(05-11-2022, 12:23 PM)TTM2 Wrote:

(05-11-2022, 11:52 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:

(05-11-2022, 11:27 AM)TTM2 Wrote: Not everyone had the luxury of locking themselves in the house for months at a time. For starters, the ones who did would’ve starved.

Quite and many of those have had to live a torrid life where their family members don’t know whether they would bring a virus home that could seriously harm or kill their child, mother or father etc. Once furlough stopped or their employee demanded they worked they were left with this choice with little or no support.

---

(05-11-2022, 11:01 AM)Protheroe Wrote: Precisely. You're seeking to impose your personal circumstances on everyone else, and that's simply not acceptable Dekka. In fact it's exceptionally selfish and destructive to society.

I sympathise with your circumstances, but life is not fair.

Don’t lecture me on selfishness, how you can have the brass neck to do so given your record of I’m alright Jack attitude over the years. Also don’t assume it’s about my personal circumstances it’s not it’s for those I work with or know who faced those problems.

My “lockdown” lasted 4 days when we worked out construction carried on, so off we went, little passes in hand. And thank god we did. 

Considering we are a tightly packed, overpopulated island our figures are nowhere near the politically motivated doomsday being touted, the facts back this up. There’s no scientific evidence that any further lockdown actions would’ve done a thing. 

I recall the screaming for a lockdown in January, the “Johnson variant” as it was touted. Turned out to be completely and utterly wrong.

(05-11-2022, 02:03 PM)baggy1 Wrote: There is a fair bit of revisionist history going on this thread. I'd love to join in but it's fair to say that 'lockdowns' (we only had one real full lockdown) came about at the time of rising hospitalisations and initially deaths - they were needed at that point in time, they aren't now. Without lockdowns we would have been at a much higher level of excess deaths and let's not try and rewrite what has happened to justify any daft ideas at the time.

And let's not get confused between government incompetence in putting a education / school program in place that would have allowed kids back and protected teachers at the same time, or chucking the virus into care homes to help out with hospital numbers and the limitations on our lives at the time.

And it's very easy to say many won't be affected but the frontline workers have to deal with, whilst risking their health, to deal with the raised number that did get affected.

Bit of context here folks - lockdowns, at the time, were needed.

(05-11-2022, 02:03 PM)baggy1 Wrote: There is a fair bit of revisionist history going on this thread. I'd love to join in but it's fair to say that 'lockdowns' (we only had one real full lockdown) came about at the time of rising hospitalisations and initially deaths - they were needed at that point in time, they aren't now. Without lockdowns we would have been at a much higher level of excess deaths and let's not try and rewrite what has happened to justify any daft ideas at the time.

And let's not get confused between government incompetence in putting a education / school program in place that would have allowed kids back and protected teachers at the same time, or chucking the virus into care homes to help out with hospital numbers and the limitations on our lives at the time.

And it's very easy to say many won't be affected but the frontline workers have to deal with, whilst risking their health, to deal with the raised number that did get affected.

Bit of context here folks - lockdowns, at the time, were needed.

(05-11-2022, 02:13 PM)baggy1 Wrote: The winter 20/21 lockdown was when we saw the highest number of hospitalisations wasn't it?

(05-11-2022, 02:26 PM)baggy1 Wrote: Yeah just checked - hospitalisations got up to 33k in Jan 2021. It's easy to say that most weren't affected or didn't care if it was going to (a bit like smoking really) but it did put tremendous stress on the health service and those working in it.

(05-11-2022, 02:26 PM)baggy1 Wrote: Yeah just checked - hospitalisations got up to 33k in Jan 2021. It's easy to say that most weren't affected or didn't care if it was going to (a bit like smoking really) but it did put tremendous stress on the health service and those working in it.

(05-11-2022, 10:55 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote: But the majority of the population were not significantly worried about their own risks pre vaccine. 

(05-11-2022, 03:13 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I’m not sure they didn’t care. I think people thought if they’re not ill, going round their mates ain’t making much difference. And as cases dropped and dropped anyway through Feb, as it got busier and busier out and about, then the pattern of a wave seemed to play out pretty much the same whether people locked down or ignored it and went out, so more and more did it. It was hilarious when they brought back the rule of 6 as most had been visiting people for weeks at least.

I think most isolated if ill, and went out round family and friends houses if they were well. I was absolutely staggered to read on here people didn’t go and see their family, especially as you could be very cautious and take LFT’s to pretty much make sure you were safe. But each to their own.