• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Reports on effectiveness (or not!) and impacts of lockdown and other measures

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cdd89

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
1,453
I agree with @brad465's post above, and would further add that it's wrong to suggest that we avoided restrictions with the current government. We were locked down for months after we'd "vaccinated the vulnerable", and far from being a distant memory it was fewer than 6 months ago that we had Covid Jail reinstated with zero notice (for arrivals from South Africa), with Boris bragging about how we were the first country to do it.

I have resigned to restrictions being dictated by global trends rather than domestic politics as world leaders apishly copy each other. This doesn't stop me being irritated with Starmer when he's busy banging on about "the Johnson variant causing a summer of chaos" and travel bans; but I've stopped believing that things would be any different in practice. Given the negligible difference in practice between the parties, of a couple of months at most, I'd rather have the one that will catch hell from the tabloids when they try to impose/extend more lockdowns.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,754
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
BBC economic correspondent Andrew Verity has just claimed that "we're only now finding out what happens when you shut down* entire industries for two years".... Really? Is the current economic turmoil not something else that was entirely predictable, and indeed predicted by many of us on here? Yes there's the war in Ukraine but that's only compounding the problem.

*Heavily disrupt may be more accurate, but the point stands regardless.

Even Ukraine could possible be a product of Putin seeing an opportunity with the west distracted / financially messed up. Or another theory is Putin’s judgement has been affected by his comparative isolation over two years.

Providing we keep Labour out of power, I am sure we won't.

It was bothersome how close we came to restrictions making a reappearance in December, and how little fuss was made about it. I don’t think it’s likely, but never say never for sure.
 
Last edited:

kristiang85

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2018
Messages
2,655
Another nail in the coffin of lockdown ideology:


UK experts believe they have identified the cause of the recent spate of mysterious liver problems affecting young children around the world.
Investigations suggest two common viruses made a comeback after pandemic lockdowns ended - and triggered the rare but very serious hepatitis cases.
More than 1,000 children - many under the age of five - in 35 countries are thought to have been affected.
Some, including 12 in the UK, have needed a lifesaving liver transplant.
The two teams of researchers, from London and Glasgow, say infants exposed later than normal - because of Covid restrictions - missed out on some early immunity to:
  • adenovirus, which normally causes colds and stomach upsets
  • adeno-associated virus two, which normally causes no illness and requires a coinfecting "helper" virus - such as adenovirus - to replicate
That could explain why some developed the unusual and worrying liver complications.

Noah, three, who lives in Chelmsford, Essex, needed an urgent liver transplant after becoming dangerously ill with hepatitis.
His mother, Rebecca Cameron-McIntosh, says the experience has been devastating.
"He'd previously had nothing wrong with him," she says. "And for it to suddenly go so quickly. I think that's what kind of took us by surprise.
"We've just assumed it was one little problem that will get easily sorted out - but actually it just kept on snowballing."
Initially, Rebecca was lined up to donate part of her liver - but, after a serious reaction to drugs used, she ended up in intensive care.
Noah was put on the transplant list and, soon after, received a new organ.
His recovery has been good - but he will need to take immunosuppressant drugs for life, to stop his body rejecting the new liver.
Rebecca says: "There is something really heartbreaking about that because you go along following the rules, do what you are supposed to do to protect people that are vulnerable and then, in some horrible roundabout way, your own child has become more vulnerable because you did what you were supposed to do."
Cases such as this are rare. Most children who catch these types of viruses quickly recover.
It is unclear why some then develop liver inflammation - but genetics might play a part.
Scientists have ruled out any connection with coronavirus or Covid vaccines.
One of the investigators, Prof Judith Breuer, an expert in virology, at University College London and Great Ormond Street Hospital, said: "During the lockdown period when children were not mixing, they were not transmitting viruses to each other.
"They were not building up immunity to the common infections they would normally encounter.
"When the restrictions were lifted, children began to mix, viruses began to circulate freely - and they suddenly were exposed with this lack of prior immunity to a whole battery of new infections."

Experts are hopeful that cases are now becoming fewer but are still on alert for new ones.
Prof Emma Thomson, who led the University of Glasgow research, said there were still many unanswered questions. "Larger studies are urgently needed to investigate the role of AAV2 in paediatric hepatitis cases.
"We also need to understand more about seasonal circulation of AAV2, a virus that is not routinely monitored - it may be that a peak of adenovirus infection has coincided with a peak in AAV2 exposure, leading to an unusual manifestation of hepatitis in susceptible young children."
 

87electric

Member
Joined
27 Jan 2010
Messages
1,023
Absolutely predictable. The fear of the covid plague just blinded so many to the rationale about how immune systems actually work. The youngsters were always going to be at more risk.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
7,024
Location
Taunton or Kent
I hope someone is preparing a dossier of articles like this for the next pandemic regarding a respiratory virus, perhaps this thread can be archived for that.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,752
Location
Yorkshire
Young children need to be exposed to certain common circulating viruses. If we deny them these exposures, the longer the delay is before exposure occurs, the greater the risk.

Those who advocated lockdowns in the past can be forgiven for being ignorant of this problem, but those who continue to advocate lockdowns (and any other measures intended to reduce such exposures) are advocating these health complications in children further down the line.

No right minded person can possibly justify lockdowns now that the true cost of them is being discovered; the costs are in terms of physical and mental health, finances and much more.

Lockdowns are disproportionately detrimental to younger people.
 

johnnychips

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2011
Messages
3,675
Location
Sheffield
Yet another surprise…

The government "doesn't know" if its Covid travel restrictions worked, MPs have said.
The UK's traffic light system - which saw travellers from 'red' countries pay to quarantine in hotels - caused "confusion and disruption", the Public Accounts Committee said.
Taxpayers subsidised £329m of the total £757m cost of quarantine hotels, its report added.
The BBC article shows that a committee of MPs found there was no proof of the effect of travel regulations reducing the spread of Covid; they were confusing as they changed so frequently; it spent £329M on quarantine hotels.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
15,267
And there’s more: deaths from alcohol related causes are expected to rise in the coming years due to the pandemic, as (even) the BBC is reporting: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62291767

Heavy home drinking during the pandemic may have set habits that will lead to rises in alcohol-related deaths and illness in England, forecasters warn.
The work, commissioned for the NHS, suggests even under the best-case scenario of people cutting back to pre-pandemic boozing levels, there could be 1,830 extra deaths within two decades.
At worst it could be 25,000, along with a million extra hospital admissions.
Experts say the findings are a wake-up call.
The warnings come from two separate modelling studies - one by the Institute of Alcohol Studies and another by University of Sheffield.
Both agree there could be a high toll of alcohol-related disease, premature deaths and hospital admissions, costing the NHS billions.

Lockdown drinking​

Not everyone drank more during the pandemic. Surveys suggest, on average, light and moderate drinkers decreased their consumption.
But heavy drinkers drank even more.
Colin Angus, who led the University of Sheffield study, said: "These figures highlight that the pandemic's impact on our drinking behaviour is likely to cast a long shadow on our health, and paint a worrying picture at a time when NHS services are already under huge pressure due to treatment backlogs."
The studies also highlight that the impacts are not evenly distributed across the population, with heavier drinkers and those in the most deprived areas - who already suffer the highest rates of alcohol harm - expected to be disproportionately affected.
Nicola Bates, from the Portman Group, the alcohol social responsibility body and marketing regulator, said: "Total alcohol consumption has gone down consistently over the past 10 years, and Britons now drink around 15% less alcohol than they did 10 years ago.
"During the lockdowns the vast majority of people continued to drink moderately, and this research shows some lighter drinkers cut their consumption.
"However, there is a small minority who were already drinking at high harm levels when the lockdowns began, and evidence suggests some went on to drink more. The models presented in this research are stark, but they presume no interventions are made.
"This small minority of drinkers are the ones who need the most support with targeted action and a focused policy response."
Dr Sadie Boniface, from the Institute of Alcohol Studies, said: "This research should act as a 'wake-up call' to take alcohol harm seriously as part of recovery planning from the pandemic."
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,623
Location
First Class
Have we had this one yet?


Women have spoken to the BBC about the "nightmare" of giving birth during the restrictions imposed because of Covid.
The London Assembly was told a de facto maternity ward ban on partners meant new mums often got very little support.
Campaign group Pregnant Then Screwed said elective Caesareans spiked, as women tried to find a way to have their partner by their side.
Patient care also suffered as maternity units struggled with what a midwifery group said was a 40% staff absence.
A London Assembly health committee review of Covid pandemic pregnancy care has heard that more than three-quarters of the some 110,000 women who gave birth in the capital in 2020 were believed to have done so without their partner's support.
Joeli Brearley, director of Pregnant then Screwed, said elective Caesarean rates increased from 15% to 24%: "Women were requesting severe surgery simply so their partner could be there."

Suzanne Tyler, from the Royal College of Midwives, agreed that London hospitals were badly affected by staff shortages.
"At its worst, staffing was 40% down," she said. "The babies didn't stop coming during Covid but services did have to be rationalised."
Dr Tyler, who said the pandemic "ended up pitting midwives against women", criticised "confusing... contradictory" advice from the government and NHS England that "kept changing".
Three mothers have spoken to the BBC about their experience.

Phillippa Guillou was left with post-traumatic stress disorder, suffering flashbacks and nightmares, after the birth of her daughter Arabella in July 2020.
She said she was left alone and in fear for hours as she struggled through labour at Queen Charlotte's in Hammersmith, where her husband Ollie was not allowed to be by her side.
Phillippa was so desperate to see him that at one point she "dragged" herself out to the car park in "full-on" labour, but the effort was too much for her and she vomited outside the entrance before being taken back inside.
Back on the ward, and still without her husband to soothe her, she had a panic attack that preceded a cascade of surgical interventions she had planned to avoid.
"It was truly awful," she said. "I genuinely believed I was going to die because it had been such a long time on my own.
"Labour feels like it's never-ending and after six hours I'd got myself into such a state I had an epidural."
Arabella was immediately taken away to intensive care for resuscitation, while Ollie was sent home and Philippa was left alone in a room for 16 hours.
"I couldn't get to her," she said. "I just felt totally abandoned... you would press the buzzer and nobody would come.
"My baby was crying and I couldn't reach her because I was too beat up and still recovering."

Phillippa was in hospital for a week without the help she needed, something she said was "a nightmare" when her baby had an undiagnosed severe tongue tie that made breastfeeding impossible for the first few months.
"Women shouldn't have been on their own," she said. "It's totally cruel to think someone shouldn't have someone with them."
The absence of a partner is not just about comfort, Phillippa said, but has a direct impact on the health and wellbeing of the parents.
"My birth didn't go well because I was so stressed and scared and anxious on my own," she said. "If I had just had my husband with me from the beginning, things would have played out differently.
"He was there when she physically came out but that wasn't the bit I needed him for - I needed him to be there for support and to advocate for me throughout."

While Phillippa struggled particularly with being left alone in the run-up to the birth, Sophie Fraser had a worse time after the birth.Sophie's baby Margot, born at 38 weeks, was immediately taken to intensive care at Whipps Cross Hospital because she needed to be resuscitated.
Although Sophie and her partner Alisdair were able to visit her briefly a couple of hours later, after 24 hours they were moved off intensive care and over to the Mulberry ward, where there was no visiting in August 2020.
Margot was on the ward for a week and Sophie was alone and exhausted trying to care for her, with nobody even to hold the newborn, and midwives unable to help because they were so busy.
"There were no visits at all," she said. "There were no midwives available to help with anything because they were so busy.
"Margot had jaundice and was on a strict feeding schedule so I was having to express milk, sterilise bottles and feed her all the time when I was just exhausted."
Father Alisdair couldn't be with his wife and child for seven nights, barring a brief visit on the intensive care ward, although Sophie said he was "lucky" to have been able to be there for the birth itself.
"I know a lot of people missed the birth, especially if it was sudden," she said. "I felt quite bad for Alisdair though, as he was supposed to be on paternity leave but just had to go back to work and he was by himself too.
"It would have been nice for them to make allowances for those who had to stay more than 24 hours."

Another mum, Nicola, spent five hours in labour without any pain relief in A&E at Queen Charlotte in Hammersmith before being told a bed could not be found.
She was only able to text her husband the news as he had to wait in the car park. At first he thought she must have misunderstood due to "going a bit loopy in labour".
When they were told they must go to St Mary's in Paddington, they drove off but had no idea what to do when they got there and could not find a car park.
"We literally abandoned the car in the middle of the road with the doors open," she said. "That was the level of panic.
"We finally found where we were supposed to be going and they said, 'we're not expecting you', and I flipped because at this point I'd been in labour for 10 hours."
Although the midwife who supported Nicola through the birth was "absolutely brilliant", she said the aftercare was "just horrendous".
"I had quite a traumatic birth and needed a couple of hours of surgery after the baby was born," she said.
"My husband was just handed the baby and told to wait for me and then we only had an hour together before he was told to leave again.
"That night was probably the worst night of my life... I felt totally abandoned."
Having had an epidural and being unable to walk, Nicola was wheeled up to a dark ward and left alone with a newborn baby and "no idea what I was supposed to do".
Unable to get out of bed, she pushed the buzzer for assistance when her baby started crying and was confronted by a "really angry" nurse.
"She reluctantly changed her nappy and put her clothes on," she said. "There was zero support from the midwives themselves and nobody was coming to see me.
"I said to my husband: 'I'm not staying another night because I'm not receiving any care.'
"I wasn't expecting a rosy experience but I was expecting not to be alone."
  • A spokeswoman for Imperial College Trust, which is responsible for St Mary's, apologised to Nicola and Phillippa and said two birth partners were now allowed to be present during labour and one was permitted to stay overnight
  • "We are very sorry for these poor experiences at our hospitals," she said
  • "While it's definitely not an excuse for what happened, Covid-19 did create a very difficult set of challenges for maternity care with clinical teams working incredibly hard in trying to maintain our standards of care and experience while keeping everyone as safe as possible
  • "We followed national guidance on Covid-19 measures and, even at the height of the pandemic, we enabled birth partners to be there for the birth and for a few hours following
  • Zebina Ratansi, director of nursing at Whipps Cross Hospital, where Sophie gave birth, said: "We sympathise with families over the visiting restrictions put in place during the pandemic and are sorry Ms Fraser's experience did not meet her expectations. Unfortunately, national guidelines at the time meant that birthing partners were only allowed during labour"
  • An NHS England spokeswoman said she did not recognise the staffing figures provided by the Royal College of Midwives and pointed to provisional statistics showing sickness absence of about 3.6% during the summer of 2020
  • She added: "NHS guidance was clear throughout the pandemic that hospitals must make an exception to visiting restrictions for birthing partners during labour, while continuing to ensure the coronavirus safety of maternity services".

It sounds absolutely horrific and there’s more than a hint of “only following orders” about the attitude of the hospitals and their staff, blaming “national guidelines” which were clearly wrong and inhumane.
 
Last edited:

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,161
I agree so many of the rules were inhumane. I hope those responsible realise this and are ashamed of their actions.
 

DelayRepay

Established Member
Joined
21 May 2011
Messages
2,929
And another one. Entirely predictable - sorry if it's been posted already.


Heavy home drinking during the pandemic may have set habits that will lead to rises in alcohol-related deaths and illness in England, forecasters warn.
The work, commissioned for the NHS, suggests even under the best-case scenario of people cutting back to pre-pandemic boozing levels, there could be 1,830 extra deaths within two decades.
At worst it could be 25,000, along with a million extra hospital admissions.
Experts say the findings are a wake-up call.
The warnings come from two separate modelling studies - one by the Institute of Alcohol Studies and another by University of Sheffield.
Both agree there could be a high toll of alcohol-related disease, premature deaths and hospital admissions, costing the NHS billions.

Colin Angus, who led the University of Sheffield study, said: "These figures highlight that the pandemic's impact on our drinking behaviour is likely to cast a long shadow on our health, and paint a worrying picture at a time when NHS services are already under huge pressure due to treatment backlogs.

Extra pressure on the NHS, extra deaths... who'd have thought it?

Edit: Looking at the few posts before mine, the BBC seem to be having a rare 'Lockdowns did cause problems afterall' moment!
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,725
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Have we had this one yet?


It sounds absolutely horrific and there’s more than a hint of “only following orders” about the attitude of the hospitals and their staff, blaming “national guidelines” which were clearly wrong and inhumane.
So many appalling measures taken on the altar of "covid-safe", but this is some ways is almost the worst not necessarily because of the risks to the patient, but that it could have been resolved so easily by simply letting partners / family be there too. We need a public inquiry into these kinds of things, because lessons need to be learnt to ensure we don't simply shut off humanity for the sake of some politically driven measures.

More broadly would those of you who lamented people like me for being worried about and criticising covid measures worldwide as being not on ineffective in slowing / stopping spread, but having real & serious consequences like to step up and admit we had a point?

Anyone?
 

DelayRepay

Established Member
Joined
21 May 2011
Messages
2,929
More broadly would those of you who lamented people like me for being worried about and criticising covid measures worldwide as being not on ineffective in slowing / stopping spread, but having real & serious consequences like to step up and admit we had a point?

In the early days, I was supportive of most restrictions (not all of them though).

I think I changed my mind during the summer of 2020 when we had various national and local restrictions which seemed to be making no difference whatsoever to Covid, but were causing all sorts of misery in other ways. From that point I found it hard to support restrictions. I also think that even people who believed in restrictions should have found it hard to support our Government's implementation of them, especially the travel restrictions which seemed designed to keep out variants that had already arrived in the UK weeks before.

I don't recall lamenting you, but if I did, then yes, I admit you had a point!
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,725
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
In the early days, I was supportive of most restrictions (not all of them though).

I think I changed my mind during the summer of 2020 when we had various national and local restrictions which seemed to be making no difference whatsoever to Covid, but were causing all sorts of misery in other ways. From that point I found it hard to support restrictions. I also think that even people who believed in restrictions should have found it hard to support our Government's implementation of them, especially the travel restrictions which seemed designed to keep out variants that had already arrived in the UK weeks before.

I don't recall lamenting you, but if I did, then yes, I admit you had a point!
To be honest I don't remember you as being one of the people strongly opposed to my views, but nonetheless it is good to see someone admitting to taking a step back and reappraising their position on restrictions based on what you were seeing in real time. I only wish more politicians had done the same a lot sooner.
 

DelayRepay

Established Member
Joined
21 May 2011
Messages
2,929
To be honest I don't remember you as being one of the people strongly opposed to my views, but nonetheless it is good to see someone admitting to taking a step back and reappraising their position on restrictions based on what you were seeing in real time. I only wish more politicians had done the same a lot sooner.
They fell for the sunk cost fallacy. They'd invested so much in lockdowns and restrictions that it became almost impossible to step back and say actually, this isn't working. Far easier to say 'it's not working, so we need even more restrictions'.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,623
Location
First Class
In the early days, I was supportive of most restrictions (not all of them though).

I think I changed my mind during the summer of 2020 when we had various national and local restrictions which seemed to be making no difference whatsoever to Covid, but were causing all sorts of misery in other ways. From that point I found it hard to support restrictions. I also think that even people who believed in restrictions should have found it hard to support our Government's implementation of them, especially the travel restrictions which seemed designed to keep out variants that had already arrived in the UK weeks before.

I don't recall lamenting you, but if I did, then yes, I admit you had a point!

Like you I was initially supportive, even if closing down society didn’t sit quite right with me. We had the “experts” advising us, and I’ll admit that being furloughed wasn’t exactly an unpleasant experience. It was around mid-May 2020 I think when I thought “this isn’t right” and started to become concerned. By June I had become quite vocal in my opposition to restrictions as it became apparent that the “cure” was worse than the disease.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,161
I'd seen the damage coming from day 1 and just hope that lessons have been learned from the last 2 years. Lockdowns must be consigned to history and we must never again be subject to such appalling messaging and inhumane politically driven rules
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,623
Location
First Class
I'd seen the damage coming from day 1 and just hope that lessons have been learned from the last 2 years.

I think I fell for the “flatten the curve” rhetoric to be honest, much to my eternal shame!

Lockdowns must be consigned to history and we must never again be subject to such appalling messaging and inhumane politically driven rules

I agree 100%.
 

DelayRepay

Established Member
Joined
21 May 2011
Messages
2,929
I think I fell for the “flatten the curve” rhetoric to be honest, much to my eternal shame!

As did I - I believed that the lockdown would be for a short period to allow us to rapidly scale up the NHS to cope with what was about to happen. And I still think that might have been the right strategy but it isn't the strategy we followed. We seemed to have on and off restrictions for the best part of two years and at the same time allowed the NHS to get further and further into a mess.
 

initiation

Member
Joined
10 Nov 2014
Messages
432
I think I fell for the “flatten the curve” rhetoric to be honest, much to my eternal shame!
Yes same here. And I guess, if we were to just 'flatten the curve' it would have been fine. But we didn't just do that.

Even through much of 2020 I was of the view that the first lockdown was somewhat justified even though I didn't support further ones.

The 2nd and 3rd lockdown changed that view point through. It was a pandora's box that should never have been opened in the first place.
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,161
As did I - I believed that the lockdown would be for a short period to allow us to rapidly scale up the NHS to cope with what was about to happen. And I still think that might have been the right strategy but it isn't the strategy we followed. We seemed to have on and off restrictions for the best part of two years and at the same time allowed the NHS to get further and further into a mess.
If it had been a 3 week lockdown and they had gone hell for leather on building NHS capacity in that time then concentrated on getting things open again as quickly as possible that might have been a reasonable strategy, however I agree it dragged on far too long causing enormous damage
 

greyman42

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2017
Messages
4,921
Even through much of 2020 I was of the view that the first lockdown was somewhat justified even though I didn't support further ones.

The 2nd and 3rd lockdown changed that view point through. It was a pandora's box that should never have been opened in the first place.
There would of been a 4th lockdown if Labour had had their way.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,549
Location
UK
Like you I was initially supportive, even if closing down society didn’t sit quite right with me. We had the “experts” advising us, and I’ll admit that being furloughed wasn’t exactly an unpleasant experience. It was around mid-May 2020 I think when I thought “this isn’t right” and started to become concerned. By June I had become quite vocal in my opposition to restrictions as it became apparent that the “cure” was worse than the disease.
Indeed, it seemed like we went from "a few weeks to flatten the curve" to some sort of indefinite suppression strategy.
 

DelayRepay

Established Member
Joined
21 May 2011
Messages
2,929
Indeed, it seemed like we went from "a few weeks to flatten the curve" to some sort of indefinite suppression strategy.

I wonder how different things would be now if we'd stuck with that strategy? I think the spanner in the works came when Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital coinciding with the three week review date. If that hadn't happened then maybe we would have seen restrictions start to lift sooner.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,752
Location
Yorkshire
I wonder how different things would be now if we'd stuck with that strategy? I think the spanner in the works came when Boris Johnson was admitted to hospital coinciding with the three week review date. If that hadn't happened then maybe we would have seen restrictions start to lift sooner.
It runs far deeper than that; Johnson had very little say and him being overweight and therefore more likely to be ill didn't really change anything.

There was initially a fundamental belief that the only way out was to reach a similar level of immunity to what we already had against similar viruses and we would live with it, i.e. the same outcome as OC43.

Then there was a counter claim that this would lead to many deaths and therefore we should suppress the virus to make it disappear, as was the case with SARS1.

It then became slowly apparent it could not be eliminated however Governments had scared people too much and invested so heavily in suppression strategies.

The hard left were incredibly vocal in saying that anything other than suppression was 'putting money over lives' and Governments were afraid to admit that endemic equilibrium was the only viable exit strategy.

Vaccines came along and some tried to claim that if we got enough doses of vaccine we would generate enough immunity to stop the spread; the reality is that most vaccines are designed to prevent serious illness and so not confer sterilising immunity and it is now apparent we actually need immunity against the whole virus, not just the spike protein, to reach endemic equilibrium.

The "experts" have massively differing views and there is no concept of "the" science whatsoever; Governments had absolutely no idea how this would pan out, or which experts to believe.

Many countries were simply following what other countries were doing.

Most countries engaged in an experiment; Sweden stuck to the proper plan for respiratory viruses and yet the media falsely claimed it was they who were "experimenting".

For nearly two years the hard left, authoritarians and people who were terrified all united to try to normalise restrictions and prevent us living with the virus.

Thank goodness they failed.

Never forget Labour were happy to go along with those who wanted more and more lockdowns and restrictions. Never ever forget that.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,623
Location
First Class
It runs far deeper than that; Johnson had very little say and him being overweight and therefore more likely to be ill didn't really change anything.

There was initially a fundamental belief that the only way out was to reach a similar level of immunity to what we already had against similar viruses and we would live with it, i.e. the same outcome as OC43.

Then there was a counter claim that this would lead to many deaths and therefore we should suppress the virus to make it disappear, as was the case with SARS1.

It then became slowly apparent it could not be eliminated however Governments had scared people too much and invested so heavily in suppression strategies.

The hard left were incredibly vocal in saying that anything other than suppression was 'putting money over lives' and Governments were afraid to admit that endemic equilibrium was the only viable exit strategy.

Vaccines came along and some tried to claim that if we got enough doses of vaccine we would generate enough immunity to stop the spread; the reality is that most vaccines are designed to prevent serious illness and so not confer sterilising immunity and it is now apparent we actually need immunity against the whole virus, not just the spike protein, to reach endemic equilibrium.

The "experts" have massively differing views and there is no concept of "the" science whatsoever; Governments had absolutely no idea how this would pan out, or which experts to believe.

Many countries were simply following what other countries were doing.

Most countries engaged in an experiment; Sweden stuck to the proper plan for respiratory viruses and yet the media falsely claimed it was they who were "experimenting".

For nearly two years the hard left, authoritarians and people who were terrified all united to try to normalise restrictions and prevent us living with the virus.

Thank goodness they failed.

Never forget Labour were happy to go along with those who wanted more and more lockdowns and restrictions. Never ever forget that.

A great summary!
 

Eyersey468

Established Member
Joined
14 Sep 2018
Messages
2,161
It runs far deeper than that; Johnson had very little say and him being overweight and therefore more likely to be ill didn't really change anything.

There was initially a fundamental belief that the only way out was to reach a similar level of immunity to what we already had against similar viruses and we would live with it, i.e. the same outcome as OC43.

Then there was a counter claim that this would lead to many deaths and therefore we should suppress the virus to make it disappear, as was the case with SARS1.

It then became slowly apparent it could not be eliminated however Governments had scared people too much and invested so heavily in suppression strategies.

The hard left were incredibly vocal in saying that anything other than suppression was 'putting money over lives' and Governments were afraid to admit that endemic equilibrium was the only viable exit strategy.

Vaccines came along and some tried to claim that if we got enough doses of vaccine we would generate enough immunity to stop the spread; the reality is that most vaccines are designed to prevent serious illness and so not confer sterilising immunity and it is now apparent we actually need immunity against the whole virus, not just the spike protein, to reach endemic equilibrium.

The "experts" have massively differing views and there is no concept of "the" science whatsoever; Governments had absolutely no idea how this would pan out, or which experts to believe.

Many countries were simply following what other countries were doing.

Most countries engaged in an experiment; Sweden stuck to the proper plan for respiratory viruses and yet the media falsely claimed it was they who were "experimenting".

For nearly two years the hard left, authoritarians and people who were terrified all united to try to normalise restrictions and prevent us living with the virus.

Thank goodness they failed.

Never forget Labour were happy to go along with those who wanted more and more lockdowns and restrictions. Never ever forget that.
Completely agree. I just hope the lessons from this are learned by those in authority and we are never again subject to such appalling messaging. As I have said before Covid was the ideal opportunity to promote healthy living, instead what we got was people being encouraged to buy takeaways and being told they were a murderer if they dared step out of hheir house
 

greyman42

Established Member
Joined
14 Aug 2017
Messages
4,921
For nearly two years the hard left, authoritarians and people who were terrified all united to try to normalise restrictions and prevent us living with the virus.

Thank goodness they failed.

Never forget Labour were happy to go along with those who wanted more and more lockdowns and restrictions. Never ever forget that.
I will never forgive and forget either, but it appears that some people already are. Perhaps they are the pro-lockdown types.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top