DustyBin
Established Member
Oh for crying out loud. It was never just about deaths. Ever.
If nothing was done where exactly would all those people who needed hospital help to *survive* Covid-19 go? There would be more of them than we’ve actually had.
Where do all the other people who need a bed in hospital go when the beds are taken up with folk on oxygen due to Covid? How do people get cancer surgery or trauma surgery when there are no intensive care beds available because Covid-19 folk are in them? And there’s a lot of surgery that requires an intensive care bed to be available even if it’s not actually expected to be used, too.
How many more would we actually have had though? I don’t claim to have a definitive answer, however we know that infections, hospitalisations and deaths don’t grow exponentially, they reach a peak and then decline. The extent to which even our “full” lockdowns affected this is open to debate.
I stand to be corrected here but I don’t actually recall “protect the NHS” being cited as a reason for imposing restrictions until the end of 2020?
I think there’s some doubt over how the South Africa data applies to us — we have a fatter and older population than they have.
I do think that the advice should have been rather more nuanced than it is. WFH advised for CEV households only, rather than everyone. There doesn’t seem to be any distinction made for those most vulnerable this time around.
True, however we also have a much higher vaccination rate.
In regard to your second point I completely agree.