I can't believe the government is considering another lockdown over 21 deaths

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Joshua997
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
The case count literally doesn't matter, we have more testing, more treatments, younger people being infected, etc. Even if we had the same number of cases as the first wave (worst case scenario, but won't happen thanks to mask wearing), we would likely have less than a third of the deaths because the people being infected are younger, care homes are better protected and we have more treatments. The impacts of the lockdown on the economy and mental health would be devastating.

I have no idea why people keep going on and on about cases. Look at the deaths. Look only at the deaths. Isn't preventing too many deaths the whole point of the initial restrictions? If we can bring the mortality rate down to a rate that is similar to the flu (0.1%), why should we have any restrictions at all?

Did you know that during the winter months, we average 50 flu deaths per day? What I am genuinely most scared off is that even after coronavirus is gone, some people will *still* be wearing masks to bring down flu deaths. We've had flu for well over 100 years in this country btw, it kills a average of 50 people each day in the winter.

You know what's currently killing 25 times more people per day than the coronavirus? Heart attacks. Perhaps we should completely ban all junk food? I mean, that would probably save more life in the long term than a second lockdown.
Last edited by Joshua997; 1 month ago
1
Mustafa0605
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
In the first wave, it started with one death and in a matter of a few weeks it reached 1000 deaths per day from coronavirus. So it is important to impose local restrictions where necessary to manage the spread of coronavirus. There is no point in writing so many paragraphs, the fact stands that these policies are influenced by many top scientists and academics.
Last edited by Mustafa0605; 1 month ago
10
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
They just like to be seen to be doing something while actually doing nothing at all productive.
2
Surnia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
(Original post by Joshua997)
The case count literally doesn't matter, we have more testing, more treatments, younger people being infected, etc. Even if we had the same number of cases as the first wave (worst case scenario, but won't happen thanks to mask wearing), we would likely have less than a third of the deaths because the people being infected are younger, care homes are better protected and we have more treatments. The impacts of the lockdown on the economy and mental health would be devastating.

I have no idea why people keep going on and on about cases. Look at the deaths. Look only at the deaths. Isn't preventing too many deaths the whole point of the initial restrictions? If we can bring the mortality rate down to a rate that is similar to the flu (0.1%), why should we have any restrictions at all?

Did you know that during the winter months, we average 50 flu deaths per day? What I am genuinely most scared off is that even after coronavirus is gone, some people will *still* be wearing masks to bring down flu deaths. We've had flu for well over 100 years in this country btw, it kills a average of 50 people each day in the winter.

You know what's currently killing 25 times more people per day than the coronavirus? Heart attacks. Perhaps we should completely ban all junk food? I mean, that would probably save more life in the long term than a second lockdown.
No, the initial restrictions were to stop the spread and the NHS being overwhelmed by patients. Another set of restrictions would do the same, and save resources on future on those who could recover from COVID but suffer long-term effects. The mortality rate is decreasing, but isn't stopping the spread one of those ways?

You are quoting an average of deaths from seasonal flu, but you can just throw out a number without context: over what period? There were just under 1700 deaths from flu in 2018/19.

You have a choice over whether or not you eat junk food. You don't necessarily have a choice over whether or not you catch coronavirus as it could be given to you by soneone who is asymptomatic.
3
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
(Original post by Surnia)
No, the initial restrictions were to stop the spread and the NHS being overwhelmed by patients. Another set of restrictions would do the same, and save resources on future on those who could recover from COVID but suffer long-term effects. The mortality rate is decreasing, but isn't stopping the spread one of those ways?

You are quoting an average of deaths from seasonal flu, but you can just throw out a number without context: over what period? There were just under 1700 deaths from flu in 2018/19.

You have a choice over whether or not you eat junk food. You don't necessarily have a choice over whether or not you catch coronavirus as it could be given to you by soneone who is asymptomatic.
No point protecting the NHS if we are just going to leave thousands to die from other treatable diseases which they can now no longer get treatment for.
1
pink00
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
(Original post by Surnia)
No, the initial restrictions were to stop the spread and the NHS being overwhelmed by patients. Another set of restrictions would do the same, and save resources on future on those who could recover from COVID but suffer long-term effects. The mortality rate is decreasing, but isn't stopping the spread one of those ways?

You are quoting an average of deaths from seasonal flu, but you can just throw out a number without context: over what period? There were just under 1700 deaths from flu in 2018/19.

You have a choice over whether or not you eat junk food. You don't necessarily have a choice over whether or not you catch coronavirus as it could be given to you by soneone who is asymptomatic.
We simply can’t sacrifice years of our life, the entire economy and the futures of an entire generation to stop a virus which isn’t more severe than the flu. It’s literal insanity.

Those who need to shield should be able to do so and should be protected financially in doing so however beyond that we should just be building up herd immunity at this point. We’re going to have to learn to live with it.

In 2016 1.6 million children died from Diarrhea, now THAT is serious however we did nothing about it because it didn’t effect the western world. It really puts into perspective how mild the physical effects of coronavirus are.

Unfortunately death is the only guarantee in life. Do you want us locked up until the death rate in the UK reaches zero ?? People die everyday and right now many are dying from cancer and treatable illnesses that they can’t receive treatment for because we’re scared of the flu.

In years to come we will look back and realise what a mistake this was
7
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by Joshua997)
The case count literally doesn't matter, we have more testing, more treatments, younger people being infected, etc. Even if we had the same number of cases as the first wave (worst case scenario, but won't happen thanks to mask wearing), we would likely have less than a third of the deaths because the people being infected are younger, care homes are better protected and we have more treatments. The impacts of the lockdown on the economy and mental health would be devastating.

I have no idea why people keep going on and on about cases. Look at the deaths. Look only at the deaths. Isn't preventing too many deaths the whole point of the initial restrictions? If we can bring the mortality rate down to a rate that is similar to the flu (0.1%), why should we have any restrictions at all?

Did you know that during the winter months, we average 50 flu deaths per day? What I am genuinely most scared off is that even after coronavirus is gone, some people will *still* be wearing masks to bring down flu deaths. We've had flu for well over 100 years in this country btw, it kills a average of 50 people each day in the winter.

You know what's currently killing 25 times more people per day than the coronavirus? Heart attacks. Perhaps we should completely ban all junk food? I mean, that would probably save more life in the long term than a second lockdown.
I'm glad that you're not in a position if power. COVID is known to cause serious, long-term issues in some, and isn't fully understood.

It should have been understood that opening up might need to be dialled back. Deaths lag infections, which can rise exponentially.
Last edited by RogerOxon; 1 month ago
4
pink00
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by RogerOxon)
I'm glad that you're not in a position if power. COVID is known to cause serious, long-term issues in some, and isn't fully understood.

It should have been understood that opening up might need to be dialled back.
Post viral fatigue has always been a huge issue. That’s what people are suffering with months after Covid because it’s a virus, it’s not a new phenomenon and it’s not that serious
0
DiddyDec
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by RogerOxon)
I'm glad that you're not in a position if power. COVID is known to cause serious, long-term issues in some, and isn't fully understood.

It should have been understood that opening up might need to be dialled back. Deaths lag infections, which can rise exponentially.
Deaths shouldn't be a major concern unless it starts to effect the productive members of society, the one that pay the most tax.
0
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by pink00)
Post viral fatigue has always been a huge issue. That’s what people are suffering with months after Covid because it’s a virus, it’s not a new phenomenon and it’s not that serious
What evidence do you have for that assertion?
Why don't the medical people studying the long-term effects have the same conclusion as you?
0
pink00
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by RogerOxon)
What evidence do you have for that assertion?
Why don't the medical people studying the long-term effects have the same conclusion as you?
Who’s the ‘The medical people’ ?
In terms of research and conclusions being made, post viral fatigue is ABSOLUTELY being considered and talked about as what is happening post coronavirus. The only reason it isn’t being treated is because there isn’t a treatment and never has been
0
nursingstudentuk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by DiddyDec)
No point protecting the NHS if we are just going to leave thousands to die from other treatable diseases which they can now no longer get treatment for.
PRSOM! Maybe instead of wasting MILLIONS or BILLIONS on a lockdown, halting education and work and destroying the country and the economy, we could put that money into the NHS instead???

Why the hell did we need a lockdown?? So frustrating! You cant even trust the COVID death tolls anyway, they are counting people who died from cancer and got hit by a bus?? Wake up people.
Last edited by nursingstudentuk; 1 month ago
2
Ciel.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by Joshua997)
The case count literally doesn't matter, we have more testing, more treatments, younger people being infected, etc. Even if we had the same number of cases as the first wave (worst case scenario, but won't happen thanks to mask wearing), we would likely have less than a third of the deaths because the people being infected are younger, care homes are better protected and we have more treatments. The impacts of the lockdown on the economy and mental health would be devastating.

I have no idea why people keep going on and on about cases. Look at the deaths. Look only at the deaths. Isn't preventing too many deaths the whole point of the initial restrictions? If we can bring the mortality rate down to a rate that is similar to the flu (0.1%), why should we have any restrictions at all?

Did you know that during the winter months, we average 50 flu deaths per day? What I am genuinely most scared off is that even after coronavirus is gone, some people will *still* be wearing masks to bring down flu deaths. We've had flu for well over 100 years in this country btw, it kills a average of 50 people each day in the winter.

You know what's currently killing 25 times more people per day than the coronavirus? Heart attacks. Perhaps we should completely ban all junk food? I mean, that would probably save more life in the long term than a second lockdown.
it's such a joke. **** them. just ignore all their 'guidance'. that's what i do.
1
Ciel.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
(Original post by DiddyDec)
No point protecting the NHS if we are just going to leave thousands to die from other treatable diseases which they can now no longer get treatment for.
exactly, what is wrong with them? why are they prioritising covid over everything else.
1
Mesopotamian.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by DiddyDec)
They just like to be seen to be doing something while actually doing nothing at all productive.
(Original post by DiddyDec)
No point protecting the NHS if we are just going to leave thousands to die from other treatable diseases which they can now no longer get treatment for.
Prsom x2
0
Drewski
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by Ciel.)
exactly, what is wrong with them? why are they prioritising covid over everything else.
Because Covid has the potential to overwhelm hospital services like nothing else currently going around.

Nobody's saying other health issues aren't important, but very few are as intensive on the support required from professional healthcare workers. That's why this is being treated differently.
0
RogerOxon
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by pink00)
Who’s the ‘The medical people’ ?
In terms of research and conclusions being made, post viral fatigue is ABSOLUTELY being considered and talked about as what is happening post coronavirus. The only reason it isn’t being treated is because there isn’t a treatment and never has been
There is a big difference between "being considered" and a conclusion.

I would assert that the best way to avoid post viral fatigue is not to catch the virus ..
Last edited by RogerOxon; 1 month ago
0
Ciel.
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
(Original post by Drewski)
Because Covid has the potential to overwhelm hospital services like nothing else currently going around.

Nobody's saying other health issues aren't important, but very few are as intensive on the support required from professional healthcare workers. That's why this is being treated differently.
i don't believe this. not a single hospital was overwhelmed last time (pre 1st lockdown), despite 'so many' cases.
1
pink00
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#19
Report 1 month ago
#19
Uh

(Original post by Drewski)
Because Covid has the potential to overwhelm hospital services like nothing else currently going around.

Nobody's saying other health issues aren't important, but very few are as intensive on the support required from professional healthcare workers. That's why this is being treated differently.
I would gladly sign a form saying if I contact it I am willing to receive no medical treatment in exchange to being able to live my life now and I’m sure 90% of young people are the same
2
pink00
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#20
Report 1 month ago
#20
(Original post by RogerOxon)
There is a big difference between "being considered" and a conclusion.

I would assert that the best way to avoid post viral fatigue is not to catch the virus ..
Do you understand that post viral fatigue isn’t a diagnosis it’s literally just fatigue after having a virus?
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (168)
14.62%
I'm not sure (53)
4.61%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (338)
29.42%
I have already dropped out (34)
2.96%
I'm not a current university student (556)
48.39%

Watched Threads

View All