Public Opinion on Lockdowns

[Domh245]

As has been pointed out here, with stats, there is no evidence that lockdowns actually make any difference. You are still pushing the argument that lockdown = fewer cases, which just isn't supported by the evidence.

Less intrusive, targeted measures would likely be no less effective while not causing the massive damage which these lockdowns have done and are doing.

You seem to keep conflating lockdown as a long term strategy with lockdown as a short term strategy. To argue that a lockdown has no effect on case rates (and thus healthcare demands and deaths) in the short term comes across as quite frankly as sticking your head in the sand. A set of less restrictive, more targeted measures over the long term (ie Swedish style) is obviously preferable, but when faced with the situation as it was at the end of December and then try to argue that we needed less stringent restrictions there & then just comes across as sticking your head in the sand. The usual bounceback in cases once lockdown ends that we've seen before will be significantly lessened by the ongoing vaccination program

 

[DB]

You seem to keep conflating lockdown as a long term strategy with lockdown as a short term strategy. To argue that a lockdown has no effect on case rates (and thus healthcare demands and deaths) in the short term comes across as quite frankly as sticking your head in the sand. A set of less restrictive, more targeted measures over the long term (ie Swedish style) is obviously preferable, but when faced with the situation as it was at the end of December and then try to argue that we needed less stringent restrictions there & then just comes across as sticking your head in the sand. The usual bounceback in cases once lockdown ends that we've seen before will be significantly lessened by the ongoing vaccination program

There is no evidence that targeted measures (i.e. those aimed specifically at at risk groups) are less effective than lockdowns - but this country, along with many others, has consistently refused to consider this.

It is also worth noting that the current measures don't actually do much to reduce the risk in some situations known to be high risk - e.g. care homes, where workers travelling between them still happens.

 

[nedchester]

You seem to keep conflating lockdown as a long term strategy with lockdown as a short term strategy. To argue that a lockdown has no effect on case rates (and thus healthcare demands and deaths) in the short term comes across as quite frankly as sticking your head in the sand. A set of less restrictive, more targeted measures over the long term (ie Swedish style) is obviously preferable, but when faced with the situation as it was at the end of December and then try to argue that we needed less stringent restrictions there & then just comes across as sticking your head in the sand. The usual bounceback in cases once lockdown ends that we've seen before will be significantly lessened by the ongoing vaccination program

Exactly. In early January we were looking at many places being in the 500-700 cases per 100000, we then had lockdown (plus vaccination) and we are looking at about 300 cases per 100000. To deny that the lockdown didn't contribute to that is utter pigheadedness and not willing to accept the evidence because you're so wrapped up in your beliefs or maybe embarrassed you are wrong?

 

[sjpowermac]

There is no evidence that targeted measures (i.e. those aimed specifically at at risk groups) are less effective than lockdowns - but this country, along with many others, has consistently refused to consider this.

It is also worth noting that the current measures don't actually do much to reduce the risk in some situations known to be high risk - e.g. care homes, where workers travelling between them still happens.

Which country can you name that has actually done a ‘Great Barrington’ and what were the results?

I think I’m correct in saying that the natural rate of ‘R’ for the virus is about 3, but the current rate is less than 1. Whilst acknowledging the problems with measuring R, it seems reasonably clear that something is ‘working.’

Regarding case numbers being on the turn as we went into lockdown 3.0, I wonder if that might have been connected with schools having been shut for over two weeks at that time?

I think that schools are the elephant in the room. There’s little clear evidence on them, I suspect because it has been considered prudent not to look too closely. As I understand it, approximately 60% of transmission is in the home, the other 40% must come from somewhere!

Before you ask, I fully support the full reopening of schools as soon as possible and would very much have preferred for them to be open now.

For the avoidance of doubt, I’m not on furlough, I live in a small flat, I’m most definitely not rich and I have worked throughout, full time from May onwards.

Exactly. In early January we were looking at many places being in the 500-700 cases per 100000, we then had lockdown (plus vaccination) and we are looking at about 300 cases per 100000. To deny that the lockdown didn't contribute to that is utter pigheadedness and not willing to accept the evidence because you're so wrapped up in your beliefs or maybe embarrassed you are wrong?

The usual riposte to this is that there’s a natural ebb and flow to infections...

 

[nedchester]

There is no evidence that targeted measures (i.e. those aimed specifically at at risk groups) are less effective than lockdowns - but this country, along with many others, has consistently refused to consider this.

It is also worth noting that the current measures don't actually do much to reduce the risk in some situations known to be high risk - e.g. care homes, where workers travelling between them still happens.

How do you target risk groups. Seal off old people's homes and make ill people isolate completely (there are an estimated 3 million vulnerables often living with non-vulnerables who would also need to be isolated. Or maybe you are suggesting concentration camps for those people (that was a joke by the way)

Oh and people cannot be completely isolated because as you say workers at care homes come and go so that blows your argument out of the water.

 

[Кряква]

How do you target risk groups. Seal off old people's homes and make ill people isolate completely (there are an estimated 3 million vulnerables often living with non-vulnerables who would also need to be isolated. Or maybe you are suggesting concentration camps for those people (that was a joke by the way)

Oh and people cannot be completely isolated because as you say workers at care homes come and go so that blows your argument out of the water.

So we can't pay for the vulnerable to isolate, but we can pay for millions to stop working based on arbitrary decisions about the "viability" of their business?

We can't tell care workers to live on site, but we can make it illegal for the entire population to be outside without an excuse?

Come on, let's have a proper debate rather than pretending these issues are impossible, they're not even that hard to implement....

 

[nedchester]

Which country can you name that has actually done a ‘Great Barrington’ and what were the results?

I think I’m correct in saying that the natural rate of ‘R’ for the virus is about 3, but the current rate is less than 1. Whilst acknowledging the problems with measuring R, it seems reasonably clear that something is ‘working.’

Regarding case numbers being on the turn as we went into lockdown 3.0, I wonder if that might have been connected with schools having been shut for over two weeks at that time?

I think that schools are the elephant in the room. There’s little clear evidence on them, I suspect because it has been considered prudent not to look too closely. As I understand it, approximately 60% of transmission is in the home, the other 40% must come from somewhere!

Before you ask, I fully support the full reopening of schools as soon as possible and would very much have preferred for them to be open now.

For the avoidance of doubt, I’m not on furlough, I live in a small flat, I’m most definitely not rich and I have worked throughout, full time from May onwards.


The usual riposte to this is that there’s a natural ebb and flow to infections...

I did think the Great Barrington was a good idea. In theory it is but like many things the practicality is somewhat different.

As for schools, it still seems obvious to me that the large increase in infections from Sept 2020 onwards was due to school infections. 60% of infections occur in homes but I wonder how many of those infections were brought into homes by school children? I am also in favour of schools being open but understand why they are not. Education by Zoom is just not effective as I well know.

 

[philosopher]

Yes, opening up from mid-March if the current progress with vaccination continues. I am certainly NOT part of the pro-lockdown brigade, don't want it tougher or last longer. I just feel that at certain times there is little other alternative.

Maybe I'm unique in not sitting in one camp or another but seeing the middle ground that has to be tread for this.

I can begrudgingly accept the need for this lockdown in terms of preventing the NHS from being overwhelmed. I think now that the UK has gone down the lockdown route it might as well follow through with it now that we are hopefully near the end of the pandemic in the UK. That said I do think overall a strategy more akin to Sweden's would have been more appropriate.

The issue I have is that many seem to want restrictions to continue either in attempt to eradicate Covid in the UK, a goal that is very likely unachievable in the UK or because they are in someway benefiting from the restrictions personally.

 

[nedchester]

We have spent 500 billion pounds.

If I lived with a vulnerable family member I would move out if I could not isolate. It makes logical sense to pay those who are unable to do so so that they can.

Are you saying that we can't tell care workers to live on site, but that we can make it illegal for the entire population to be outside without an excuse?

How do you force people to do it though if they don't want to leave a loved one......that would be very 'authoritarian'........

 

[Кряква]

How do you force people to do it though if they don't want to leave a loved one......that would be very 'authoritarian'........

We don't need to force them to do anything!

This is the main flaw with your argumentation - you feel the need to "protect" people who don't want to be protected.

You're unwilling to look at individual situations, and instead assume that everything must be based on the top-level stats on infections.

How do you force people to stay inside for an indefinite period, destroying their mental health against their will? We've already done it! There is no "how", there is only "should we". And I would argue no force is necessary in any of this.

We should be equipping people with the tools required to make the best decisions for themselves and their families, not expecting everyone across the country to sacrifice simply because lockdown is the lazy option.

 

[nedchester]

The issue I have is that many seem to want restrictions to continue either in attempt to eradicate Covid in the UK, a goal that is very likely unachievable in the UK or because they are in someway benefiting from the restrictions personally.

Totally agree

 

[sjpowermac]

I actually think I'm in the middle camp of wanting proportionate reasonable restrictions rather than a full lockdown; looking beyond the UK that accounts for what appears to be the majority of countries.

The harsher the restrictions, the fewer benefits (in terms of reduced cases) but the greater the harms to society.

Anyway I look forward to being in agreement with you in a few weeks time

When you say the ‘middle camp’ do you mean something around Tier 2ish on restrictions?

Whilst I can’t say that I enjoyed any of the Tiers, 2 felt like a reasonable balance. As to whether that would have been sufficient by late December, I’m genuinely not sure.

I agree that at the margins some of the things actually seem counter productive and not particularly sustainable.

I agree too that the burdens of lockdowns fall disproportionately on poorer sections of society. Fully agree too about how public transport has been demonised. I say that as someone who has never owned a car.

 

[nedchester]

We don't need to force them to do anything!

This is the main flaw with your argumentation - you feel the need to "protect" people who don't want to be protected.

You're unwilling to look at individual situations, and instead assume that everything must be based on the top-level stats on infections.

How do you force people to stay inside for an indefinite period, destroying their mental health against their will? We've already done it! There is no "how", there is only "should we". And I would argue no force is necessary in any of this.

We should be equipping people with the tools required to make the best decisions for themselves and their families, not expecting everyone across the country to sacrifice simply because lockdown is the lazy option.

I've just looked at some of your other posts and think you need help. Please consult a doctor asap.

I am NOT taking the piss, you have been seriously affected by the current situation and perhaps need to seek assistance before you do yourself and perhaps others harm.

 

[Кряква]

I've just looked at some of your other posts and think you need help. Please consult a doctor asap.

I am NOT taking the piss, you have been seriously affected by the current situation and perhaps need to seek assistance before you do yourself and perhaps others harm.

Thanks - I agree. I am not taking the piss either.

I, and many others like me, need these restrictions to go, very soon, otherwise we will be forced to take some very drastic actions.

You, and people like you, have removed every last shred, every safety net, every mechanism for joy from my life over these past few months (coming on a year now). I don't think that you're quite aware of this - but now you are aware, and you have time to redress this before serious unrest occurs.

You're tearing apart the fabric of this country over a single variable analysis.

All I ask is for you to stop pushing me. I will gladly pay for any isolation you want for you and your loved ones - whack it on Income Tax, do as you will. But leave me the **** alone.

 

[sjpowermac]

I did think the Great Barrington was a good idea. In theory it is but like many things the practicality is somewhat different.

As for schools, it still seems obvious to me that the large increase in infections from Sept 2020 onwards was due to school infections. 60% of infections occur in homes but I wonder how many of those infections were brought into homes by school children? I am also in favour of schools being open but understand why they are not. Education by Zoom is just not effective as I well know.

In many secondary schools having year group bubbles actually made the spread of the virus more likely than the option of doing nothing at all.

As an example, the requirement to keep year groups separated at break times led to full year groups being crammed inside rather than the previous situation where many students would be outside and at least getting some exercise. I could go on but I’m sure you get the picture!

I can begrudgingly accept the need for this lockdown in terms of preventing the NHS from being overwhelmed. I think now that the UK has gone down the lockdown route it might as well follow through with it now that we are hopefully near the end of the pandemic in the UK. That said I do think overall a strategy more akin to Sweden's would have been more appropriate.

The issue I have is that many seem to want restrictions to continue either in attempt to eradicate Covid in the UK, a goal that is very likely unachievable in the UK or because they are in someway benefiting from the restrictions personally.

I agree with most of what you have put there, but I’m not sure where the evidence is that ‘many’ people want the restrictions to continue.

 

[nedchester]

Thanks - I agree. I am not taking the piss either.

I, and many others like me, need these restrictions to go, very soon, otherwise we will be forced to take some very drastic action.

You, and people like you, have removed every last shred, every safety net, every mechanism for joy from my life over these past few months (coming on a year now). I don't think that you're quite aware of this - but now you are aware, and you have time to redress this before serious unrest occurs.

You're tearing apart the fabric of this country over a single variable analysis.

I really don't think you know what I think and your current fragile mental state is clouding your judgement of what my point of view is. I am far from a locktivist but understand that certain measures need to happen. People have been affected to different levels, most are able to cope well, others less so.

Please seek medical assistance.

 

[Кряква]

I really don't think you know what I think and your current fragile mental state is clouding your judgement of what my point of view is. I am far from a locktivist but understand that certain measures need to happen. People have been affected to different levels, most are able to cope well, others less so.

Please seek medical assistance.

I know your point of view very well, thanks. You seek to imprison the entire population for the benefit of a select few.

I am indeed sick, as a direct result of your policy. Why pretend you care, when you clearly don't? You seek to "other" anyone who doesn't go along with your sick totalitarian fantasies.

What "medical assistance" do you suggest, perchance? Should I be in a mental hospital, locked up because you've pushed me to the absolute brink of what I can handle?

I'd much rather your kind be thrown under the bus.

Hell, if this doesn't stop soon, at least a few of them will be.

They dont "need" to be, of course. But they will. Because when you keep pushing people, further and further until they snap, things happen which may seem to an external observer to be ilogical.

 

[Yew]

Exactly. In early January we were looking at many places being in the 500-700 cases per 100000, we then had lockdown (plus vaccination) and we are looking at about 300 cases per 100000. To deny that the lockdown didn't contribute to that is utter pigheadedness and not willing to accept the evidence because you're so wrapped up in your beliefs or maybe embarrassed you are wrong?

If it is due to lockdowns, why are Florida, North Dakota and Sweden also seeing cases decline, despite minimal to no restrictions

 

[nedchester]

I know your point of view very well, thanks. You seek to imprison the entire population for the benefit of a select few.

I am indeed sick, as a direct result of your policy. Why pretend you care, when you clearly don't? You seek to "other" anyone who doesn't go along with your sick totalitarian fantasies.

What "medical assistance" do you suggest, perchance? Should I be in a mental hospital, locked up because you've pushed me to the absolute brink of what I can handle?

I'd much rather your kind be thrown under the bus.

Hell, if this doesn't stop soon, at least a few of them will be.

If you are a danger to yourself and others then yes you should be hospitalised. If you are threatening harm to others then I am afraid you need help and quick.

I will not engage with you any more and it could be that the moderators of this board have a duty of care to you.

 

[Кряква]

If you are a danger to yourself and others then yes you should be hospitalised. If you are threatening harm to others then I am afraid you need help and quick.

I will not engage with you any more and it could be that the moderators of this board have a duty of care to you.

I agree.

Unfortunately I also believe that you are threatening harm to me on an ongoing basis. You simply see it as being less acute because you have no empathy - you only understand force and violence.

Shall we both pop down there then?

 

[Yew]

If you are a danger to yourself and others then yes you should be hospitalised. If you are threatening harm to others then I am afraid you need help and quick.

I will not engage with you any more and it could be that the moderators of this board have a duty of care to you.

Remind me, which one of us is advocating measures that cause direct harms to millions?

 

[sjpowermac]

They dont "need" to be, of course. But they will. Because when you keep pushing people, further and further until they snap, things happen which may seem to an external observer to be ilogical.

You are absolutely correct about illogical. So many things this past year have seemed strange and absolutely awful.

I remember last March waking up so many times and feeling really disconcerted about everything. I suppose in many ways I’ve just got numb to it all now.

May I ask, is there anything you are looking forward to when this is finally over? I know for myself I’m looking forward to doing some Railway photography outside my home city. I know it’s trivial! Do you have anything you hold onto?

 

[DB]

If it is due to lockdowns, why are Florida, North Dakota and Sweden also seeing cases decline, despite minimal to no restrictions

Quite. This is the point which those in favour of lockdowns never want to address.

 

[sjpowermac]

Quite. This is the point which those in favour of lockdowns never want to address.

28°C and sunny in Florida right now, you are the one who always pushes that the virus ebbs and flows according to the seasons!

Hardly any daylight hours to go out in Sweden, that must surely suppress transmission somewhat.

Still waiting to see your examples of countries that have tried Great Barrington and been successful...

And still, for the avoidance of doubt, I’m not pro-lockdown or for keeping the schools closed.

 

[Кряква]

You are absolutely correct about illogical. So many things this past year have seemed strange and absolutely awful.

I remember last March waking up so many times and feeling really disconcerted about everything. I suppose in many ways I’ve just got numb to it all now.

May I ask, is there anything you are looking forward to when this is finally over? I know for myself I’m looking forward to doing some Railway photography outside my home city. I know it’s trivial! Do you have anything you hold onto?

This probably sounds like some sort of silly "meta-analysis", but honestly, I'm just looking forward to feeling like I, we, are a society again, that we're part of an inclusive whole rather than atomized entities or animals to be herded or whatever.

Maybe I've just been lucky in life so far. I've felt comfort in the fact that I put in - study and work hard, do my bit, pay my taxes, don't work in abusive industries, look after my fellow man - and as a result, I get to enjoy life with my friends and family, the state looks after me to an extent, I can spend my money on amusements, etc.

Right now all of that is gone. I feel no sense of belonging, no role in this "new world", I see no place for me.

In terms of the everyday? I'd just like to be able to jump on the train, go to another city, and have there be amenities at the other end and none of these silly "you MUST do" announcements and adverts everywhere.

Hardly any daylight hours to go out in Sweden, that must surely suppress transmission somewhat..

I've lived in Sweden for a short period of time - way up North. They don't really let the darkness bother them, it's common for streets to have (non-festive) lighting etc.

A bit like how here we don't really let a bit of rain stop us from having a go of it because we'd never get out otherwise.

 

[Cowley]

As I said yesterday this thread may end up being locked and this is why:
It’s such an unanswerable question. So many people have differing opinions on this and trying to work out what the public think is not something that can really be answered in this thread and it’s causing the thread to go off in all kinds of different directions...
There is also a support group running and some of the issues around people struggling with this may be better off being had in that:

Online support group for people who are upset/anxious/angry/frustrated with Covid restrictions

I am setting up a support group via the forum's conversation message function, for anyone who feels either upset, anxious, angry or frustrated at the Covid restrictions, so that people can share frustrations and support each other. If you wish for me to add you to the group, you can either send...

www.railforums.co.uk

Over and out.