Get Boosted Now & ignore the last week.

Regardless, we now know with certainty that child abuse increased hugely during lockdown. We know that suicide has too. We know that deaths in the home have - and still continue to - exceed any previous precedent by a huge margin.

We know all these things with certainty, as they are recorded facts, and yet people still continue to pretend that the downsides of lockdowns are simply financial and economic. I don’t understand why they do this.

So when people talk about lockdown being a ‘cautious’ approach, I’m going to continue to highlight that they’re talking about it being cautious for themselves, and not for the more vulnerable in society.

 

Yes, but funny how the NSPCC are not themselves speaking against lockdowns. Here are the recommendations flowing from their report into the impact of Covid-19 on child safety:

Recommendations
We recommend a national and local response from governments and statutory agencies which includes practical steps such as:

• providing practical support to parents around income maximisation to reduce stresses caused by financial insecurity
• addressing digital exclusion, ensuring all children have access to the technology they need to access school, therapeutic support and other services
• comprehensive and long-term funding for children’s services, with at least £2 billion a year invested in early intervention and therapeutic services.

 

I can tell you first hand the schools for SEN pupils were only partially open.

 

Just as it was highly ironic that BLM protesters were wearing masks because of Covid but mixing in huge numbers during a lockdown. The BLM protest on that basis was actually illegal where yesterday's was not. Huge double standard on the nature of reporting.

 

Absolutely 100% wrong on suicides. They haven't increased since the start of the pandemic. Locally, nationally or internationally.

 

I said further up this thread if lockdown had been a clinical trial it would have been stopped due to adverse impact on public health.
Now it does at least sound like we are going for another one of those pretend lockdowns so it won't be as bad but will still have devastating outcomes for some.

 

What is definitely worthy of debate here is what is the endgame? Because we have done more jabs than Muhammad Ali and we are still facing a lockdown.

 

A lifetime of jab and lockdown cycles. Every new variant will require a jab and a lockdown because we all know that as viruses mutate they become more transmissible and as we are making our decisions based solely on case numbers that means we will logically continue in this neverending cycle of 6 monthly jabs and lockdowns for some unfathomable reason.

 

And your fanaticism on this is totally devoid of self-interest?

 

Preventing transmission will eventually prevent mutations and in the meantime make them less harmful. Stubborn resistance by refuseniks will slow the progress towards this state.

 

Temporarily preventing transmission in the UK will do nothing to prevent either mutations in any of the other 194 countries of the world or to prevent any mutations in the UK either outside of the couple of weeks of lockdowns. Unless you are actually suggesting that the world goes into lockdown together for a significant period of time.

Also you say that it will prevent mutations AND make them less harmful. They are contradictory as it is well known that viruses become less harmful the more hey mutate. If we want them to be less harmful then we WANT them to mutate, we don't want to prevent mutations and leave the more serious variants as the dominant ones.

 

Is it not painfully clear by now that we cannot prevent the transmission?

 

Obviously we can. I mean we got a huge percentage of the country vaccinated and that stopped the virus mutating in South Africa didn't it. Oh it didn't? Oops

 

Sage states that there are hundreds of thousands of people being infected with the Omicron Variant of covid every day and rising exponentially. England has around 55m people in it. At this point the entire country will have herd immunity within a month.

 

Brilliant! Let's all relax and let it rip! Terrific!

 

From the Samaritans website,

https://www.samaritans.org/about-sa...o-we-know-about-coronavirus-and-suicide-risk/

 

I think the point was the reports of exponential growth are often a little bit wild. They'll put up a graph showing doubling every 3/4 days and show what happens. They only tend go up to come to a million because it gets a bit silly after that.
Given currently we have very few restrictions in place and we are essentially just "letting it rip" we haven't seen anything like the exponential growth we warned about a couple of weeks ago.
That's not to say it's nothing to worry about but again it's just a layer of perspective.

 

Again, it's about protecting the NHS. It's ironic that some people complaining about restrictions are also the same people who cite the effects of a fall off on treatment in hospitals. Treatment can only carry on at the previous low levels (due to Tory cuts) if the NHS isn't run ragged due to Covid wards replacing non-Covid wards and staff are healthy enough to go to work.

If the NHS fails we're all up **** creek. The Tories might be *****, but they do realise this. It need not be under this pressure, but they tossed it off for 10 years or more and now they're reaping the whirlwind.