Covid-19 and purity spirals

It's about putting in fire breaks. The spread between your home and your DDS home, plus any associated further spread need not happen

My daughter's home consists of two people.....my daughter and her daughter....neither of who mixes or associates with anyone other than us. My daughter goes to the supermarket like many thousands of others - judging by the huge queues outside.......and I go to smaller stores, plus occasionally to a full range store when necessary. I go there to avoid huge numbers of people and having to queue for ages.

I do understand that the more contacts you have the more chance of contracting the virus.......but we all have to shop for food and other essential items.

You say your husband goes to the supermarket? Is that wise - given how vulnerable you are......? If you were doing this perfectly, yourself......surely he'd be shielding too...and you would be getting neighbours...such as my daughter.... to do your shopping...and leaving it for you on your doorstep ( as she does for her neighbour).

Most of us aren't going to get it. Think about it. Currently, studies are showing between 10 and 15% of a population has had it. That means 85 - 90% haven't had it.

When we come out of lockdown they can't let the virus infect people willy Billy because within a couple of months we will be back to here again - country in lockdown, no one working because it will be threatening to overwhelm the NHS again.

What they will have to do is stop the infection spreading as they are doing in South Korea and Singapore. They will have to test, track, contact trace and quarantine, relentlessly because otherwise we will be in and out of lockdown. They can't let all of us catch it because that cannot happen without overwhelming the NHS or without shutting the country down until a vaccine is made.

Anyway I am wasting my time, I know people will continue to break the rules because they don't see any harm in what they are doing. Like the woman I know that thinks everyone is over reacting, or those who think it is inevitable they will catch it anyway.
Those of us who have been reading what WHO are saying know that we need to take this seriously and continue to protect ourselves and our families. That is what I am going to do.
p.s. I have read too many stories of people online who have died whose underlying condition is mild asthma or other unremarkable condition.

@quentinwaters We are not going to all get it anyway. It is estimated 10% of the population have had it. We won't all get it. There will be developed better treatment for those who do get it and a vaccine.

Yes. But most of us are going to get it eventually. The lock down is to prevent the health service being overwhelmed, not to eradicate the virus. If people are being responsible and when they aren't exactly following guidelines they are only increasing risks to themselves, not other high risk people, I'm not going to get too worked up about it.
We are adults who don't live in a police state (yet). I can't see the difference between what just is doing and me sending my children to their dads for half the week, which is allowed.

QuentinWinters

If you saw a house being burgled, or someone being mugged, or heard a neighbour yelling and screaming at their children day after day would you consider that none of your business too? Do you turn a blind eye to everything?

@QuentinWinters It increases risk to everyone in both those households.

Yes. Of justhadathought caught it, had no symptoms at the beginning as is common but passed it on to others, they would all have an increased viral load. If everyone caught it in a group mixing, then they all are shedding virus onto each other. Remember the chances are no one will have symptoms at the beginning. The increased exposure means a higher risk of being more ill than the person originally infected.

It is one reason it is thought that people who live in multi generational households seem to be at an increased risk of dying.

It sounds like Justathought is possible closer to the situation of children travelling between their parents who share care - which is permitted
Quite. You don't have to justify yourself to us just. I'd argue caring for your GD could fall into the vulnerable people category laid out by the govt, depending on the circs. And it is actually noone elses business.

Justhadathought

Because it is about reducing unnecessary spread.

So if you catch it, you might give it to your husband, plus any people you interact with at the shop.

However, if you get it and are mixing with your DD and gd you've now given it to your dh, DD, gd, plus anyone you come into contact, plus anyone that your DD comes into contact with too so maybe her elderly neighbour, the shop workers she interacts with, the people she works with.

It's about putting in fire breaks. The spread between your home and your DDS home, plus any associated further spread need not happen.

That's the issue.

As far as I understand it, viral load is thought to be relevant where more than one person in a household catches it as it's very difficult for most people to effectively self isolate from the people they live with, especially when there is a care situation involved such as children or elderly parents. And the greater the viral load, the harder it is for even a healthy immune system to fight it. Just as it's relevant when health and care workers, bus drivers etc are exposed multiple times. It applies to everyone who has multiple exposures to the virus.

It sounds like Justathought is possible closer to the situation of children travelling between their parents who share care - which is permitted. Obviously she doesn't want to disclose her exact personal circumstances but I have known a couple of families like this; in some cases an informal family agreement, in others an agreement reached with social services.

If one of you catches corona, because of viral load and the increased number of people

If anyone catches it, it is likely to be me...since I'm the one that does the shopping. I'm as likely to catch it as most other people who frequent shops. Nobody else in the household goes to the shops ( apart from my daughter who goes once a week where she shops for an elderly neighbour), or to work outside of the home..nor do they see friends or colleagues.

Can you explain how you think I'm more of a risk than you, or your family? Where is this heavy 'viral load' coming from in my circumstance?

You might not feel irresponsible but you clearly are

No I'm not! You don't know my family circumstances other what you have been told on here. I shoulder a lot of responsibility, and that includes looking after our granddaughter.We all have to balance our duties and obligations.

So where do you put the cut off? 2 miles? 10 miles? The government is clear the cut off is different houses; it doesn’t matter if they are only 50 yards apart. It doesn’t matter if you used to see your granddaughter daily or that your daughter once upon a time lived with you. It is irrelevant that you used to take her swimming. There are no stipulations about family size or number of grandparents in the legislation or that the guidelines only apply if you have siblings.

You might not feel irresponsible but you clearly are. If you don’t get Covid, or if you do and receive treatment, it is because you are riding on the backs of people who are being responsible and are not mixing households or going for exercise several times a day, or who go shopping the minimum amount they can.

If one of you catches corona, because of viral load and the increased number of people, it makes it more dangerous for others.
That is why those in large households are more at risk.

Your grand daughter isn't part of your household though, no matter how much you see her as being. You don't live in the same household and therefore aren't part of the same household.

You were clearly gleefully with self vindication to find out that a poster sees her granddaughter

Even the phrase "seeing her granddaughter" assumes it is a selfish act of someone who can't live without seeing her family. That's not my circumstance at all......me and my husband have daily responsibility for our granddaughter, and in fact she has stayed with us for months on end - because of our particular family circumstances. We pick her up from school, when she's at school...take her swimming and so on.

My granddaughter is ver much part of our household. She doesn't live 100 miles away.

I'm still not feeling irresponsible....no matter how much others try to induce guilt ( i know that is not what you are doing). I take my family responsibilities seriously- and as a family we don't mix with others.

My granddaughter only has one set of grandparents - that's us - and no siblings.

RoseAndRose

I agree with every word. That is the sad truth.

Dances

It is not the government's fault if people ignore what they have been told.

The government are at fault for many things - chronic under funding of the NHS, lack of PPE, lack of preparedness for a pandemic, but the fact remains that no matter how prepared the health service was people will die. People will die despite early ITU care with every intervention possible. Those people arent dying because of a shortage of ventilators. They are dying because they couldn't be saved.

The more people who go out and spread it the more people will die. Not because of failures by government but simply because there is no treatment from this and many people will die from it because every intervention has been done and there is nothing more that can be done.

Yes, government has made huge mistakes and they aren't being held accountable for them. Health care workers, and their patients, are being put at unacceptable risk due to lack of PPE, which will no doubt no lead to hospital acquired infection spreading and killing patients but that's why it's even more important to not risk spreading it through the community.

I see in general women trying to follow the guidelines more than men. But I have seen a few women not taking it seriously. Like one who posted on face book inviting everyone to a lock down party until she got lots and lots of critical comments. She openly says she thinks it is all a major over reaction and does not understand the fuss.

It will certainly not be doing you any good. Can I suggest a nice book? Audible is really great, and you can listen while you do other things, like housework as you said you cant garden

I'm off to do some work.

hooves

Some people really are that selfish, and that unconcerned for unlikely c good. They are the children of Thatcher, (even if they say they abhor right wing politics) for their actions show they see no such thing as society. They fault-find with advice that is perfectly clear to the vast majority, and keep picking away with what the as imperfections.

They are incapable of seeing the common benefit, of realising the need to protect the weakest, or of foregoing anything without compulsion. The idea that we're all in this together is rejected by them because they think 'together' has to mean 'expienced identically' rather than the more socially cohesive 'everyone acts' idea.

Unfortunately, there are enough of them about to risk the intended benefits of lockdown.

But I also think there are a lot of people still not taking this seriously and parroting the earlier government message that all those who have died would have died in the next few months anyway. If you believe that, then yes there is zero issue with going to the local chop for one can of coke.

Yes I do actually agree with this point, and as we've seen on other threads it goes with a feeling of resentment that the country has been put on hold for a reason that some people don't consider adequate.

I do however from my own experience of family and friends think most people are trying to follow the guidelines as best they can.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras I agree with you and I understand your anger. But I also think it is because of the governments mixed messages that most people are doing this.

We are going to be the worst affected country in Europe. Lots more people are going to die needlessly. People like me have been pointing out the seriousness of this for about 2 months now and being told we are scaremongering, and now that we want a stasi state. We just don't want more people to die. But honestly, I think it is too late.

Those who have died up till now will have largely caught it before lock down. The next tranche will be those living in households with people who caught it before lock down plus key workers. I am not convinced we are at the peak yet.