Covid-19 Discussion

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Personally, I think that the majority of the long-term changes that we will see in months and years to come are simply things that would have happened anyway but were brought forward by the pandemic and the measures that we took.

I think that history will see this pandemic as a catalyst event, rather than a game changer.

(This is also why I think that the conspiracy theories are wrong on this one - essentially they all see it as an attempt to change the course of history, while in reality it will merely speed-up things - everything that happened and will happen, was about to happen at some point anyway).
Top post. Could not have put it better myself! Nature always balances herself
 
Hi,
For me, the $64 million question is how the infection rate would have really changed without lockdown - but just implementing the wearing of masks, good hygiene and social distancing.
Is this curve of lower and lower infections simply the natural course of this virus - regardless of what we did?
If this is the case - then there was no need to ruin the economy and people’s lives & jobs with the lockdown.
Cheers
Steve
Social distancing, hand washing and wearing of face coverings, may well have been effective at managing down the infection rate. Unfortunately substantial numbers of Joe Public taking it on themselves to ignore the request from HMG and visit various beauty spots en masse together with some other factors led to more the more formal lockdown.
 
How i see it

Love the way the source for the graphic is Twitter, says it all really.

Incredible what can happen when you scare the population half to death. But soon people may well realise the danger was not what they were told.

Then things may take a different turn.
 
Social distancing, hand washing and wearing of face coverings, may well have been effective at managing down the infection rate. Unfortunately substantial numbers of Joe Public taking it on themselves to ignore the request from HMG and visit various beauty spots en masse together with some other factors led to more the more formal lockdown.
Like the 170,000 + anti-racism protestors in the UK. The UK media uncritical of these unlawful mass gatherings.

How many this weekend?
 
Love the way the source for the graphic is Twitter, says it all really.

Incredible what can happen when you scare the population half to death. But soon people may well realise the danger was not what they were told.

Then things may take a different turn.
Well please kind Sir, enlighten us thusly about this mediocre virus....
The secret of a good post chipchop is to have a good beginning and a good ending; and to have the two as close together as possible....
 
Well please kind Sir, enlighten us thusly about this mediocre virus....
The secret of a good post chipchop is to have a good beginning and a good ending; and to have the two as close together as possible....
Not quite sure why i need to enlighten you at all as it is very simple and relies on human nature.

People will not remain afraid of this virus very long.

The reason for this is because the "flight or fight" response cannot be a permanent state as it is so detrimental to human health that the consequences would dwarf those of any virus.

Self preservation dictates the fear will diminish with time.
 
Last edited:
There was indeed a sense of fear - panic, even - among some parts of the British public.

It was that fear which pushed the government into imposing a lockdown - it wasn't the government's first choice - their original plan to 'manage' infections and achieve 'herd immunity' was shot-down very quickly by those parts in the public who demanded a complete lockdown.

But it is obvious to everyone, especially to the government who from the onset said it relies on advice from behavioral sciences - that the long term measures for dealing with the pandemic will have to comprise of practical steps that appeal to people's common sense rather than the extreme measures that were the result of pressure from a panicking public.
 
There was indeed a sense of fear - panic, even - among some parts of the British public.

It was that fear which pushed the government into imposing a lockdown - it wasn't the government's first choice - their original plan to 'manage' infections and achieve 'herd immunity' was shot-down very quickly by those parts in the public who demanded a complete lockdown.

But it is obvious to everyone, especially to the government who from the onset said it relies on advice from behavioral sciences - that the long term measures for dealing with the pandemic will have to comprise of practical steps that appeal to people's common sense rather than the extreme measures that were the result of pressure from a panicking public.
The notion that it was the public asking for lockdown is false. That pressure came from somewhere way above national government level.

The new normal will not work. Humans will revert to doing what they want to do. Basic psychology.
 
The notion that it was the public asking for lockdown is false. That pressure came from somewhere way above national government level.

The new normal will not work. Humans will revert to doing what they want to do. Basic psychology.

The notion that it was the public asking for lockdown is fact.

I was there... we all were. Listing to the first COVID-19 press briefing, then reading the headlines next morning that said that the government were embarking on a massive experiment in herd immunity using the British public as test subjects.

That said, there may have obviously been other forces at play, alongside public opinion, I do not know. Now that the SAGE meetings' minutes have been made public, it might be worth going through them - from around mid-March - and see which were the argument the pushed the government into a U-turn.

All I can say for certain is that there was massive public pressure on the government to close the borders and to impose a lockdown - but whether the government simply succumbed to it, or had other reason for imposing the lockdown, I just don't know.
 
Hi,
If I remember correctly - it was the data from the now disgraced professor Ferguson that frightened the government into a lockdown.
I think his computer model showed that if the country relied on herd immunity - then up to 500,000 people could die.
This high number prompted the government to abandon the notion of herd immunity and move to a more cautious approach.
Cheers
Steve
 
The notion that it was the public asking for lockdown is fact.

I was there... we all were. Listing to the first COVID-19 press briefing, then reading the headlines next morning that said that the government were embarking on a massive experiment in herd immunity using the British public as test subjects.

That said, there may have obviously been other forces at play, alongside public opinion, I do not know. Now that the SAGE meetings' minutes have been made public, it might be worth going through them - from around mid-March - and see which were the argument the pushed the government into a U-turn.

All I can say for certain is that there was massive public pressure on the government to close the borders and to impose a lockdown - but whether the government simply succumbed to it, or had other reason for imposing the lockdown, I just don't know.
Project fear is not asking the public if they want lockdown it is TELLING them to be afraid. You describe herd immunity as a "massive experiment" when it is nothing of the sort. It is an accepted process in epidemiology.
 
reading the headlines next morning that said that the government were embarking on a massive experiment in herd immunity using the British public as test subjects.
Which was actually a huge lie...
Now that the SAGE meetings' minutes have been made public, it might be worth going through them
...that is completely dispelled by those minutes. Yet it is still repeated 🤦‍♂️

But, as the old saying goes, a lie is half way around the world before the truth gets its shoes on 🙁
 
The markjay version:

The lockdown was imposed by the government in response to public pressure.

The Steveml63 version:

The lockdown was imposed by the government in response to Prof Ferguson's modeling

The ChipChop version:

The lockdown was imposed on the government by..............?

Take your pick. Or maybe all three are correct?
 
Project fear...

Wasn't Project Fear the failed attempt to stop Brexit? Has someone found new use for it - hoping it might do a better job for the lockdown than it did for the Remain camp?
 
The markjay version:

The lockdown was imposed by the government in response to public pressure.

The Steveml63 version:

The lockdown was imposed by the government in response to Prof Ferguson's modeling

The ChipChop version:

The lockdown was imposed on the government by..............?

Take your pick. Or maybe all three are correct?
Maybe someone should ask Boris. He did however become quite ill just after this so may have trouble remembering.
 
Maybe someone should ask Boris. He did however become quite ill just after this so may have trouble remembering.
Care to spell it out...? Or will we have to suffice (yet again) with the innuendo?
 
Not quite sure why i need to enlighten you at all as it is very simple and relies on human nature.

People will not remain afraid of this virus very long.

The reason for this is because the "flight or fight" response cannot be a permanent state as it is so detrimental to human health that the consequences would dwarf those of any virus.

Self preservation dictates the fear will diminish with time.
You don't need to ...that's why I said "Please"
reading through your post Iit appeared as though you have all the answers & have this Virus licked ...hence my plea oh Sage!
 
Care to spell it out...? Or will we have to suffice (yet again) with the innuendo?
Which was a pretty decent album, though maybe not as good as Sheer Heart Attack.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom