So - now masks protect the wearer?

I haven’t said s/he is a bad person. I have said I do not understand her attitude,

MayBee70

But the deaths are avoidable deaths. And long covid is avoidable.

I don't agree. It's been known, or at least suspected, for some time, long before covid, that viral infections can cause long-term problems.

Some infections by the covid virus are doubtless avoidable, but not all. Likewise with long covid. Likewise with deaths from covid.

Lucca

I haven’t said s/he is a bad person. I have said I do not understand her attitude,

I see.

Well, it's okay not to understand someone's attitude.

Lucca

“ it's not serious for most” Tell that to the families of the tens of thousands in the uk who have died, not to mention those who survived but are still suffering the after effects.

The suffering of the families who have lost loved ones and of those who have long covid does not alter the fact that covid19 is not serious for most of the people who are infected by it.

Ok I give up. I’d have liked to know what you and biscuitmuncher suggest should happen ???

biscuitmuncher seems to say that there is no point taking any precautions as all, as they make no difference to the number of people infected. That is more radical than saying that it is not serious for most of the people who are infected by it.

To return to my analogies of home insurance, seatbelts, hot pans, and keeping carving knives in places inaccessible to toddlers, most people involved in accidents and home damage are not seriously hurt, and most toddlers won't find the carving knife, but it is common sense to routinely avoid the circumstances where accidents can happen - while not getting paranoid imagining they will happen.

I think covid is horrendous a terrible disease but to ruin your economy and not educate your younger generation is terrible

I am in complete agreement with Biscuitmuncher on this and ruining the economy and not educating children is far more dangerous in health terms than COVID is.

Economies cannot live on air and struggle if they take on a too large burden of debt - and before we get the argument that the government prints money so doesn't owe it I would point out most of this debt is financed by issuing government bonds, known as gilts, which are sold on the market to the likes of us, Pension funds and other savings vehicles and their value and viability relies on borrowers thinking they are a safe place to put their money.

Even if we can level the playing field as far as access to higher education is concerned, the fact of the matter that 13 years of children will be going through the system having lost a year's education, that means they will be going into higher education with a lower education achievement, that will require universities to adjust their courses to deal with this. This learning deficit will leave us less well skilled and competitive and able to innovate and take on the skills of other countries in the world economy.

A. A lower education achievement only by the possibly arbitrary goals currently in force
B. Still no answer to what should happen. Schools open? No lockdown ?

Sorry I should have said that children are being educated.

Lucca

A. A lower education achievement only by the possibly arbitrary goals currently in force
B. Still no answer to what should happen. Schools open? No lockdown ?

With regard to B, I don’t think anyone knows what the answers are.

No, low education achievement by comparisons with other countries.

If other countries have closed schools, then provided we keep on getting online lessons to the pupils we will be on a level playing field with our competitors. Everything we are learning about online education can be appled to lifelong learning to, and to leisure subjects.

Children must have lost a lot of education during the war (sorry to bring up WWII) so what happened after 1945? I’m sure children will catch up if the resources are made available by the government, albeit that being a bit of a concern. But lost lives can’t be brought back.

This explains it

Overthehill
Excellent!

MayBee70

Children must have lost a lot of education during the war (sorry to bring up WWII) so what happened after 1945? I’m sure children will catch up if the resources are made available by the government, albeit that being a bit of a concern. But lost lives can’t be brought back.

They most certainly did. My mother was one of the ones who was evacuated at the age of nine to a village in the back of beyond, where she had a terrible time. It was the days before the 1944 Education Act (obviously) and the school only offered elementary education. My mother and her friend were moved to the "top class" with children four years older than she was. Despite spending nearly a year there, she still passed the exam to go to grammar school when she went home and I can't say that I ever noticed that my mother was behind educationally.

I'm in touch with quite a lot of children. Some miss their friends and others have home situations which make it difficult to work from home. However, there are many who actually enjoy working on their own without distractions. There is very little that couldn't be overcome with support (financial and emotional) for those who need it. It's strange that few people seemed that bothered about the underachievement of some pupils before the pandemic. I don't remember any outcry when government cuts meant that schools with some of the neediest children were struggling to provide what was needed.

I'm not for one moment claiming that education doesn't matter. The government could have done a lot to mitigate some of the problems. Listening to headteachers would have been a start. However, to use it as a political tool to argue against lockdowns is disingenuous at best.

M0nica

No, low education achievement by comparisons with other countries.

Children in many other countries don't start school until at least a year later than British children, but somehow manage to catch up by the age of about nine or ten. Secondary school pupils actually spend a high proportion of time in school working on their own anyway.

And why do some people keep saying that those who wear masks and/or stay at home as much as possible are scared witless? No, I'm not. I'm not even miserable. Like MOnica (and others), I decided what I needed to do to keep myself as safe as possible and I've stuck to it. I can't say it's fun, especially as I live on my own, but there are even advantages and I've rearranged parts of my life, so that it's all bearable.

I do not wear a seatbelt in the car because I am scared, with or without my wits, or even because it is required by law. I wear it as a safety precaution.

The reason I am able to contribute to GN is because my DH has always been safety conscious and we had car seat belts long before they were required and these saved the lives of DS and myself. When DH had to break hard and drive off the road when a car came out of a side turning without looking. Our seatbelts stopped me and the baby who might otherwise been on my lap, had he not been in a Britax car seat, from going through the windscreen.

It is the same with masks. They are a safety device, not a lucky charm to ward off evil. They reduce the risks of us catching COVID. Just do it and stop seeing problems where there are none.

A good analogy, so why do so many of the people who deny that Covid is a serious problem claim that people who stay at home and wear masks, etc are quaking wrecks, terrified that the bogeyman will get them? I've lost count of the number of times people have said the same kind of thing as biscuitmuncher. It's almost as though there's some kind of handbook of arguments to make. Does anybody seriously think that if all restrictions were lifted, the whole country would suddenly have its mood lifted?

growstuff I agree wholeheartedly with your posts. I too live alone but, am not miserable and quaking (maybe a bit sad this week as it coincides with my wedding anniversary and birthday).

I keep busy, even if that only means watching Netflix. As a retired ward sister, I am probably slightly more aware of how infection spreads than some but, that does not make me a quivering wreck, just careful.

I'm miserable, I've never been more miserable in my life. I say this as a person who has never struggled with stress anxiety or any other mental health problems. I've just about had a gut full. I feel like everyday is just something to get through. My whole life is on hold and has been for a year for the sack of others

Biscuitmuncher

I'm miserable, I've never been more miserable in my life. I say this as a person who has never struggled with stress anxiety or any other mental health problems. I've just about had a gut full. I feel like everyday is just something to get through. My whole life is on hold and has been for a year for the sack of others

So get an interest which doesn't involve interacting with other people. You can always contact others by all sorts of technological means anyway. And stop reading lockdown conspiracy writers.

Who's been reading conspiracy writers? And get an interest that doesn't involve interaction with other people? I'll go into the west wing of my imaginary mansion then shall I

M0nica

I do not wear a seatbelt in the car because I am scared, with or without my wits, or even because it is required by law. I wear it as a safety precaution.

The reason I am able to contribute to GN is because my DH has always been safety conscious and we had car seat belts long before they were required and these saved the lives of DS and myself. When DH had to break hard and drive off the road when a car came out of a side turning without looking. Our seatbelts stopped me and the baby who might otherwise been on my lap, had he not been in a Britax car seat, from going through the windscreen.

It is the same with masks. They are a safety device, not a lucky charm to ward off evil. They reduce the risks of us catching COVID. Just do it and stop seeing problems where there are none.

I do agree with you. We just do what we can to cut down the risk, and carry on with life.

It’s like crossing the road. Looking both ways doesn’t mean you’re neurotic.