All the conversation about the pros and cons of lockdowns is certainly interesting but only really serves to deflect attention away from the fact that a significant proportion of the 1, 000 excess weekly deaths from cardiac arrests, pulmonary embolism, auto-immune disorders and unexplained causes that Britain is currently experiencing are Covid vaccine induced.
Problem is statistics are a bit of a bugger if a significant proportion of the population are actually at home for a third of the time more as they aren’t at work as in 2020/21 then it just follows that you would see more deaths at home. It’s hard to know what the true cause and effect is.
Valid point but those at home deaths aren’t massively indexed to people who would be working at home instead of working ‘away’. It’s predominantly in the 65+ age group so a bit of a moot point.
and absolutely nothing to do with any long term effects of immunity caused naturally by actually having Covid in the first place
Threads like these are so massively divisive. All they do is pull the BBS apart. Nobody will change their opinion.
I think we played hard and done good. As a species, like. We saw a pandemic and responded. who knew what was happening? (you can't ask the dead guys)
Does anyone remember that wonderful halcyon time before 2015 where things could be debated without "we won, you lost" rhetoric?
Huge part of that is the implied narrative that some believe that the alternative to lockdown was letting everyone carry on as normal. Something I can’t remember one person suggesting. It’s also not that divisive because 90% have one opinion and 10% another. Maybe the OP was a touch direct, but anything suggesting lockdowns were a bad idea is met by the torches and lanterns approach. I’d say it’s the opinion from that side that refuses to budge the most, despite us becoming more and more aware of the negative effects lockdown has had and is having.
This thread isn't anything more than a "I told you so" smug thread (which transpires when you actually dig further into this perceived evidence is dubious to say the least). If you don't believe it is creating division on here then I have nothing more to add. It brings out the worst in all of us.
I'm turning the BBS off. I'm back to wanting to hit people again. For the record I agree with TM. And I don't think he's being smug. But I can't live with this anger again.
Torches and lanterns? Really? I speak only for myself but my response is based entirely on what can be seen as fact - anyone can speculate about what they like but the truth is nobody will ever know what would have happened if we hadn’t locked down. And my post specifically asked about who would be ringfenced in his alternative suggestion, so I never for a second said anyone had suggested carrying on as normal. If you are going to group people into just two sides you need to be careful what you accuse the other side of. I am clearly part of the 90% but I’m not of the thought you, TM or anyone else were advocating doing nothing - nor am I 100% convinced complete lockdown was the right thing. It just can’t be proven otherwise. The tone of the OP and subsequent ones suggested he was using the article as proof he was right all along when the article itself does no such thing - and that’s before any questions as to the source material.
We wouldn’t be so petty as to single it down to just that. Conservative voters are responsible for the absolute state this country is in for so many more reasons. Dont underplay your part.