05-11-2022, 02:07 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-11-2022, 02:10 PM by backsidebaggie.)
(05-11-2022, 02:03 PM)baggy1 Wrote: There is a fair bit of revisionist history going on this thread. I'd love to join in but it's fair to say that 'lockdowns' (we only had one real full lockdown) came about at the time of rising hospitalisations and initially deaths - they were needed at that point in time, they aren't now. Without lockdowns we would have been at a much higher level of excess deaths and let's not try and rewrite what has happened to justify any daft ideas at the time.
And let's not get confused between government incompetence in putting a education / school program in place that would have allowed kids back and protected teachers at the same time, or chucking the virus into care homes to help out with hospital numbers and the limitations on our lives at the time.
And it's very easy to say many won't be affected but the frontline workers have to deal with, whilst risking their health, to deal with the raised number that did get affected.
Bit of context here folks - lockdowns, at the time, were needed.
The winter 20/21 one was largely ignored though in highly populated towns and cities. I appreciate many places were closed so that bit couldn’t be ignored, but people just went round mates houses instead.
Contrast that to the first lockdown in March to May 20 when streets were really quiet and the vast majority followed the rules.