for precisely the same reason there's no "probing of the climate change sceptic" side of the "argument".there is no probing whatsoever towards the lockdown sceptic side of the argument.
for precisely the same reason there's no "probing of the climate change sceptic" side of the "argument".there is no probing whatsoever towards the lockdown sceptic side of the argument.
I've never met a climate change sceptic. I have met some that are sceptical of the ER, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, Greta.... narrative on Climate Armageddon, or the latest #climatecollapse.
But that is for another thread.
As far as scepticism of lockdown policy goes, to suggest it shouldn't even be up for discussion is narrow-minded.
Richard Taylor
"William Tell could take an apple off your head. Taylor could take out a processed pea."
Sid Waddell
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk
Almost 3,000 cases today, 756 in hospital, 69 on ventilators, 124 admissions. Sure, "only" 2 deaths within 28 days of a positive test. Winter, especially Xmas/New Year, will be the real test. All that bug mixing - there used to be huge numbers of admissions at that time of year of chest infection after chest infection, mostly seemingly picked up at the seasonal get togethers. Do we ban grandparents from these celebrations? I am not talking about government action, but personally, what do we do? The risk of succumbing to Covid is 1,000 fold at 85 what it is at 25. My older folk are in Oz, and we have not seen each other for decades, so the issue will not concern me, but it will many others. And the risk in the mid 60s is high enough - 100 fold that at 25.
I bet you've never met anyone who died of covid, either.....I've never met a climate change sceptic
Well I guess that it comes down to personal responsibility. If you have lots of old, vulnerable people in your close family then you take responsibility to take extra precautions around hygiene, getting tested, distancing at gatherings etc. If you are young and have very little contact with oldsters, you just live your life. As you say Mike, chest infections run riot every winter, even without Covid and we have never “locked down” before. I just don’t think it is reasonable to lock up young people forever on the off chance that someone else’s 90 year old grandma might catch it. They’ve made clear they’ve had enough anyway by the number of infections, house parties, raves etc. I don’t think these will stop anytime soon.
I've not.Originally Posted by Dave_Mole
To come back to my previous assertion, we need to consider an age stratified response. Anyone over 60 needs to consider low level precautions and anyone over 80 needs to think of avoiding large groups of younger people or at least accept the risks of doing so. We need to shift from global enforcement of disease avoidance to personal responsibility for disease avoidance according to personal risk indicators.
Partner of a running colleague - early 40s I think - died from Covid a couple of months back. He is understandably absolutely devastated. I do not know her medical history, but she looked 100% fit in every respect.
And to refer back to my point made when you last said that, your idea falls down completely when the younger and more probably infected mix with essential workers in the health service (for example) and other hubs where the elderly and/or unhealthy have to go from time to time. If the disease became endemic, as it inevitably would if all youngsters were given free reign, it fairly likely that all of the doctors and consultants in the health sector would get it (many of which aren't necessarily that healthy themselves) which would also decimate the health service's ability to deal with the likely massive spike in cases they're having to deal with
If only people had just their own risk to worry about. If you are 85, and don't go out, you still need food, medical and dental care, house maintenance - and if the younger people providing these services are living "normally" then they risk catching and spreading Covid. There do need to be some limits on everybody.
