/multiple strains of Covid-19, means that having a vaccination may not prevent a person from catching/spreading Covid-19, making the intended use of a vaccine passport redundant.
3) Legal nightmare, in terms of GDPR, human rights laws (both national/supranational), equality/discrimination laws, labour laws etc.

Erosion of civil liberty dear me. 120,000 dead but you're concerned at being required to have the vaccine before doing certain activities. It doesn't make the intended use redundant at all, it is a measure to reduce transmission not eliminate it entirely.

[Samo]

I'd feel safer knowing I was surrounded by people who have had a vaccine with even 50% efficacy rather than a room full of people who havent had any vaccine.

What human rights are broken by refusing service to someone who hasnt had a vaccine without medical reason/not in a vaccinated group yet?

[Duty281]

Vaccine passports must be opposed.

Why?

Seems common sense to me to implement such a measure.

1) Further state intrusion. Further erosion of civil liberty.
2) Vaccine efficacy not 100%/multiple strains of Covid-19, means that having a vaccination may not prevent a person from catching/spreading Covid-19, making the intended use of a vaccine passport redundant.
3) Legal nightmare, in terms of GDPR, human rights laws (both national/supranational), equality/discrimination laws, labour laws etc.

Erosion of civil liberty dear me. 120,000 dead but you're concerned at being required to have the vaccine before doing certain activities. It doesn't make the intended use redundant at all, it is a measure to reduce transmission not eliminate it entirely.

You can, of course, be concerned at both things. Civil liberties are always of the highest importance, especially due to how precious they are.

[Soul Requiem]

You can, of course, be concerned at both things. Civil liberties are always of the highest importance, especially due to how precious they are.

One matters the other is just a meaningless buzz word.

[Duty281]

You can, of course, be concerned at both things. Civil liberties are always of the highest importance, especially due to how precious they are.

One matters the other is just a meaningless buzz word.

I can only feel sympathy if you believe your individual rights and freedoms are meaningless. Though I can feel empathy if you've been made to feel that way based on events over the past twelve months.

[BamBam]

You can, of course, be concerned at both things. Civil liberties are always of the highest importance, especially due to how precious they are.

One matters the other is just a meaningless buzz word.

Like sovereignty, for example

[Samo]

You can, of course, be concerned at both things. Civil liberties are always of the highest importance, especially due to how precious they are.

One matters the other is just a meaningless buzz word.

I can only feel sympathy if you believe your individual rights and freedoms are meaningless. Though I can feel empathy if you've been made to feel that way based on events over the past twelve months.

Your civil liberties end when they can put someone elses life in danger. Like drink driving. You can drive drunk, but you arent allowed to because you put other people at risk.

[Y I Man]

You can, of course, be concerned at both things. Civil liberties are always of the highest importance, especially due to how precious they are.

One matters the other is just a meaningless buzz word.

I can only feel sympathy if you believe your individual rights and freedoms are meaningless. Though I can feel empathy if you've been made to feel that way based on events over the past twelve months.

Your civil liberties end when they can put someone elses life in danger. Like drink driving. You can drive drunk, but you arent allowed to because you put other people at risk.

What about my civil liberties not to be infected by someone?

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Equally, it's not saying you have to stay inside. If you would prefer this "liberty" over going abroad, fair enough.

What are they gonna get from knowing you have a vaccine that they don't know from you having a passport you use?

[alfie]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer. Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

[Y I Man]

The only serious debate needed, is what colour the vaccine passport should be :-D

[navyblueshorts]

Vaccine passports must be opposed. Some Tory minister has previously said there wouldn't be any vaccine passports, but the Tories will alter path on this. At least out of the EU our government actually gets to decide. That's nice, but we all know which way the big-government Tories will go.

The path out of lockdown is far too slow as well. Little point in having a world-beating vaccine programme, which it has been (one area the government deserves credit), if it takes four more months to get back to somewhere approaching normality.

We already know the damage from lockdown(s) is greater than the damage (and potential damage) wreaked by Covid, now the economy will have to suffer for even longer than anticipated, as there appears to be no 'vaccine dividend'.

As the old saying goes, those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. Our nation has been mad for the past year. The suspension of normal democratic procedures, state power so great that a potential fascist or communist government would turn green with envy, and a quick surrender of civil rights and liberties. All in all a grossly disproportionate response, a terrifying precedent established and a complete social upheaval. And the maddest thing of all - one of the most stringent lockdowns in the world happened in the UK, but one of the highest death tolls per capita also happened in the UK. Mad. And history will view it as such.

With respect, Israel would claim to have done better; so not actually 'world-beating'.

And, I'm sorry, but I don't give a 4X of the needs of the few and the claim that individual freedoms always trump those of wider society.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

[navyblueshorts]

Vaccine passports must be opposed.

Why?

Seems common sense to me to implement such a measure.

1) Further state intrusion. Further erosion of civil liberty.
2) Vaccine efficacy not 100%/multiple strains of Covid-19, means that having a vaccination may not prevent a person from catching/spreading Covid-19, making the intended use of a vaccine passport redundant.
3) Legal nightmare, in terms of GDPR, human rights laws (both national/supranational), equality/discrimination laws, labour laws etc.

Not really, no. Anyway, as we're now a free, sovereign, independent nation, we can surely do as we damned well please?

[Duty281]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

The thin end of the wedge was passed nearly a year ago.

[Duty281]

Vaccine passports must be opposed.

Why?

Seems common sense to me to implement such a measure.

1) Further state intrusion. Further erosion of civil liberty.
2) Vaccine efficacy not 100%/multiple strains of Covid-19, means that having a vaccination may not prevent a person from catching/spreading Covid-19, making the intended use of a vaccine passport redundant.
3) Legal nightmare, in terms of GDPR, human rights laws (both national/supranational), equality/discrimination laws, labour laws etc.

Not really, no. Anyway, as we're now a free, sovereign, independent nation, we can surely do as we damned well please?

Yes, really. The Royal Society wrote a good paper looking at the legal entanglements. And I was speaking from an international, not national, perspective.

[Soul Requiem]

The international perspective won't make a difference if vaccine passports become common place throughout the world. Baffling that the feelings of those refusing to have the jab should be prioritised over those that have.

[Duty281]

The issue of vaccine passports/passes in everyday society affects both those who have had, and those who have not had, the jab(s).

[Soul Requiem]

Equally the actions of those against such a measure affect those who have and have not had the jab. I know which group of people I don't give a toss about.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

The thin end of the wedge was passed nearly a year ago.

Let me ask you, Duty: do you think lockdowns are / have been necessary?

[Duty281]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

The thin end of the wedge was passed nearly a year ago.

Let me ask you, Duty: do you think lockdowns are / have been necessary?

For the entire population? Of course not. It's right to shield those who are vulnerable because of their age and/or because of pre-existing health conditions, but locking down the entire population was an incorrect move.

At a certain level lockdown has failed - we've (as a nation) recently endured one of the most stringent lockdowns in the world, but are also experiencing one of the highest death tolls in the world (per capita; death tolls are of course not entirely related to government action, however). The economic effects of lockdown will be felt for decades to come, particularly with regards to levels of government borrowing and national debt (this is the most awful aspect; and the atrocious spending review a few months ago was covered up by the 'dead cat' of the foreign aid cut, a total nonsense), but for the short-term it's 'just' the small businesses going to the wall and the rising unemployment numbers to contend with. And we have a snapshot so far, in time we'll get a full picture, of the extra deaths caused through lockdown, as well as the myriad of other issues that aren't currently being discussed widely (mental health deterioration being a key one, though there are others).

And, yes, there's the liberty argument. All very tedious to some authoritarians on here, I'm sure, but we've seen the government of the day exert a terrifying level of control and establish a truly frightening precedent. Freedom of assembly, democratic norms, even the ability to leave your house - all restricted just like that, through rushed Acts of Parliament and little democratic process. If any truly sinister government in the UK comes to power in the near-future, they'll know how easy it is to establish a fascistic tyranny.

All of the above might make a degree of sense if the Black Death was ravaging our green and pleasant land, instead we're experiencing a virus which has a greater than 99% survival rate for the majority of the population.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Thanks. I suspected as much.

[lostinwales]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

The thin end of the wedge was passed nearly a year ago.

Let me ask you, Duty: do you think lockdowns are / have been necessary?

For the entire population? Of course not. It's right to shield those who are vulnerable because of their age and/or because of pre-existing health conditions, but locking down the entire population was an incorrect move.

At a certain level lockdown has failed - we've (as a nation) recently endured one of the most stringent lockdowns in the world, but are also experiencing one of the highest death tolls in the world (per capita; death tolls are of course not entirely related to government action, however). The economic effects of lockdown will be felt for decades to come, particularly with regards to levels of government borrowing and national debt (this is the most awful aspect; and the atrocious spending review a few months ago was covered up by the 'dead cat' of the foreign aid cut, a total nonsense), but for the short-term it's 'just' the small businesses going to the wall and the rising unemployment numbers to contend with. And we have a snapshot so far, in time we'll get a full picture, of the extra deaths caused through lockdown, as well as the myriad of other issues that aren't currently being discussed widely (mental health deterioration being a key one, though there are others).

And, yes, there's the liberty argument. All very tedious to some authoritarians on here, I'm sure, but we've seen the government of the day exert a terrifying level of control and establish a truly frightening precedent. Freedom of assembly, democratic norms, even the ability to leave your house - all restricted just like that, through rushed Acts of Parliament and little democratic process. If any truly sinister government in the UK comes to power in the near-future, they'll know how easy it is to establish a fascistic tyranny.

All of the above might make a degree of sense if the Black Death was ravaging our green and pleasant land, instead we're experiencing a virus which has a greater than 99% survival rate for the majority of the population.

This is a fallacy. Death rates are low at least partially because of the precautions that we have taken. Crucially there are a lot of people who are not dying in hospital who are either dying within a few months https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-hospitals-death-long-covid-b1804704.html or suffering life changing damage to their health https://edrooksby.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/nine-months-in-the-long-limbo-of-long-covid/ (Author recently died). The other major factor in survivability is the effectiveness of the health service. If it is not overwhelmed the death rates are what they are, but had the NHS truly ran out of staff and capacity the death rates would have gone much much higher. The lockdowns have helped protect the health service. A month ago we had 60K new infections recorded per day. It is still high now but we are much better off.

The fundamental problem with the lockdowns is that they have always tended to be enacted too late. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but 2nd time around there were big warning signs which could have been heeded earlier. Earlier, potentially harder, lockdowns could have meant not being in such a hard lockdown now.

Living in lockdown is truly sh!te. I am not underestimating the mental toll, not least because it is something we are all facing. All we can say is that it could have been a lot worse, but we didn't quite get there so we don't know how much worse it could have got.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

I do love how the kind of Kumquat who have mocked mental health online for years have now found it an ally in their hatred so use it to try justify their stance.

[BamBam]

SOVEREIGNTYYYYYYYY

[BamBam]

Sorry about that, it’s just been the default outraged retort for so many years I’ve forgotten what other means of response to arguments there are

[lostinwales]

Sorry about that, it’s just been the default outraged retort for so many years I’ve forgotten what other means of response to arguments there are

There is so much bitterness in discussion linked to, for instance, Brexit that it is easy to forget that Duty here is capable of debating these issues. I rarely agree with him but respect his ability to make his arguments sensibly, and not agreeing is actually OK. This forum would be a worse place without different points of view.

[Duty281]

I do love how the kind of Kumquat who have mocked mental health online for years have now found it an ally in their hatred so use it to try justify their stance.

I've little idea what this refers to, but you're a lot better than this abusiveness.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

I don't know why anyone would think that lockdowns / restrictions are anyone's ideal choice. Why would any government be doing this if it didn't think it was necessary? And surely that fact that it's governments worldwide, on the right and the left, doing broadly the same kind of thing, is enough to tell you that it's not an overreaction, and that is the right thing to be doing. If you think they're all colluding to overreact to something trivial, just to gain 'control' of their citizens, then you need to have a word with yourself.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

I do love how the kind of Kumquat who have mocked mental health online for years have now found it an ally in their hatred so use it to try justify their stance.

I've little idea what this refers to, but you're a lot better than this abusiveness.

Apologies, I wasn’t talking so much to/of you, Doots, I have been off the forum for a while and my head is clear of the views of this place. I meant the Hartley-Brewers of this world, and I would never put myself above abusing people like her. And I think myself better for that, too.

Like a lot of people, I find swearing a perfectly expressive form of language, especially so when it’s full of warranted anger.

[Y I Man]

What you will find regarding vaccine passports, is that some self owned pubs and restaurants will insist on some proof of vaccination to use the premises, whether the government enforces them or not.

[BamBam]

Sorry about that, it’s just been the default outraged retort for so many years I’ve forgotten what other means of response to arguments there are

There is so much bitterness in discussion linked to, for instance, Brexit that it is easy to forget that Duty here is capable of debating these issues. I rarely agree with him but respect his ability to make his arguments sensibly, and not agreeing is actually OK. This forum would be a worse place without different points of view.

Yeah it was just my usual attempt to bring a bit of levity to the debate. I acknowledge Duty putting forward arguments that have a basis beyond waving pom poms for Boris Johnson's benefit, no names mentioned of course

[navyblueshorts]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

The thin end of the wedge was passed nearly a year ago.

Let me ask you, Duty: do you think lockdowns are / have been necessary?

For the entire population? Of course not. It's right to shield those who are vulnerable because of their age and/or because of pre-existing health conditions, but locking down the entire population was an incorrect move.

At a certain level lockdown has failed - we've (as a nation) recently endured one of the most stringent lockdowns in the world, but are also experiencing one of the highest death tolls in the world (per capita; death tolls are of course not entirely related to government action, however). The economic effects of lockdown will be felt for decades to come, particularly with regards to levels of government borrowing and national debt (this is the most awful aspect; and the atrocious spending review a few months ago was covered up by the 'dead cat' of the foreign aid cut, a total nonsense), but for the short-term it's 'just' the small businesses going to the wall and the rising unemployment numbers to contend with. And we have a snapshot so far, in time we'll get a full picture, of the extra deaths caused through lockdown, as well as the myriad of other issues that aren't currently being discussed widely (mental health deterioration being a key one, though there are others).

And, yes, there's the liberty argument. All very tedious to some authoritarians on here, I'm sure, but we've seen the government of the day exert a terrifying level of control and establish a truly frightening precedent. Freedom of assembly, democratic norms, even the ability to leave your house - all restricted just like that, through rushed Acts of Parliament and little democratic process. If any truly sinister government in the UK comes to power in the near-future, they'll know how easy it is to establish a fascistic tyranny.

All of the above might make a degree of sense if the Black Death was ravaging our green and pleasant land, instead we're experiencing a virus which has a greater than 99% survival rate for the majority of the population.

I'm sorry, but you don't understand half of the issues here. For a start, letting a new, human pathogen run rife through a large population is the height of stupidity. You do not want to allow it the chance to evolve. You have no idea what you'll get. All anyone banging on about individual freedoms ever thinks about is their own 'rights' being curtailed. Just because they don't trust anyone not to take it too far (probably says more about them, tbh), it is not a reason to be so completely selfish.

If you want all the rights, but none of the responsibilities, of living in a society, suggest you buy an island and create your own. I am fed up to the back teeth with all of these self-important "I want my individual rights!" cretins within what is a large, complex human society. You do not have any right to do whatever you want if that injures those around you. If you don't understand that basic tenet, then you're not mature enough to have a modern society.

Yes, of course Government has to have checks and balances (and some of the Covid legislation may not have had enough scrutiny), but it's a balance and I suggest you don't understand where that balance has to lie in situations such as this one.

[navyblueshorts]

What you will find regarding vaccine passports, is that some self owned pubs and restaurants will insist on some proof of vaccination to use the premises, whether the government enforces them or not.

Of course. I also don't hear anyone talking about these for the long-term. Once enough are vaccinated and/or are otherwise immune, it's far more questionable whether they're a valid thing to mandate thereafter.

[Y I Man]

What you will find regarding vaccine passports, is that some self owned pubs and restaurants will insist on some proof of vaccination to use the premises, whether the government enforces them or not.

Of course. I also don't hear anyone talking about these for the long-term. Once enough are vaccinated and/or are otherwise immune, it's far more questionable whether they're a valid thing to mandate thereafter.

The problem this will cause, is that it will open the door for fake passports, unless the government makes official ones, with counterfeit protection.

[navyblueshorts]

What you will find regarding vaccine passports, is that some self owned pubs and restaurants will insist on some proof of vaccination to use the premises, whether the government enforces them or not.

Of course. I also don't hear anyone talking about these for the long-term. Once enough are vaccinated and/or are otherwise immune, it's far more questionable whether they're a valid thing to mandate thereafter.

The problem this will cause, is that it will open the door for fake passports, unless the government makes official ones, with counterfeit protection.

That could be an issue I guess, but it's not one that should stand in the way if the principle is that these should be used. Perhaps a use for the NHS Covid 19 app after all this time? Who knows. Above my pay grade .

[Duty281]

I will edit misinformation that I consider disrespectful and insulting. If you can’t respect that, they’ll be changed more firmly.

Such censorship is disappointing, but unsurprising given the often over-zealous moderating on here. Little wonder so many posters have drifted away when fair discussion is discouraged and alternative points of view are policed.

[Duty281]

Some sort of "vaccine passport" is surely a no-brainer.  Think they will be needed world wide for the foreseeable future.

Doesn't mean they will take away anyone's civil liberties any more than current sensible covid related restrictions do : just enables airlines , prospective destinations , hospitality venues , etc , etc the required information for them to make their own decisions as to admitting someone or not ; at a time when we are still not going to be certain as to when the dangers are over...

Help to open everything up quicker , no ? Really can't see why anyone would object to it.

I think some people see vaccine passports as the thin end of the wedge. That's not my view, just to be clear.

The thin end of the wedge was passed nearly a year ago.

Let me ask you, Duty: do you think lockdowns are / have been necessary?

For the entire population? Of course not. It's right to shield those who are vulnerable because of their age and/or because of pre-existing health conditions, but locking down the entire population was an incorrect move.

At a certain level lockdown has failed - we've (as a nation) recently endured one of the most stringent lockdowns in the world, but are also experiencing one of the highest death tolls in the world (per capita; death tolls are of course not entirely related to government action, however). The economic effects of lockdown will be felt for decades to come, particularly with regards to levels of government borrowing and national debt (this is the most awful aspect; and the atrocious spending review a few months ago was covered up by the 'dead cat' of the foreign aid cut, a total nonsense), but for the short-term it's 'just' the small businesses going to the wall and the rising unemployment numbers to contend with. And we have a snapshot so far, in time we'll get a full picture, of the extra deaths caused through lockdown, as well as the myriad of other issues that aren't currently being discussed widely (mental health deterioration being a key one, though there are others).

And, yes, there's the liberty argument. All very tedious to some authoritarians on here, I'm sure, but we've seen the government of the day exert a terrifying level of control and establish a truly frightening precedent. Freedom of assembly, democratic norms, even the ability to leave your house - all restricted just like that, through rushed Acts of Parliament and little democratic process. If any truly sinister government in the UK comes to power in the near-future, they'll know how easy it is to establish a fascistic tyranny.

All of the above might make a degree of sense if the Black Death was ravaging our green and pleasant land, instead we're experiencing a virus which has a greater than 99% survival rate for the majority of the population.

This is a fallacy. Death rates are low at least partially because of the precautions that we have taken. Crucially there are a lot of people who are not dying in hospital who are either dying within a few months https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-hospitals-death-long-covid-b1804704.html or suffering life changing damage to their health https://edrooksby.wordpress.com/2021/01/09/nine-months-in-the-long-limbo-of-long-covid/  (Author recently died). The other major factor in survivability is the effectiveness of the health service. If it is not overwhelmed the death rates are what they are, but had the NHS truly ran out of staff and capacity the death rates would have gone much much higher. The lockdowns have helped protect the health service. A month ago we had 60K new infections recorded per day. It is still high now but we are much better off.

The fundamental problem with the lockdowns is that they have always tended to be enacted too late. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but 2nd time around there were big warning signs which could have been heeded earlier. Earlier, potentially harder, lockdowns could have meant not being in such a hard lockdown now.

Living in lockdown is truly sh!te. I am not underestimating the mental toll, not least because it is something we are all facing. All we can say is that it could have been a lot worse, but we didn't quite get there so we don't know how much worse it could have got.

Hence why I said majority of the population. I accept the survival rate is below 99% for those who are elderly/have pre-existing health conditions, which is why such people should be shielded by a limited lockdown, which would in turn protect those who are most likely to be hospitalised by Covid. The peak of hospitalisations from Covid happened during January 2021, when such rates were far higher (as expected) than before and during the first/second lockdown. This also suggests the capacity of the health service wasn't stretched to breaking point before and during the first/second lockdown, though I absolutely agree that protecting the health service is a priority.

Harder lockdowns earlier would have probably still meant being in one now, going by the same line of government thinking, because cases of Covid were always going to increase in the winter months, and any government would find it difficult to 'sell' a lockdown during the Christmas/New Year period.

[Duty281]

I don't know why anyone would think that lockdowns / restrictions are anyone's ideal choice. Why would any government be doing this if it didn't think it was necessary? And surely that fact that it's governments worldwide, on the right and the left, doing broadly the same kind of thing, is enough to tell you that it's not an overreaction, and that is the right thing to be doing. If you think they're all colluding to overreact to something trivial, just to gain 'control' of their citizens, then you need to have a word with yourself.

1) Governments are often incompetent. Ours certainly is. Some are also corrupt. If you want to ask why a government is doing a certain thing, it could be because it's the right thing, it might be the incompetent thing (which this is), or it might be a corruption angle (I think dodgy dealings have been covered by others on here).

2) Just because a lot of governments are doing the same thing does not also mean it's the right thing. Whether something is correct or not is often judged on the reasoning behind it, not judged on the basis that everyone else is doing it ergo it must be the correct thing to do.

3) I've never intimated that the main reason our government is establishing lockdown is to control their citizens. Some people are, I'm not. They're doing it mostly because they're incompetent. But a sinister precedent has been established, yes.

-------

https://www.606v2.com/viewtopic.php?t=70243

[Sponsored content]