Shielded Groups should stay home and we should all get back out there?

[moreginplease81]

Aibu to think shielded groups should stay home and we should all just get back out there and carry on?

The economy is going to be on its knees!

If you can work, you should be allowed to.

YABU - there are people in ICU now who aren't in the "vulnerable" groups - it seems really random who it can kill so I'd prefer not to take the risk thanks.

Also many jobs are just gone anyway.

Did you see how many people died this week in this country?

Ask the nhs nurses with no underlying conditions who died l. Or the 13 year old boy

Because no "healthy" person has died of Covid-19...no, wait. They have.

Stop being a wally.

And the hospitals will manage the onslaught of patients, how?

Ffs! 🤦🏻‍♀️

I thought people are allowed to work 🤔 not seen working banned or did I miss that instruction.

And healthy people who live with vulnerable people?

🤯

My healthy colleague died this weekend of the virus. Not a shielded individual, nor any health conditions. Tell her family your thoughts.

When lots of healthy people get ill alongside the ill and very ill there will be no health system left to care for them. We will be left to die in our houses alone. Great plan OP 👍

I'm so sorry @ Q. Be kind to yourself. X

Omg Op you must call WHO, and all the governments of affected countries and tell them they are doing it wrong😱

Off you go then OP. Just make sure you carry a card with you at all times explaining that you don’t want to be admitted to hospital under any circumstances.

FFS - why don’t some people get this? We’re not trying to stop everyone from getting it, ever. We’re trying to ensure we don’t all get it at the same time, so that the NHS can cope.

Hmm.

My f.i.l. Just has to perform a piece of minor surgery on himself, under phone instruction, at home, because the NHS is - indeed - already struggling.

My sister (nursing in the community) is now nursing people who would formerly have been in hospital.

That's why we're isolating - because the NHS is already under strain.

It's about the strain everywhere as C-17 infections take effect.

Stay in. Save lives.

Started early on the gin I see OP

There are multiple reasons you cant just seperate the vulnerable even if we ignore that this has made vulnerable many people that we wouldnt usually consider vulnerable. Its not just really old people who would need to be isolated, lots of people got the letter (inc whole families due to one child with vulnerablities) and services would struggle to maintain a normal service. Its easy to think of this in terms of 90 year olds but this virus has made people with asthma vulnerable and killed young people with no previous health concerns

Even if it was just an issue with the "frail" You cant truly isolate people. Say the general population who you have no concerns about getting it are group C, and the isolated person is A. We can tell A to stay at home, but as its a marathon not a sprint, some people will either still need to go out for essentials them selves or will have carers. A people will need to interact with carers, medical staff and possibly wider groups like delivery drivers or family that lives with them

That creates group B who are the "go betweens" between group A and group C who will have no health concerns generally themselves but interact with those that do. Group B is huge. Its the family members that live with person A, its the carers that drop in to do personal care, its health care staff. You cant isolate these people as the number is too large. B needs to keep low levels of disease, else hospitals will shut and they will pass it to A.

Thus if group C has a high level, it will increase the incidence in group b who will give to group A. Think of C being a checkout worker who serves B who is a carer for A. If C is low risk then B is low risk, but if b people are constantly living and interacting with c people with it eventually B is going to get it and either pass it on unwittingly or self isolate and leave A without care.

We are all too interlinked for isolation of one group to be effective

Are you not watching the daily news updates? FFS!

I think we could have done that to delay the lockdown for maybe a week, but now, even with a small % of cases requiring ICU help, there would be too many if free movement were allowed.

The economy is certainly in trouble but bodies piled up in the streets would have done that too.

The death rate is comparatively low because people are staying home.

Imagine if everyone went back to work?

US doctor suggests a low estimate that for every ventilator only 1/50 will get to use one

If you do get a ventilator you have a 50:50 chance of survival.

Ventilators will be needed for at least a week.

At the moment over 65’s aren’t given a ventilator

What then? Who’s next? Disabled? Over 50’s? Vulnerable asthmatics or diabetics?

How many of your friends and family are included now?

I have heard this presumption that the economic effects of lockdown are worse than not locking down.

Why do you think the economic effects of 'no lockdown' would be better, OP, other than 'stands to reason'.

If you are focused on the economy rather than the deaths (and I know there will be MH issues and 'suicides from the lockdown and businesses folding' though I also see the excess deaths from not locking down will have a pretty large MH effect on their families too), I expect the economic effects of the excess deaths and the the proportion of people who choose to isolate anyway would be significant and may/could/would exceed that of a temporary lockdown.

As an aside, I've found this article that discusses some academic research about how different US cities handled 1918 pandemic 'flu with lockdown or not www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/04/new-laws-pandemic-economics/609265/

Now I know people generally see what they look for. Yes, I realise COVID is different to pandemic 'flu 1918, yes, the economy is different and so on but it's the only analysis I've found about the economic effects of handling a pandemic. but [spolier - "But early and aggressive interventions both saved lives and triggered a faster rebound in several measures, such as job growth and banking assets".]

The cities that locked down didn't have the state business 'life support' to somewhat keep them going during the lockdown either which presumably will have some effect in rebounding from a lockdown.

Agree with @Hingeandbracket this is much more serious to everybody than we first thought, the WHO have admitted that now.

Plenty of health people will still become very ill with Covid-19 and require hospital treatment. That will completely overwhelm the NHS leading to unnecessary deaths. Plus treatment for those in vulnerable groups would have to be delayed to create NHS capacity.