It's not the economy, it's our way of life.

trapp

What a desperate situation we are in.

Having been reading this forum over the last two weeks (while banned - this is life in lockdown!!) I've been very surprised by the general argument around restrictions.

It seems to, generally, be those arguing for the economy against others arguing to continue lockdown to save lives.

In this argument I would support the lockdown. Forget the economy (even though a broken economy will lead to many silent deaths also) over protecting the health service.

My worry with the lockdowns, not just here, but all over the world, is how they will impact on our lives.

Focusing on here, a lockdown or quite severe restrictions would mean the following;

friends separated indefinitely

family separated indefinitely

No social activity for anyone

No more weddings, funerals as we knew them etc

Grandparents unable to see their granchildren and vice versa.

For children, teenagers and young people a life alone without mixing with friends, making friends, learning social skills etc.

For children no more school, no more sport, no more clubs etc.

For vulnerable children and children from disadvantaged areas a prolonged time out of school, with no support from teachers or community workers would be devastating to their future.

An increase in domestic abuse and child abuse in the home.

Many, many people out of work and living with no purpose in their lives i.e employment, sport, etc

No freedom to go where we want, when we want, within reason.

Some of the above are obviously more damaging than others but effectively we're talking about the complete erosion of our way of life.

A vaccine within a year is the absolute best and at that it's extremely optimistic.

On the other side, even with social distancing everywhere, once we try to get back to normal it's a given that more people will die.

But will that just have to be accepted, just like people die of many things. Many lives can be saved for now by locking down but how long can it go on?

Is it worth the erosion of our way of life. Is it worth confining ourselves and our children to a solitary, lonely, fearful life for a period of years?

It's not about the economy. It's about life, friendship, love and living.

In reality life is very short for everybody. A life locked up inside a house is not a future for anyone.

Salary Negotiator

I’ll happily sit in my house and delay my wedding if it means my parents and future parents in law will be around to attend.

rob316

The virus is here to stay its only ever been about managing the spread. 3 weeks time we'll start to rollback but its going to be with us for a while and in our minds until there is a vaccine. Its a fast changing situation though, I wouldnt look too far past the next month.

trapp

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

I’ll happily sit in my house and delay my wedding if it means my parents and future parents in law will be around to attend.

But for how long?

A year?

Two years?

Three years?

A safe vaccine rolled out everywhere within 2 years is a fairytale.

owlbethere

I think I might be on the same page as you trapp. I understand the importance of these restrictions.

Thinking of the economy got to me too this weekend.

There's all things social too that you mentioned.

We can't live on this lockdown until a vaccine is formed. There's no vaccine for hiv. What if a vaccine isn't formed for this?

We need some sort of a balance going forward.

I think this is the scarlet fever, the smallpox, the tb of our generation and we will have to live with this and hopefully if a vaccine is formed, it will be for the next generation.

fr336

You've been in "lockdown" how long? A month? Two? Oh, 2-3 weeks? Jeez. The amusing thing about all this is pre lockdown so many people took their friends and family for granted, they were too busy dashing here there and everywhere and stuck on their phones when at "social events". Sure it wasn't everyone but it looked that way from where I was standing.

trapp

owlbethere wrote: »

I think I might be on the same page as you trapp. I understand the importance of these restrictions.

Thinking of the economy got to me too this weekend.

There's all things social too that you mentioned.

We can't live on this lockdown until a vaccine is formed. There's no vaccine for hiv. What if a vaccine isn't formed for this?

We need some sort of a balance going forward.

I think this is the scarlet fever, the smallpox, the tb of our generation and we will have to live with this and hopefully if a vaccine is formed, it will be for the next generation.

I agree.

Unfortunately our lives have changed and we are a generation that, until a vaccine, will live with this virus.

And a safe vaccine could be 2/3 years away if ever.

Now treatments etc may improve and hospital capacity can be increased a huge amount over the next years to cope.

Social distancing or a form of it will have to be common, no more concerts, mass gatherings ie 80,000 in Croke Park etc.

But we can't give in to fear completely.

We have to live. Isolation and long term lockdown will destroy us more than a virus.

trapp

fr336 wrote: »

You've been in "lockdown" how long? A month? Two? Oh, 2-3 weeks? Jeez. The amusing thing about all this is pre lockdown so many people took their friends and family for granted, they were too busy dashing here there and everywhere and stuck on their phones when at "social events". Sure it wasn't everyone but it looked that way from where I was standing.

That's not the point.

I'm talking about the effects of a long term lock down.

I think the human effects of this have to be considered and the reason for finding ways to lift it in time, not the economic effects.

Read the list of effects in the original post.

Do you not think they would be devastating over a long term period?

fr336

trapp wrote: »

That's not the point.

I'm talking about the effects of a long term lock down.

I think the human effects of this have to be considered and the reason for finding ways to lift it in time, not the economic effects.

Read the list of effects in the original post.

Do you not think they would be devastating over a long term period?

Long term yeah, as we are at the moment. But a lot of the world have to deal with these kind of things permanently - constant fear of death from war, famine, weather etc. If I lived to say 70 or 80, would one whole year of my life in 2020 be such a big deal? Of course they'd never lock down for 6 months let alone a year so I think you can rest easy.

Salary Negotiator

trapp wrote: »

But for how long?

A year?

Two years?

Three years?

A safe vaccine rolled out everywhere within 2 years is a fairytale.

Honestly not sure, but I dont think we’re at the point that we should just throw the elderly and at risk to the wolves for the sake of the economy.

Economies can be reanimated, the dead can’t.

trapp

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

Honestly not sure, but I dont think we’re at the point that we should just throw the elderly and at risk to the wolves for the sake of the economy.

Economies can be reanimated, the dead can’t.

With respect did you even read the original post.

I couldn't give much of a toss about the economy.

It's the human effects of a long term lockdown as clearly written the original post.

As per the title it's not the economy versus the virus, it's our way of life.

trapp

fr336 wrote: »

Long term yeah, as we are at the moment. But a lot of the world have to deal with these kind of things permanently - constant fear of death from war, famine, weather etc. If I lived to say 70 or 80, would one whole year of my life in 2020 be such a big deal? Of course they'd never lock down for 6 months let alone a year so I think you can rest easy.

To be honest I'm considering the effects of this restricted life continuing into 2021 and beyond.

A safe vaccine within a year is not the certainty some believe.

Salary Negotiator

trapp wrote: »

With respect did you even read the original post.

I couldn't give much of a toss about the economy.

It's the human effects of a long term lockdown as clearly written the original post.

As per the title it's not the economy versus the virus, it's our way of life.

So you’re complaining about friends and family being temporarily separated and your solution to this is to lift the restrictions that are in place to stop people dying and being permanently separated?

trapp

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

So you’re complaining about friends and family being temporarily separated and your solution to this is to lift the restrictions that are in place to stop people dying and being permanently separated?

Again I'm not complaining about anything.

I'm just considering the human effects of a long term lockdown which are a lot more than you refer to.

friends separated indefinitely

family separated indefinitely

No social activity for anyone

No more weddings, funerals as we knew them etc

Grandparents unable to see their granchildren and vice versa.

For children, teenagers and young people a life alone without mixing with friends, making friends, learning social skills etc.

For children no more school, no more sport, no more clubs etc.

For vulnerable children and children from disadvantaged areas a prolonged time out of school, with no support from teachers or community workers would be devastating to their future.

An increase in domestic abuse and child abuse in the home.

Many, many people out of work and living with no purpose in their lives i.e employment, sport, etc

ILoveYourVibes

It's not the economy, it's our way of life.

We know it doesn't change anything.

Negotiation is one of the steps towards acceptance.

trapp

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

We know it doesn't change anything.

Negotiation is one of the steps towards acceptance.

As a matter of interest are you happy to restrict children to no school, no education, no sport, no clubs, no friendship for two or three years?

We can't accept this.

We must try and find a way to keep living and live alongside the virus.

Things will not be the same but that doesn't mean we should allow the virus to destroy our way of life.

And by way of life I don't mean holidays, nights out, concerts etc.

I mean interacting with other humans.

HamSarris

Let’s hope things get back to normal where people continue to die of other stuff but we are allowed to earn a living

pgj2015

I think if I was 80 +, I would rather die than see the economy destroyed and the younger generations live like caged rats for a year or two. it is nature, you get old and die, simple as. some people would have their parents and family live to 200 if they could, no matter what quality of life they had. i think that is wrong.

s1ippy

trapp wrote: »

As a matter of interest are you happy to restrict children to no school, no education, no sport, no clubs, no friendship for two or three years?

We can't accept this.

We must try and find a way to keep living and live alongside the virus.

Things will not be the same but that doesn't mean we should allow the virus to destroy our way of life.

That's not possible, or we would already be doing it.

trapp

s1ippy wrote: »

That's not possible, or we would already be doing it.

What is the alternative?

Lockdown forever?

ShineOn7

trapp wrote: »

A safe vaccine rolled out everywhere within 2 years is a fairytale.

Why so?



Almost everything I've read has said 18-24 months

Zaph

trapp wrote: »

As a matter of interest are you happy to restrict children to no school, no education, no sport, no clubs, no friendship for two or three years?

We can't accept this.

We must try and find a way to keep living and live alongside the virus.

Things will not be the same but that doesn't mean we should allow the virus to destroy our way of life.

So what are you suggesting people do? At the moment the alternatives are to say bugger this to the lockdown and take your chances out there, with the possibility that even if you don't get sick you could transmit the virus to a loved one who isn't so fortunate and dies from it. Or you stay inside. I know which one I'm going for, even if it's a complete pain in the arse. There is no vaccine for SARS, for example, because the epidemic was over before they could develop one. Something similar is likely to happen with COVID-19 - either a vaccine is developed or the measures being taken now will result in transmission rates dropping to zero. Who knows which will happen first, but in the meantime we really don't have any alternative but to wait and see which it is.

trapp

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Why so?



Almost everything I've read has said 18-24 months

Best case scenario.

And even then it's two years lockdown?

Would that vaccine even be safe?

ILoveYourVibes

trapp wrote: »

As a matter of interest are you happy to restrict children to no school, no education, no sport, no clubs, no friendship for two or three years?

Yes I secretly planned this and can stop it any time I want. Yes I am happy to live like this and enforce it all on you. I totally have a choice in this.

We can't accept this.

We must try and find a way to keep living and live alongside the virus.

This is living alongside the virus.

Things will not be the same but that doesn't mean we should allow the virus to destroy our way of life.

And by way of life I don't mean holidays, nights out, concerts etc.

I mean interacting with other humans.

What do you mean allow? We don't have a choice. If some genius scientist comes up with a way and we develop PPE to the level were we all have our own personal bubbles to walk around in I am all for it. But until then this is it.

When you come up with an idea tell us.

bloodless_coup

Restrictions need to end in May, for good. If older / high risk people want to cocoon, knock themselves out.

We need to get people back to work, and everything open again, salvage what's left of the economy.

Some people will get sick, some will die. That's life. A return to normalcy is more important.

Plumbthedepths

Protect people from the virus to allow them die as a result of the impending depression.

ILoveYourVibes

trapp wrote: »

Best case scenario.

And even then it's two years lockdown?

Would that vaccine even be safe?

Normally Vaccines take 10-15 yrs to develop.

trapp

Zaph wrote: »

So what are you suggesting people do? At the moment the alternatives are to say bugger this to the lockdown and take your chances out there, with the possibility that even if you don't get sick you could transmit the virus to a loved one who isn't so fortunate and dies from it. Or you stay inside. I know which one I'm going for, even if it's a complete pain in the arse. There is no vaccine for SARS, for example, because the epidemic was over before they could develop one. Something similar is likely to happen with COVID-19 - either a vaccine is developed or the measures being taken now will result in transmission rates dropping to zero. Who knows which will happen first, but in the meantime we really don't have any alternative but to wait and see which it is.

I understand your point completely.

But genuinely, have you considered the human effects, forget the economic, the human effects of a lock down for a year or two?

There is no winning situation here but will our children and teenagers thank us for 2 years isolation, no school, no sport, no friends?

I don't know but I doubt it.

ILoveYourVibes

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Protect people from the virus to allow them die as a result of the impending depression.

Protect them from depression to allow them to die as a result of the virus.

cbreeze

trapp wrote: »

What is the alternative?

Lockdown forever?

No. The day will come when there are no more deaths caused by Covid-19 and after that no more new cases. Then after 14 or 15 days the community transmission will have ceased. Then lockdown ends. Simples.

niallo27

trapp wrote: »

Best case scenario.

And even then it's two years lockdown?

Would that vaccine even be safe?

That's why it will take so long, its because of the safety risks. There will be no shortage of patients for trials.