Coronavirus - Strange times

[Jonwo]

Also I'm not particularly a fan of the idea that the government(s) are rubbing their thighs to introduce new restrictions at every point given every one so far as been introduced far too late and lifted far too early damaging any gains we may have had.

No Government wants to bring in restrictions, the costs are enormous and trying to protect health as well as the economy is a tricky balance.

That being said, I do think that some scientists don't help themselves by being alarmist and making themselves available to the media spouting their opinion and I fear that this will create a distrust with the general public which shouldn't be the case.

[cwathen]

No Government wants to bring in restrictions, the costs are enormous and trying to protect health as well as the economy is a tricky balance.

I agree that no government wants the restrictions. But with the current narrative being pursued worldwide, no government would dare not bring in restrictions if the scientific community advises a tipping point has been reached which make them necessary. Hence the current situation in the UK when BoJo the clown is out seeking Brownie points for acting quickly, telling anyone who will listen how the UK responded to Omicron quicker than almost any other country on the planet because he wants the Kudos for responding when responding is deemed important on the international stage.

Essentially at the start of the pandemic the lockdown model of the CCP was viewed as the only effective way of preventing the spread and Western governments were all eyeing each other up hoping nobody would snap and do it. Then Italy did. At that point the general view that a western government would never get away with something so totalitarian as a lockdown was gone and they all fell into line rushing out lockdowns to protect their image of not wanting to do less to 'keep people safe' than Italy was doing, even though essentially the west resorted to using a model which a communist totalitarian state had recommended which is somewhat insane when the values on which that society vs a western society work in terms of government are entirely incompatible. If nobody blinked the west would never have done lockdowns and all this debate about restrictions would be academic, we would simply have had to deal with Covid largely within the boundaries of what used to be deemed acceptable with possibly some extra measures as a middle way through. And yes I am well aware it would have resulted in the NHS exceeding capacity. But we still would have let that happen before we damaged normality to this extent. I firmly believe that.

When it comes to de-escalating I believe the same is true. I believe they are all hoping for a significant western government to refuse to introduce further Covid measures in defiance of advice from a scientific community that is now used to their advice being followed and their cause being more important than normality. It's just no one wants to be the first to do that when the international position remains that Covid is of infinite importance. And again it will only take one western country to snap and say enough is enough and refuse to do more to fight it, then everyone else will quickly conclude that they are in the same position and do the same.

[Jonwo]

I agree that no government wants the restrictions. But with the current narrative being pursued worldwide, no government would dare not bring in restrictions if the scientific community advises a tipping point has been reached which make them necessary.

Essentially at the start of the pandemic the lockdown model of the CCP was viewed as the only effective way of preventing the spread and Western governments were all eyeing each other up hoping nobody would snap and do it. Then Italy did. At that point the general view that a western government would never get away with something so totalitarian as a lockdown was gone and they all fell into line rushing out lockdowns. If nobody blinked the west would never have done lockdowns, I firmly believe that.

When it comes to de-escalating I believe the same is true. I believe they are all hoping for a significant western government to refuse to introduce further Covid measures in defiance of advice from a scientific community that is now used to their advice being followed and their cause being more important than normality. It's just no one wants to be the first to do that when the international position remains that Covid is of infinite importance. And again it will only take one western country to snap and say enough is enough and refuse to do more to fight it, then everyone else will conclude that they are in the same position and do the same.

I do think we need to be careful not to brand scientists as a bunch of buzzkills who want people to be miserable all the time, they are human as well. It's true some are more extreme than others but that's true for anyone whether they be a scientist or a politician.

Now that zero Covid has been abandoned by most places apart from China and Western Australia and even the latter is likely to give that up in the next few months, I think the shift next year by both Governments and Health experts will be towards managing the disease rather than outright stopping now that vaccines and treatments are in place.

[cwathen]

I do think we need to be careful not to brand scientists as a bunch of buzzkills who want people to be miserable all the time, they are human as well. It's true some are more extreme than others but that's true for anyone whether they be a scientist or a politician.

I don't actually blame the scientists. They are only doing their job and looking at this thing from their point of view and what measures will achieve the goal of stopping Covid from spreading. But the job of governments is to take that advice and when that advice involves making drastic curtailment to normal life given the percentage of the population actually at risk then I don't see how any rational government could reach any conclusion other than 'sorry, but we just can't do that' for the simple reason that the damage (and death) that will be caused if they do is unacceptable. Western governments the world over have utterly failed their populations by allowing Covid to be made more important than preserving normality when they should have been considering what interventions were viable.

The scientists are being set up to be scapegoats as every enquiry on the planet from a western government is about to start spouting 'we were just following the science' when we (as I'm convinced we eventually will) determine that we've run away with Covid and done more harm than good in the process.

[james2001]

That being said, I do think that some scientists don't help themselves by being alarmist and making themselves available to the media spouting their opinion and I fear that this will create a distrust with the general public which shouldn't be the case.

Doesn't help that many of these scientists don't really know much about viruses and infection, but much of the media and public seem to have the attitude that "they're a scientist, they must know what they're talking about" when there's so many different fields of science, and someone who's proficient in one may know next to nothing about another. Eric Feigl-Ding probably being the most prominent example, often appearing in the media or being shared across social media with his alarmism and doommongery, but he's actually a nutritionist. It's like asking Mary Berry on how to make the perfect roast, because she cooks things and it's all the same, right?

Anyone with the weakest claim to being a scientist is giving their opinion, which doesn't help with all the conflicting information we get.

[james2001]

The response to future potential threats is the thing that concerns me the most.

If hasty border closures are a good policy for Omicron, it follows that they should also have been imposed for Swine Flu. With hindsight, that would have been a monumentally expensive error, both socially and economically.

Worse, if travel restrictions are our response to future potential threats that turn out not to be a threat, we may slap ourselves on the back for “keeping it out”, never knowing that it would have been fine otherwise, creating a cycle that justifies the action.

I am of the view that the management of Covid from Jan to early Mar, with the exception of the actions of the CCP, was correct; even though it was a huge mistake in hindsight. That needs to be recognised more widely to avoid rash actions in response to every future potential threat over the next 30 years.

I think that's one of the things many worry about, now the precedent's been set there's a worry it's going to be hard to get rid of, and this sort of thing comes back every time there's an epedemic of something. I've heard far too many people say we should bring back masks and social distancing every winter now, some people have really ended up with a skewed opinion of risk as a result of the last couple of years.

As someone who caught a bad chest infection back in 2016 which left me bedbound for days and ill for months (in fact I was significantly more ill than anyone I know who's had a post-vaccination case of covid), maybe it's left me with a different opinion to people who are now acting as if these sorts of viruses are a new threat we've never had to encounter before and we can never live a normal life again. These sorts of viruses have always been around and it's never been zero risk, even if most people have never really thought much about it until now.

[Jonwo]

I think that's one of the things worry about, now the precedent's been set there's a worry it's going to be hard to get rid of, and this sort of thing comes back every time there's an epedemic of something. I've heard far too many people say we should bring back masks and social distancing every winter now, some people have really ended up with a skewed opinion of risk as a result of the last couple of years.

I get masks in the Winter but I can't see any Governments being willing to cover businesses' costs due to them having reduced capacity or close in the long term, there isn't going to be enough money to do so.

[james2001]

Though why should we need to bring back masks every winter when we've coped fine without needing them until now? As I said, it's the way people's perception of risk has been skewed. I doubt most people even thought about winter illness epidemics and would have thought someone was mad if they suggested we needed to bring in precautions and restrictions on our lives against them before 2019. The way some people talk, we'll never be able to live a "normal" winter ever again, even though by next winter it likely won't be any more risky than it was prior to 2019. Far too many people out there seem to be suggesting we make wholesale permanent changes to our lives when the reality is when covid passes into endemic status, things almost certainly won't be any more dangerous than they were pre-pandemic.

I can remember numerous winters with bad flu epidemics and similar, can you imagine what it would be have been like if we'd acted the way we're acting now every time one there was an epidiemic or merely because a new flu strain was discovered? Yet at times it feels like a precedent's being set for these things to happen from now on. When you let the genie out of the bottle, it's hard to put it back in.

[cwathen]

I think that's one of the things worry about, now the precedent's been set there's a worry it's going to be hard to get rid of, and this sort of thing comes back every time there's an epedemic of something. I've heard far too many people say we should bring back masks and social distancing every winter now, some people have really ended up with a skewed opinion of risk as a result of the last couple of years.

I get masks in the Winter but I can't see any Governments being willing to cover businesses' costs due to them having reduced capacity or close in the long term, there isn't going to be enough money to do so.

We can't afford what has already been spent. We will all be taxed to death for the rest of our lives to pay for this because we couldn't get Covid in perspective. And even though the bill has reached the level at which further support packages aren't at present being considered, we're currently sanctioning massive damage to the travel industry and basically telling them they'll just have to bear the loss, with no guarantee more damage to other parts of the economy won't follow. Should the restrictions reach a point at which support packages have to be re-implemented lest too much of the public starts turning against the measures, that just adds to the bill.

And I'm sorry, but masks in the winter is where it all starts, just like we are seeing now. No restrictions at all are acceptable. Normal life must be considered more important than obsessing about Covid.

[james2001]

One thing that rarely gets mentioned is the health costs of all these restrictions. The combination of the stresses and similar of lockdown and people not wanting, or being unable to, access medical treatment are already starting to cause massive pressures on the NHS. We keep hearing how many people are in hospital and dying with covid, but not those who have missed or delayed treatment as a result of lockdowns and restrictions.

As I said in the masks thread, I had a family member die of cancer in October, his diagnosis was delayed by three months as a result of the doctors constantly fobbing him off and not wanting to see him because of covid. The worst thing there is he first sought help in July/August 2020 when cases were very low and barely anyone was in hospital, but doctors were still all but refusing to see people for anything but covid and it was an uphill battle for him to finally get seen despite the fact he was clearly quite ill. And things haven't improved massively now in many places, I still know people who have trouble getting to see a doctor, still having to phone up first thing in the morning to try and get an appointment, be stuck on the line for ages and often still fobbed off with a phone or e-consultation at the end of it. I can't help but think that the consequences of lockdowns and restrictions could end up causing more deaths than covid itself in the long term.

[james2001]

And now tonight we're getting scary headlines about "vaccine 40 times less effective against Omicron", which isn't what the study says at all, but that's what happens when you let media types who don't understand the science write the story. From what the people who do understand the science say, "40-fold reduction in neutralising antibodies" isn't anywhere near as alarming as it sounds (and certainly doesn't mean the vaccines are 40 times, or even 40%, less effective), and is actually quite positive news. Particularly when it comes to hybrid immunity (having been both vaccinated and infected) and boosters.

And even this reduction is still only against infection, protection against serious illness still seems to be standing up even better.