Healdplace
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 May 2013
- Messages
- 15,985
Thank you. I appreciate that reply and I do not disagree. As you know I think that we would be much better off with a policy of far better well aimed guidance giving people the facts and more freedom to choose their own response to those facts within prescribed limits and protection from harm if they choose to be protected as advised.I understand that you well appreciate the differences but I’m not sure that’s universally true.
Before anyone jumps in, I do know this isn’t ‘flu’ but we did have 27000+ deaths from flu and pneumonia in 2014/15 which equates to 200 a day, everyday. ICU’s were full and elective surgery was cancelled, because that’s what happens and it happens most years, to be honest.
I don’t seek to underplay COVID at all, but I do think we are now possibly entering the ‘cure being worse than the disease’ phase when we look at the demographics of those affected. The reality is that, if you’re over 80 in a ‘normal’ year, there is a 1 in 6 chance that you will not see out the following 12 months and those odds shrink every year.
The nanny state might work when you really need a nanny but rarely works when you are trying to keep a family happy and clothed, fed and with a future to look forward to.
I supported a circuit breaker if applied instead of this tier nonsense when it would have helped. But that boat sailed without us (not for the first time) and we need a new approach now. And wider discussion on what that is - not dictation of what must be because.....
Last edited: