Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
The issue is you can't mention rule breakers or potential rule breakers because people think its blame.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Coronavirus
- Thread starter markysimmo
- Start date
The issue is you can't mention rule breakers or potential rule breakers because people think its blame.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
You make it sound like you're a government apologist
Yes, some kind of authoritarian, decisive action probably would have limited the harm caused. Look at China, or Korea. Or New Zealand, Australia, Germany etc. I personally wouldn't have minded a Swedish approach. The point is, whatever measures you take, do them well and with conviction. Our government did neither. And that is why people in the UK will sadly suffer more than in other nations.
Legohamster
Cecil Poynton
you can certainly blame them and also the government in not taking them with them
These raves were after 5/6 months - after the gov had lost all authority And moral high ground.
the gov have hidden behind “following the science” without explaining it and making stuff up saying it’s done to science.
labour need to start opposing as well.
People who just want to work are branded as selfish by those able to WFH and not be affected and celebrities - amazing irony really
spurspinter1
Paul Stalteri
This is a genuine question, what can we take from this?
I haven't seen any figures but an increase sadly would't surprise me...
monkeybarry
Ian Walker
"Given the current position that it affects a small volume of (known) people I'd consider both aspects very low risk; however it should be noted that the impact has the potential to be high and if the numbers were to increase it could have impacts across a range of factors in society, not limited to public health factors."
Did a little tweak for you.
At present it is small in both volume and significant impact, hopefully it stays that way. But it should not be dismissed as irrelevant yet.
You make it sound like you're a government apologist
Yes, some kind of authoritarian, decisive action probably would have limited the harm caused. Look at China, or Korea. Or New Zealand, Australia, Germany etc. I personally wouldn't have minded a Swedish approach. The point is, whatever measures you take, do them well and with conviction. Our government did neither. And that is why people in the UK will sadly suffer more than in other nations.
Nice polticians answer of avoiding the question
You said we didn't lock down hard enough, that's nothing to do with timing of lockdown. You make it sound like you think the lockdown wasn't strict enough so I'm wondering what additional measures you'd have put in place?
I agree if you are going to lockdown you do it swiftly, the week of pubs can open but please don't go should have been the start of lockdown however on the flipside the stats show that we'd peaked prior to the actual lockdown starting so no one can say definitively what should have happened.
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
Nice polticians answer of avoiding the question
You said we didn't lock down hard enough, that's nothing to do with timing of lockdown. You make it sound like you think the lockdown wasn't strict enough so I'm wondering what additional measures you'd have put in place?
I agree if you are going to lockdown you do it swiftly, the week of pubs can open but please don't go should have been the start of lockdown however on the flipside the stats show that we'd peaked prior to the actual lockdown starting so no one can say definitively what should have happened.
No. 1 is to be better prepared. Around December/Jan governments were observing what was going on, and planning. in Feburary, our PM skipped 5 Cobra meetings!! Five! The Times headline is the UK Sleepwalking into Disaster. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...n-britain-sleepwalked-into-disaster-hq3b9tlgh
If you are to lockdown - make sure it works!! If you are going to close the nation, do it well! Make sure it is for a reason, not just going through the motions. And get testing and tracking in place to maintain things when you open up. Ensure visitors are screened. Secure the nation. The faster and more stringent the lockdown the quicker the UK recovers. In theory, a two week draconian lockdown should get things under control.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but even at the time, people were calling for the right things - faster action, better testing etc. Our government were the least prepared it seems.
Last edited:
Mikey10
John Lacy
The sad thing is we’re repeating the same process. Nadine Dorries now saying hospitals in some areas are 10 days away from being overwhelmed - which means actions taken now are already too late.
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
There has been an increase. Record number of calls on domestic and child abuse too over the last few months.
Locking people away is not the answer
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
But even if track and trace works coming out of lockdown means infections would increase, track and trace does not stop that, we just know where they are.
Another Lockdown comes from the fact we went into a first lockdown because now the country is sh1tting its self at the increase of infections which were alway going to go back up back when we went back into society.
Lockdown was a success but it came at a price which was wait till the vaccine otherwise any increase in infections are met with hysteria
Lemonade Money
Steffen Freund
Is it?
An effective track and trace system coupled with enforced quarantine, would slow the numbers of infections greatly. That should have been the plan.
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
Yeh but then again so would the realization that the initial infection attacked and unfortunately killed the most vulnerable....globally, thats how all diseases work.
We know enough about the thing not to lockdown again but as long as people keep staring at the infection rate like its a clock then we have no hope
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
Yep hence the threat of another lockdown
Legohamster
Cecil Poynton
Lemonade Money
Steffen Freund
The threat of another lockdown is from the government, no? I don't see or hear anyone bricking themselves. Where do you live that everyone is bricking themselves? Or are you basing this on the media?
Baleforce
Martin Peters
The absence of hope for me is seeing the number of people not doing the right things, distancing, mask wearing, etc.
Grays_1890
Colin Calderwood
I meant the government, they are the ones that decide if we go into a lockdown
SpurMeUp
Les Howe
London is okay as things stand. Some areas in the North were seeing people admitted to hospital at rates seen in April. Which was a concern. I don't know if that was a blip, but if not, 'local lockdowns' are probably needed. Just to ensure hospitals don't become consumed by Covid - and to stop the NHS going back to being the 'National Covid Service'.