Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Harvard scientists calculate we’ll have to socially distance until 2022

29 replies

CinnabarRed · 26/04/2020 22:08

www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/04/coronavirus-social-distancing-how-long

That’s from the World Economic Forum, so reputable.

I just don’t see how we can. The cost to our children, to their education, to our economies, to eradicating poverty and hunger - it’s too much.

At what point do we accept that the virus is amongst us and we have to find ways to live with it?

OP posts:

LaurieFairyCake · 26/04/2020 22:29

That is 'living with it'

lljkk · 26/04/2020 22:32

The response has always been a mostly political decision.
The Youth are paying a heavy price to protect the elderly.
I seem to be the only one bothered about that.

There never was a good set of choices, just a lot of trying to figure out what could be least bad mix of choices.

GymSloth · 26/04/2020 22:33

It says some form of 'intermittent ' lockdown. I imagine that is quite different from what we're experiencing at the moment.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

General education

LilacTree1 · 26/04/2020 22:36

This guy says it’s shite

metro.co.uk/2020/04/25/grim-milestone-uk-coronavirus-deaths-pass-20000-12609122/

My definition of living or dying with the disease doesn’t include social distancing. How would schools or transport run?! Not to mention lots of businesses.

GarlicSoup · 26/04/2020 22:37

The Youth are paying a heavy price to protect the elderly

But it's not just the elderly is it? None of us know how we would react to catching the virus - not all who have so sadly died have been elderly, or have underlying health conditions. Surely the lockdown is to protect everyone.

Original poster

CinnabarRed · 26/04/2020 22:45

No. The lockdown is to slow the spread of the virus to allow the NHS time to build capacity. But it isn’t, and never was, about protecting people from ever getting COVID-19. It’s here, it’s endemic, we’re all going to get it at some point unless a viable vaccine is produced.

OP posts:

Mucklowe · 26/04/2020 23:03

Sounds good to me.

DamnYankee · 26/04/2020 23:11

The lockdown is to slow the spread of the virus to allow the (medical community) time to build capacity. But it isn’t, and never was, about protecting people from ever getting COVID-19.

This. Not sure we will all get it; however, also not sure about how our economy and mental health can sustain this much longer.

I think in our state (US), people will comply for two more weeks and then the government will just have to accept we're capable of weighing risks and making decisions for ourselves.

Judging by what I've observed about our community - before and during - this mess, I doubt many people throw all caution to the wind.

Happymum12345 · 26/04/2020 23:58

I hate it when people say that the younger people are suffering in lockdown because it’s just for protecting the elderly. The elderly are people with feelings. The youth are not alone in suffering because of lockdown-we are all suffering because of the virus. I have a friend who is in her 90’s who is terrified. Terrified for herself, her son & Grandson. You don’t stop caring or worrying when you get to a certain age. I also have young dc and teenagers, a few months or longer in lock down, isn’t going to affect them massively & I know they would choose to do this than risk elderly people dying.

Dowser · 27/04/2020 00:02

Just in time for the next big one to come around then .

BeardedMum · 27/04/2020 00:03

I have a friend in her 40s who has just come off the ventilator but both her kidneys have failed and her heart is also failing. No underlying conditions, normal weight and above average fitness levels. This virus strikes randomly.

Kasabian23 · 27/04/2020 00:04

Good, implement social distancing for as long as it takes and fine those who break the rules. People need to understand that until we get a vaccine life as we know it is over and that by keeping away from each as much as possible we save more lives.

zozozoe · 27/04/2020 00:12

We isolate now so that, when we gather again, nobody is missing.

It’s not just the elderly, FFS.

JoeBidensDisintegratingBrain · 27/04/2020 05:29

Boris wasn't elderly: he is 55.

DeathByBoredom · 27/04/2020 05:49

Overweight men in their fifties are a higher risk. But he didn't die, did he? So if we still have an economy by 2022 we can still afford hospital care if needed for overweight men in their fifties. Too bad for them if we have plunged into a great depression by then and there's no money for medicine.

DeathByBoredom · 27/04/2020 05:51

Til 2022 is not a few months, is it happymum? My savings won't stretch that far, don't know about yours?

PhilCornwall1 · 27/04/2020 05:57

People need to understand that until we get a vaccine life as we know it is over and that by keeping away from each as much as possible we save more lives.

It's not about saving lives in the UK, it's about protecting a woefully underfunded NHS. If they could have coped, the fact people die from it wouldn't have been an issue for the government, they couldn't give a toss if you or me died from this. I thought that was well known.

DeathByBoredom · 27/04/2020 06:01

I'd say that people need to understand there is no vaccine riding into town to save you any time soon. Get out plan B. If plan B is cower inside til it all goes away, you crack on with that. I'm off out

Stellamboscha · 27/04/2020 06:16

The Youth are paying a heavy price to protect the elderly.
I seem to be the only one bothered about that.

There never was a good set of choices, just a lot of trying to figure out what could be least bad mix of choices.

Completely agree @lljkk
Makes me sad and angry. I am a teacher and want to get back in school ASAP and just carry on.

Aramox · 27/04/2020 06:33

The elderly are paying a terrible price too. Plenty live alone, dependent on groups and day centres. The mental health cost is catastrophic and for people in their last years it’s unlikely to be worth it.

Contactlenses123 · 27/04/2020 07:08

Boris wasn't elderly: he is 55.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Boris didn't have pneumonia did he?
What was he actually admitted for? Just exhaustion along with a nasty virus?

DeathByBoredom · 27/04/2020 07:17

Is he dead? No

Oblomov20 · 27/04/2020 07:18

Quite a few of Boris's Ministers have had it, haven't they?

DeathByBoredom · 27/04/2020 07:21

It's a virus. It's nasty. It kills the elderly at a fairly high rate. Under 50 death rates are pretty damn tiny. If I was an overweight man in his 50s I'd be a bit nervous. The risk of death ramps up over 70.
This virus isn't going anywhere, and it isn't killing the non elderly at a terrifyingly high rate.
No medical care as the country is bankrupt will

lljkk · 27/04/2020 08:38

Lockdown is trashing the economy & anyone still alive in 10 years will have had to deal with the repercussions for most if not all of the 10 years. The elderly may not live that long for other reasons. The young ARE more affected.

I am wondering if compulsory national service will be brought back. Put all the 18yos who were supposed to start Uni & other training courses into the NatService before they can actually start their proper courses,Israeli style. Everyone else's education to be delayed by a year. It's a terrible solution to how to avoid opening schools again, but there are only terrible solutions. Ripple all the way down the education system. School (reception year) to only start 1st September after 5th birthday for now on (lots of MNers will be happy).

Flip

1 2