The jollying up bit? No it didnât and nor should it.
Vulnerable were protected, particularly in the early days and if there is one thing out of the whole pandemic which could b/c said was wrong it was that. People dying alone FFS sake.
But what seems to be suggested is that the vulnerable should shoulder the entire burden of that wicked disease, isolate them, and let the rest of us get on with our lives. That would involve an even tighter restriction on them considering the likelihood of the general population including carers being riddled with it.
So you are saying that the vulnerable were locked up but not protected and presumably think that the lockdowns in place were needless and this wouldnât have favourably impacted the protection of the vulnerable?
Thatâs not very decent or compassionate now is it.
Like most in society who bleat about Covid you have a fundamental lack of understanding of the subject. Covid is an airborne disease, if you understoood that you would understand how utterly stupid your utterances and those of the majority of other morons are.
Try and think for a change, how might you protect those who are vulnerable from an airborne disease? Think measles, how would you protect a child who is immune compromised if there is an outbreak of measles. Would you stop all children going to school?
You constantly put words in my mouth that I did not say. See, I do not have an absolutist mindset, like you. I do not believe any âblack and whiteâ nonsense, which is the ultimate simplicity.
You benefited, and continue to benefit, from Covid measures. Man on a trampoline decrying bounciness.
Sports and cultural events, schools never closed nor restaurants and bars, although numbers were limited. Again, nothing wrong with sensible restrictions, especially in the early stages of a wave.
Beats a level 5 lockdown, the 5km limit, closing schools, 9 Euro meals, etc.
It is very dishonest to pick up a study which relies on China scientists for this.
Clearly social distancing works and the harder you go the quicker you get it down.
That doesnât mean it suits everyone or is the approach to take for a virus that has spread across multiple borders and is endemic.
For those saying âlockdownsâ worked, where? China style? Australia?
Iâd probably advocate shutting the borders hard on the place that has the next novel virus that shows the ability to spread, but I also recognise that we have delayed info and that this is a dangerous long term approach.
It just isnât a way for someone to run a society long term.
Without that vaccine (whether you think it worked or not) we were absolutely fucked as Ireland talked itself into harder lockdowns with diminishing returns.
You need to get your facts square. Swedish secondary schools were closed. Primary schools were never closed there. I repeat: a group of eight people was the maximum allowed in public as of November 2020. For most events, such as a gig or a play, that maximum obviously constituted a de facto shutdown.
You are not describing Sweden. You are describing âSwedenâ, a place created by magical right wing thinking.
