When will we stop asking people who are asymptomatic or have only mild symptoms to isolate?

Scrote said:
There is clearly a right answer as demostrated by the many countries around the world that haven't got anywhere near our deaths per capita, never mind the absolute count.

What you and others mean is that we are where we are so we might as well do nothing to try and improve the situation - which is exactly what the government want.

It's the same argument they'll use when they sell off the NHS.

It's the same tactic they used for all the other privatisations - run it down and then tell us that the private sector could do it better.
Click to expand...
The private sector possibly could do it better.
 
Scrote said:
No it doesn't. Look around the world - plenty of other governments have managed to contain the virus and not just have this defeatist attitude.

I spoke to mates in Thailand and Western Australia yesterday and they were amazed at our lack of leadership.
Click to expand...
Thailand, they’ve really got it right haven’t they?

Mandatory hospital admission for anyone who tests positive. If you are lucky and asymptomatic as a tourist you may get away with a hospitel.

Thailand has comparably low testing rates so they really have no idea how much Covid is going around.

Thinking about it this is where we need to get to.
 
I think there’s too many variables to compare OUTSIDE of Covid to suggest how affective countries decisions are ..
 
Scrote said:
There is clearly a right answer as demostrated by the many countries around the world that haven't got anywhere near our deaths per capita, never mind the absolute count.

What you and others mean is that we are where we are so we might as well do nothing to try and improve the situation - which is exactly what the government want.

It's the same argument they'll use when they sell off the NHS.

It's the same tactic they used for all the other privatisations - run it down and then tell us that the private sector could do it better.
Click to expand...
Sweden have a lower death per capita than the uk? They chose to offer clinical advise and let the population decide their own level of risk.m for the most part. China have been the most successful at hindering the virus via public shaming, and other very scary methods, Australia have used camps, I think its reasonable for people to think we should move forward without restrictions now, young people in particular have suffered enough and their futures look bleak as a result tories or not. Masks and jabs should be all we do about this from now imo. We have delivered over 130 million jabs, we have a weaker variant now, yes it may mutate again and probably will, but that is the life cycle and we are daft to believe we can change this, we can only delay, and delay for what, we already have the jabs and therapeutics to deal with this, its now (well soon) or never.
 
Chris_Boro said:
Ah there it is. Screw the vulnerable so morons get to keep their "freedoms".

This argument is pathetic.
Click to expand...
I say shield the vulnerable you say screw the vulnerable.

We can not have restrictions forever.

We hope mutations will be increasingly less virulent but society will move on.
 
We also need to find a way to achieve world wide vaccination.

A clear invest to save opportunity.
 
Mwelolo said:
I say shield the vulnerable you say screw the vulnerable.

We can not have restrictions forever.

We hope mutations will be increasingly less virulent but society will move on.
Click to expand...

I'll ask you again, how do you shield the vulnerable away from those who refuse to be vaccinated?

And why should my freedoms be taken away over those who can't be bothered to follow basic rules?
 
Chris_Boro said:
I'll ask you again, how do you shield the vulnerable away from those who refuse to be vaccinated?

And why should my freedoms be taken away over those who can't be bothered to follow basic rules?
Click to expand...
Or you could ask why should a vastly greater number of people’s freedoms be taken away?
 
Mwelolo said:
The time will come when we step down the testing and just let it spread in the knowledge that only a small minority will suffer negative consequences.

The most physically vulnerable will need to be shielded but those stupid enough to decide not to be vaccinated will suffer their own consequences.

I have always supported restrictions to date but I feel we have to move on soon and future proof the NHS to cope better with peaks of demand.

We need to get on with things.
Click to expand...
Hi mate, my missus aged 40, is extremely clinically vulnerable to Covid. But otherwise healthy. We have three kids all at school. Do we just let her die then?
 
Mwelolo said:
Or you could ask why should a vastly greater number of people’s freedoms be taken away?
Click to expand...

No I do not need ask such a ridiculous question. You need to justify how you could remove freedoms from millions of people who have done nothing wrong for the benefit of those who choose not to follow basic guidelines or be vaccinated.

Your argument is not the needs of the many you want it to be.

The only way through this for everyone is if everyone plays their part.
 
Mwelolo said:
Or you could ask why should a vastly greater number of people’s
Click to expand...

Chris_Boro said:
No I do not need ask such a ridiculous question. You need to justify how you could remove freedoms from millions of people who have done nothing wrong for the benefit of those who choose not to follow basic guidelines or be vaccinated.

Your argument is not the needs of the many you want it to be.

The only way through this for everyone is if everyone plays their part.
Click to expand...
He isn't being ridiculous at all, he has his point of view. Can I ask, where do you stand on smoking? That puts you at high risk of lung cancer, and in turn at high risk of covid. Now getting a jab is a no brainer for me, but for example, do you think it is reasonable to ask a healthy 16 year old to only go for a walk with his mates, not go to school, all to protect someone who likes a fag? Now I know that is not the case for many or most, but these restrictions disproportionately affect the young, and meanwhile sfter spending billions on this, we cant even muster up the money for out of term meals for poor kids. I know right now we are not talking about this level of restrictions but any restriction outside of masks and jabs is harmful and destroyed futures. And the current situation no longer warrants them.
 
Chris_Boro said:
No I do not need ask such a ridiculous question. You need to justify how you could remove freedoms from millions of people who have done nothing wrong for the benefit of those who choose not to follow basic guidelines or be vaccinated.

Your argument is not the needs of the many you want it to be.

The only way through this for everyone is if everyone plays their part.
Click to expand...
Not ridiculous at all.

Restrictions are not a viable long term option.

Hopefully future strains will be less virulent but I don’t see open ended restrictions being palatable to people who face very little risk from the virus, whilst experiencing considerable cost.
 
Last edited:
Mwelolo said:
Not ridiculous at all.

Restrictions are not a viable long term option.

Hopefully future strains will be less virulent but I don’t see open ended restrictions being palatable to people who face very little risk from the virus, whilst experiencing considerable cost.
Click to expand...

You have still not answered the question as to how.

You're argument is completely ridiculous without it.
 
Warwickboro said:
He isn't being ridiculous at all, he has his point of view. Can I ask, where do you stand on smoking? That puts you at high risk of lung cancer, and in turn at high risk of covid. Now getting a jab is a no brainer for me, but for example, do you think it is reasonable to ask a healthy 16 year old to only go for a walk with his mates, not go to school, all to protect someone who likes a fag? Now I know that is not the case for many or most, but these restrictions disproportionately affect the young, and meanwhile sfter spending billions on this, we cant even muster up the money for out of term meals for poor kids. I know right now we are not talking about this level of restrictions but any restriction outside of masks and jabs is harmful and destroyed futures. And the current situation no longer warrants them.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous question, covid is not comparable to second hand smoke. If you want to use it, then just like smokers you should have restrictions placed on you.

Why should those who are vulnerable pay the price for those unwilling to follow basic guidelines? And how do you lockdown over 3 million people, plus their families and carers?

Noone even wants to try and detail how as it blows their argument out of the water.
 
Chris_Boro said:
You have still not answered the question as to how.

You're argument is completely ridiculous without it.
Click to expand...
Won't it get to a point (which in some ways we've been at for a while currently) where if people are worried about going to certain events (ie. more vulnerable) because Covid numbers are rising then they can and will opt out.

I was in London the week before Christmas. With working from home back in, and people concerned about Omicron, it was really quiet. I saw a few pubs that hadn't even bothered to open, and those that were open were very quiet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top