On the third anniversary this month of the2020 Covid shutdown, what do you remember?

[metis]

My opinion on the lockdown hasn't changed. I still think it was too restrictive and unreasonable to the point of absurdity. It also harmed a lot of people who lost not only their jobs but also health and lives due to the cynical "safety" measures taken by my country government. And I mean here not only closing down businesses but above all depriving chronically sick people of the access to the public health system. These were the dark times when people, including those suffering from cancer and other serious diseases, couldn't contact their doctor, except by phone. Treatments were halted, rehabilitation was banned. Many of those people died because they couldn't afford private treatment. Those responsible for such inhuman policy should rot in prison. I'm still triggered when I think of it.

I understand but medical estimates have it that we unnecessarily lost well over 200,000 people here in the States because of carelessness, both politically and individually. Inconvenience and loss of pay is bad but dying and/or exposing others to covid is far worse, imo.

 

[Twilight Hue]

How willing and eager people are to destroy their society over security and safety.

 

[anna.]

I remember...

Now that's funny!

 

[anna.]

How willing and eager people are to destroy their society over security and safety.

Society wasn't destroyed. And security and safety are pretty major human aspirations. Remember Maslow's Hierarchy?

 

[anna.]

I remember thinking there was too much panic and not enought rationality. I remember people buying all the toilet paper and pasta they could find in the supermarket leaving nothing for others. I also remember thinking that we would end up with insane amounts of inflation when central banks started creating tons of currency so that people would be paid to stay home, and here we are now, precisely in that situation. I still wonder to this day, if the mesures to fight the ilness won't end up being worse that the ilness itself. We'll see.

Humans are predicable, especially when it comes to TP in emergencies. I'm no saint myself, and had to constantly battle the temptation to grab every last one of a thing, and frequently picked up the last one and then made myself put it back, and I'm in no way a hoarder in ordinary times, I've always leaned minimalist. The effect of scarcity on human cognition can lead to irrational responses, it's kind of hardwired into us.

You were certainly prescient wrt inflation.

 

[anna.]

Definitely. My view doesn't match the view imposed by main stream media

In what ways?

 

[anna.]

The measures should have been less restrictive and more appropriate to the danger. It has never been the disease with 30% or more mortality rate. During the first wave of Covid-19, which was dangerous mainly to the old and chronically sick people, the following safety measures would be sufficient:

- masks in crowded enclosed spaces,
- limit on customers in shops and audience in cinemas, theatres, museums, restaurants etc,
- quarantine imposed on sick people and those who had contact with them,
- regular testing of vulnerable people

That would be sufficient without the need to close everything down and making a large number of people unemployed. For medical experts health care could be a priority. The government should have other priorities as well, that is avoiding the economic crisis. It's extremely hard to care for your health if you remain without the means to live.


No, that wasn't my point. My government passed the law which allowed doctors to replace face to face visits with phone sessions. The result was that nobody, even seriously sick people, could consult a doctor, except for phone calls. The examinations and therapy sessions were cancelled, even for the patients with cancer. Mind it didn't apply specifically to quarantined people (such approach could be justified) but to everybody. And it looked like that only in the public health care. The private clinics functioned normally. I had to visit an allergologist because I had chronic and advanced hives. Without the access to the doctor, I remained without meds. So I went to the private clinic, paid cash and I could forget about covid. Hell, I didn't even have to wear a mask.

I agree with your four safety measures. I also agree with you to an extent regarding the limiting of routine appointments which should have continued on as necessary, but I also remember that in the early months all the world really had to go on was what was happening in Italy and NYC which was fearful indeed. The fact that wasn't replicated across the globe is due to a number of factors, not just one or two, but if it had there's no way medical systems could have managed and there could indeed have been a massive death count. The speed at which, as noted elsewhere in this thread by @exchemist that research and government moved to get the vaccine out there had much to do with the better outcome.

 

[Vee]

Humans are predicable, especially when it comes to TP in emergencies. I'm no saint myself, and had to constantly battle the temptation to grab every last one of a thing, and frequently picked up the last one and then made myself put it back, and I'm in no way a hoarder in ordinary times, I've always leaned minimalist. The effect of scarcity on human cognition can lead to irrational responses, it's kind of hardwired into us.

You were certainly prescient wrt inflation.

Irrational responses from a few people can be easily contained and not have very serious consequences. What scares me is when large amounts of people act irrationally.

 

[stvdv]

Have your opinions changed on how the shutdown was managed?

Definitely. My view doesn't match the view imposed by main stream media

In what ways?

To avoid RF warnings, I left it at just that

 

[AnnaCzereda]

I agree with your four safety measures. I also agree with you to an extent regarding the limiting of routine appointments which should have continued on as necessary, but I also remember that in the early months all the world really had to go on was what was happening in Italy and NYC which was fearful indeed. The fact that wasn't replicated across the globe is due to a number of factors, not just one or two, but if it had there's no way medical systems could have managed and there could indeed have been a massive death count. The speed at which, as noted elsewhere in this thread by @exchemist that research and government moved to get the vaccine out there had much to do with the better outcome.

Certainly, I can agree with you that the first variant of Covid-19 was more dangerous than the later ones. It's debatable whether all such drastic measures and this fear mongering by the media were proportionate to the threat. In my opinion, they weren't. And what's funny is that the scientists working for the British government admitted using fear to coerce people into obedience:

Use of fear to control behaviour in Covid crisis was ‘totalitarian’, admit scientists

We can say the end justifies the means, that they had good intentions and wanted to save lives. But somehow I don't believe in good intentions of politicians.

 

[exchemist]

Certainly, I can agree with you that the first variant of Covid-19 was more dangerous than the later ones. It's debatable whether all such drastic measures and this fear mongering by the media were proportionate to the threat. In my opinion, they weren't. And what's funny is that the scientists working for the British government admitted using fear to coerce people into obedience:

Use of fear to control behaviour in Covid crisis was ‘totalitarian’, admit scientists

We can say the end justifies the means, that they had good intentions and wanted to save lives. But somehow I don't believe in good intentions of politicians.

The object, fairly clearly, was to engender a sense of seriousness and urgency in the population, as in wartime, so that everyone actually observed the safety meaasures. It takes quite a lot to do that. They, the scientists, clearly were afraid themselves, because they understood the potential of the disease if things went badly. I see nothing wrong with trying to communicate that same fear to the population at large.

Especially when we had a prime minister who thought it all a bit of a joke - until he caught it and nearly died himself.

 

[AnnaCzereda]

@exchemist,
Whatever, if you're cool with that, OK. I don't like any form of manipulation. The truth is preferable.

The doctors working for our prime minister adviced him to make the vaccines mandatory. He didn't because the large percent of his electorate were anti-vaxxers. So instead he suggested regular testing for all the employees. Fortunately, it didn't pass in parliament. It would force healthy people to stand in lines with the sick ones to get the test which would make them more likely to get infected. So did he really care for people's health? I don't think so. But maybe your gov is better than mine. If so, kudos.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Have your opinions changed on how the shutdown was managed?

Not really. In hindsight it's always easy to talk.

 

[anna.]

Not really. In hindsight it's always easy to talk.

True, but sometimes being able to look back is helpful, whether individually or as a society. You need some hindsight to see how things could be done better, refined, streamlined. Or what mistakes to be avoided should there be a next time. When you're in the middle of a thing you might not have the full picture, and it's a different thing entirely trying to plan for an unknown.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

True, but sometimes being able to look back is helpful, whether individually or as a society. You need some hindsight to see how things could be done better, refined, streamlined. Or what mistakes to be avoided should there be a next time. When you're in the middle of a thing you might not have the full picture, and it's a different thing entirely trying to plan for an unknown.

Ow, sure, absolutely. In fact, I consider it a given that retrospectives should happen and that lessons should be learned so as to handle it better in the future.

What I meant was that we can't really judge bad or good decisions from the past with knowledge from the present.
We can only ask the question if we could have made better decision back then with the knowledge we had back then.

A certain decision in the past could be a perfectly rational decision at that time given what was known then, even though later intel shows it was the wrong decision in hindsight.

 

[anna.]

Ow, sure, absolutely. In fact, I consider it a given that retrospectives should happen and that lessons should be learned so as to handle it better in the future.

What I meant was that we can't really judge bad or good decisions from the past with knowledge from the present.
We can only ask the question if we could have made better decision back then with the knowledge we had back then.

A certain decision in the past could be a perfectly rational decision at that time given what was known then, even though later intel shows it was the wrong decision in hindsight.

Agreed!

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I remember still working, just with a mask.