O/T:- Are we over-reacting to COVD19?

[BigFatPie]

I think anyone trying to score political points over this wants their head testing. I agree that the Gov, whoever is in power must be held responsible for their actions, or indeed lack of them. It seems weird to absolutely everyone that the UK are taking such a different stance to almost everyone else, however it seems the PM has taken the advice of the 'experts' and acted accordingly.

Getting the balance right between losing lives to the virus and lives being ruined by economic catastrophe is not a challenge I would particularly want to be faced with and held responsible for.

I'm not particularly religious but I do now find myself having the occassional prayer like thought that we all make it through this as unscathed as possible.

Agree with all of that and what Driller said, but the government are still digging their heels in with issues like the exiting the European Early Warning and Response System and extending the Brexit transition period.

There’s no point in ‘following the science’ in one area and then being patently ideological in another.

[ncfcog]

Agree with all of that and what Driller said, but the government are still digging their heels in with issues like the exiting the European Early Warning and Response System and extending the Brexit transition period.

There’s no point in ‘following the science’ in one area and then being patently ideological in another.

Again, it's that fine line isn't it.

Anyway, I agree with Driller, let's not let this thread descend into another brexit thread. I think Driller is actually doing us all a service by providing us with as much info as possible from first hand experience of being in a country in lock down. It's pretty obvious stuff but I appreciate the input.

[sidders]

It would only be political point scoring if I was saying something like 'Labour would handle this so much better'. I'm not. Right now, Labour are a rabble and couldn't organise the vicar's tea party. But that doesn't mean that poor government is acceptable.
Take your point about 'Bozo', Driller.

[Elite_Pie]

Is it safe to say the answer to the thread title is 'NO'?

[deadyoyomagpie]

Is it safe to say the answer to the thread title is 'NO'?

It's not even a question. The UK is adopting one of the weakest positions in the world. As an immuno-suppressed 40 year old (following organ transplantation), who'd really like to see his two young children grow up, it's fair to say I'm beyond worried and scared about how this is going.

Just keep remembering the figures everyone ... CMO "60% of population need to catch the virus." Death rate (assuming we can give good care to all sufferers - which we won't be able to) 1%. 1% of 60% of 66m people means saying goodbye to circa 400,000 people.

Stay safe fellow pies and good luck for the coming weeks.

[countygump]

Is it safe to say the answer to the thread title is 'NO'?

They keep saying that they expect less than 1% deaths thru Covid 19, Eli. A full 1% of the UK pop is @750,000. I think we can safely say the answer to the thread is 'No'.

[Notsohumblepie]

Research carried out in 2016 showed that nine million grandparents across the UK were spending significant time looking after their grandchildren.

If the government had closed schools , the elderly exposure would have been increased to an appalling level . The most vulnerable " group" would have become even more vulnerable. By all means be vigilant, and proactive, but some measures require " thinking through"

[deadyoyomagpie]

Research carried out in 2016 showed that nine million grandparents across the UK were spending significant time looking after their grandchildren.

If the government had closed schools , the elderly exposure would have been increased to an appalling level . The most vulnerable " group" would have become even more vulnerable. By all means be vigilant, and proactive, but some measures require " thinking through"

The elderly exposure wouldn't be increased to an appalling level though, because the risk from children is because they are attending school and mixing with each other. Also, as more and more people will work from home, that figure of 9m grandparents would likely be much less in the circumstances.

[LaxtonLad]

The elderly exposure wouldn't be increased to an appalling level though, because the risk from children is because they are attending school and mixing with each other. Also, as more and more people will work from home, that figure of 9m grandparents would likely be much less in the circumstances.

That's what I thought. If the kids are not meeting other kids and teachers, only grandparents and presumably their own parents, then there is less contact with possible "carriers". Also, as you say, parents forced to stay at home will have less outside contact too. Keep it in the family, eh?

[Notsohumblepie]

The elderly exposure wouldn't be increased to an appalling level though, because the risk from children is because they are attending school and mixing with each other. Also, as more and more people will work from home, that figure of 9m grandparents would likely be much less in the circumstances.

You're assuming huge numbers of people can work from home.

According to government figures, 1.3 million now work from home, with a further 300,000 working in the same grounds or building as our homes. Another 2.7 million people said that they work in different places, but use home as a base( that means that they need to leave home to work effectively ).
Assuming you could treble that figure, out of a work force of 21.3 million , it still leaves an enormous number of people who can't work from home. That works especially for NHS staff.
You're also assuming that kids would have all quit school uninfected. Only time will tell.