Over reaction to current situation

[steveeasy]

Quite surprising the ignorance by some posters here. This country has adopted a strategy that protects the economy as much as possible but at the same time reducing the spread of infections so not to not overload the NHS. WHY, because it would be morally wrong in todays society to watch as thousands of people died while gasping for breath on the streets, while the pubs and restaurants where busy increasing the spread. would you prefer 200,000 to die as opposed to under 20,000.
Like it or not, Coronavirus is here. and will be for some time. A few weeks to prevent a catastrophe will not destroy the uk economy. It may have ruined the Global economy but that's self inflicted by human behaviour on its own. As some say businesses continue to trade, but just for a few weeks everyone has to not travel or mix. what a hardship to endure.

Steveeasy

 

[Iliade]

104-year-old Second World War veteran survives coronavirus

 

[Ningaloo]

@steveeasy

I might remind you of this post in 6 months...
No one in predicting this to be over in "a few weeks". Vaccine is 18+ months awy.

And once again, the policy is not to save lives, just to defer death.

If the vulnerable stay isolated the is no need for the healthy to do so, and looking at the demographics of the deaths so far I don't see any evidence that this would result in 200,000 deaths either.

 

[dom]

@steveeasy
And once again, the policy is not to save lives, just to defer death.

And once again, you're wrong.

The policy is explicitly to try and hold the peak below the max capacity of global health services and thereby dramatically reduce the total death count within all age groups.

 

[Daydream believer]

My understanding is that by the time a ventilator is needed there is only 50% chance of survival.
Provide palliative care by all means, but this does not need hospital or even advanced medical facilities.

If it comes to it, shove the b..y thing down my throat, I will go for the 50% please

 

[Daydream believer]

@steveeasy

And once again, the policy is not to save lives, just to defer death.

With all due respect ( to who ever posted the original comment)
No it is not. It is to lower the rate of throughput in the hospitals. The chance of survival is there - So if the sufferer can actually get a place in the hospital they have a chance. Whether it be 50/50 or 30/70 or whatever.
So long as the hospitals are not overloaded there is a greater chance of getting the people through the system & thus SAVING LIVES

 

[Bobc]

It's not just about the 2 rule. If you go out, you touch things that other people touch.

I really can't believe that there are still people out there that don't get how serious this thing is. Maybe that's why we have to have clear rules.

 

[LBRodders]

I am the only one that thinks a flattened curve delays (expected) death rather than saving lives?

We all die yes. That is not the point.

If you have 10 hospital beds, it's best to have 10 weeks of 10 patients than 100 in one.

Providing people with dignity and the best care possible is the aim. It's just not as catchy as 'Save lives...'

 

[dom]

Not complaining, but one has to say that this thread has ZIP ZERO NADA to do with sailing ?

 

[Bobc]

If it comes to it, shove the b..y thing down my throat, I will go for the 50% please

What if I gave you a gun with 3 bullets in it. Would you use it?, because that's what you're suggesting.

 

[Blue_mischief]

Over reaction reduces quality of life.
Under reaction reduces life.

 

[Babylon]

Not complaining, but one has to say that this thread has ZIP ZERO NADA to do with sailing ?

I beg to differ: I mentioned sailing and boat maintenance earlier on!

 

[Sharky34]

I fully agree with the social distancing regulation, keep 2m away from other people, limit visits to shops, close pubs , work from home if possible ect.

However, it seems to me that we there unnecessary degree of big brother in some elements of the response to the pandemic. A kind of media fuelled mass hysteria that has forced the politicians to panic.

The majority of the uk is still working more or less as usual, many factories are still open, we can buy any goods online and have them delivered, everyone can go to the local food shop, newsagent, hardware store, laundrette or take away food shop.

However, we can not go for a drive, a sail, walk on a deserted mountain or sit alone and fish. I could drive to my boat, fill up with petrol to get there using a card pay pump, go and sail my boat for a weekend and stay at anchor without coming within 10 metres of anybody but that is a crime. Yes there is a tiny chance of me being infected and having to call for assistance and I would be happy to take my chances and not have access to help if I needed it.

The economic, mental health, domestic violence and suicide consequences of the current approach will be massive. In the last week 1% of UK deaths were from the virus, mainly people with a very short life expectancy. There were 80,000 tobacco related deaths last year in the UK but we still allow tobacco sales.

I think that we could take a leaf out of Sweden’s book and treat people more like intelligent adults. Just for the record, I am following the current rules to the letter, this is just an personal opinion which I think we are still allowed to have.

"Yes there is a tiny chance of me being infected and having to call for assistance and I would be happy to take my chances and not have access to help if I needed it"

You, might be "happy to take my chance", but how about the other poor buggers who end up attending to you, who are not?
Seems like a self centred, bloody selfish attitude imo.

 

[Sharky34]

@steveeasy

I might remind you of this post in 6 months...
No one in predicting this to be over in "a few weeks". Vaccine is 18+ months awy.

And once again, the policy is not to save lives, just to defer death.

If the vulnerable stay isolated the is no need for the healthy to do so, and looking at the demographics of the deaths so far I don't see any evidence that this would result in 200,000 deaths either.

Expert are you?

 

[Sharky34]

What if I gave you a gun with 3 bullets in it. Would you use it?, because that's what you're suggesting.

Go on, give it to him.

 

[bedouin]

I don't think the politicians have panics - I think they have been handling this well. I think the Media/Police have over-reacted.

In spite of what the Police (and many of the Fascists on here) would have you believe we are not in a hard lockdown. The government want to keep as much of the economy running as possible while protecting the vulnerable and not overloading the NHS. That seems to be a very sensible approach.

The government is taking the approach of introducing as few restrictions as possible while keeping the expected number of cases within the capacity of the NHS - go above that and the death rate will shoot up.

 

[JumbleDuck]

I live in a rural area of the country and saw first hand the mental health and suicide consequences of the foot and mouth crisis on the farming community. It was under reported but very significant.

I lived right in the middle of the Galloway F&M outbreak, and I agree. The mental strain on farmers and their families was dreadful. Our excellent minister was run off his feet as the only person visiting farms - taking elaborate biosecurity precautions at every one, of course. The current lockdown feels very like that.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Take a look at New York, then rethink your post.

It is not going to get better there soon.

Almost by definition, the worse it is the sooner it gets better - rather like radioactivity. If we did nothing the whole thing would be over in a month or so ... at the cost of 15% of over 65s and a significant number of younger people who could not get treatment for survivable conditions. Not a very palatable option, to put it mildly, but we're going to see how it pans out in some countries.

 

[JumbleDuck]

The government have chosen a very ill advised mantra since the strategy of flattening the curve has never been about saving lives.. simply delaying death. The flattened curve still covers the same overall area (number of fatalities).

You misunderstand, I fear. The area under the curve is cases, not deaths. Yes, we're mostly going to get it but if we get at at a rate which the NHS can cope with many fewer people will die than if we all get it at the same time. That's the point of flattening the curve. This diagram shows it: basically most people above the dotted line will die.

 

[dom]

I beg to differ: I mentioned sailing and boat maintenance earlier on!

I stand corrected, you seem to have covered yourself well: ?

"Yes, there are tons of leisure activities (including sailing or boat maintenance in remote locations, fishing, hill-walking, pony-riding, driving around the whole of the M25 on a full tank of fuel) ...."​