To think it is utterly crazy that shielders can now meet up with people?

[Biglittlethings]

At midnight last night the Government slipped out a frankly bizarre new alteration to the rules in that shielders, who have been told on the one hand to expect that they will need to shield beyond 30 June, will from tomorrow be able to not only leave the house, but meet up with others from different households.

"From Monday, the 2.2 million people who’ve been shielding can go outside for first time. This will be with either members of their household, or, if they live alone, to meet one other person."

Further information will follow in today's press conference.

Am I the only one to think this is absolutely ridiculous, and not at all in the interests of "the science?"

Here is the text of the new shielding guidelines. Hopefully this makes it clearer to those who don’t understand.

People classed as clinically extremely vulnerable are advised to take additional action to prevent themselves from coming into contact with the virus. If you’re clinically extremely vulnerable, you’re strongly advised to stay at home as much as possible and keep visits outside to a minimum (for instance once per day).

This is called ‘shielding’ and the advice is now updated:

If you wish to spend time outdoors (though not in other buildings, households, or enclosed spaces) you should take extra care to minimise contact with others by keeping 2 metres apart.

If you choose to spend time outdoors, this can be with members of your own household. If you live alone, you can spend time outdoors with one person from another household (ideally the same person each time).

You should stay alert when leaving home: washing your hands regularly, maintaining social distance and avoiding gatherings of any size.

You should not attend any gatherings, including gatherings of friends and families in private spaces, for example, parties, weddings and religious services.

You should strictly avoid contact with anyone who is displaying symptoms of COVID-19 (a new continuous cough, a high temperature, or a loss of, or change in, your sense of taste or smell).

The Government is currently advising people to shield until 30 June 2020 and is regularly monitoring this position.

The thing is it appears some of the shielding conditions don't appear to be as risky and some conditions that people didn't shield for now are seen to be risker:

"“People living with diabetes face a significantly higher risk of dying with COVID-19 with a third of deaths in England associated with the condition, according to new NHS research..”"

There advice is changing as more and more information is known. Since a large percentage of the population has lots of different health reasons or are overweight then it is difficult to cover those all individually but at least people with diabetes who are no currently shielding know that they are at an increased risk.

We all have different opinions and different levels of what we call acceptable risk in day to day life anyway. This new advice means that shielding can if they want to get out and about for a walk. The ones that are more risk adverse don't have to do anything if they don't want to.

All people have different levels of risk eg I know people who don't have to shield and are generally fit and healthy that are terrified of getting covid and I also know others who are in the very vulnerable group that are happy to go out for a walk since feel that is an acceptable thing for them to do.

For balance I am in the shielding category and I stayed at home totally for the first 10 weeks of my doctor advising me to shield urgently. I am now going out for walks being careful and met one friend for a socially distanced walk and feel so much better and not so isolated as I did before.

Sad that some people actually think this:

"VelveteenBunni
I really do think they are trying to kill us as pp's have said.
This is a shambles."

Actually concentrate on the facts. No one is trying to kill you. The guideline changes mean that shielders can if they want to do some additional things. No one is saying you have to do it, if shielding just if you want to. Continue as you are if that is best for you/what you want to do.

I sometimes wonder if the post I have quoted from is actually a troll to cause trouble since purposefully emotive language to rile people up or scare others and completely ignoring what is being said the the government guidelines.

Also people need to appreciate where it says "should" stay in doors that is not the law and it is not mandatory whereas the coronavirus regulations' provisions which set out when everyone can leave home (eg to work) are the law and if you break them you can be fined.

The difficult issue for those very vulnerable and shielded is if they cannot work from home (most people) and how long their employer should carry on paying them for doing nothing before making them redundant and how to do that fairly within the law.

I don’t think many people on here realize how powerful ‘advice’ from the government can be. I know many shielders, and they on the whole feel that they need to trust ‘those in charge’.

So there are many with serious vulnerabilities who now will think that there is no risk in going out for a walk with say a healthcare worker who may also have contact with many others.

It’s absolutely terrible advice.

It could take 18 months to get a reliable vaccine, or we might never get one. Many older people with health conditions may not wish to spend possibly the whole remainder of their limited life expectancy trapped indoors in solitary confinement.
The virus is killed outdoors by 10 minutes of strong sunlight. It would seem reasonable to let shielding patients choose what level of risk they want to take, in order to have a life, as opposed to a miserable existence.

I don’t understand lots of recent government advice tbh. There’s still thousands of daily cases and hundreds of deaths, not sure why they’re acting as though it’s gone away.

@2ndtimearound2020 The guideline changes mean that shielders can if they want to do some additional things. but they don’t, I am shielding and could always have gone for a work if I had wanted to. Obviously I would be making a “choice” than could render my dc motherless. It is more dangerous now with the high R where I live, combined with people not bothering to social distance than it was a month ago. Some people will listen to this advice and reassess their risk not based on their consultants in depth knowledge but on on a government prioritising the economy and keep DC out the news. If you are not shielding yourself or living with someone who is you do not understand, you may feel empathy but you don’t understand because you are not in that situation.

more dangerous now with the high R where I live, combined with people not bothering to social distance than it was a month ago.

This.

I am shielding and went out for a walk for the first time today. I really didn't want to go out but I've noticed my fitness plummet during the time I've been shielding so figured I'd better start to build it up again - big mistake. There were so many people out walking, families cycling in groups on the pavement, groups of mums pushing prams - I was constantly having to cross the road to avoid people but there were too many occasions where I just didn't have anywhere to go, both sides of the pavement were busy.

I went scientists to explain these risks properly. Are the shielded in danger by walking close to someone else?

To this poster:

"ToothFairyNemesis Obviously I would be making a “choice” than could render my dc motherless. If you are not shielding yourself or living with someone who is you do not understand, you may feel empathy but you don’t understand because you are not in that situation."

You totally ignored EVERYTHING I wrote

1. If you think going out for a walk and socially distance means the choice is that you WILL THEN MAKE YOUR dc MOTHERLESS then DON'T do it. No one is suggesting that you should just that SHIELDERS can if THEY WANT TO.... you don't want to, so don't then.

1. I told you that I am in the shielding group! So I do understand being very vulnerable because I AM but I chose to go for a walk - you don't. I personally don't think going for a walk means my DC will end up motherless and feel you are being over dramatic that a mere walk distancing from others will mean you will die - you believe that, I don't - hence I like the new guidelines so hysterical people don't keep insisting I should lock myself away because I am very vulnerable - I ignore them anyway since I know that the virus cannot leap 2m or even closer if someone walks past me whilst I am walking in the fresh air.

Before you spread your fears of DC being motherless after a simple walk actually READ what you are responding to!

I really do fear for the mental health of some of the posters that are so extreme in their views that they will die if they brush past someone or get nearer than 2m.

The poor children living with a parent with that level of fear. No wonder so many children have anxiety issues!
I can see children growing up afraid of their own shadows and fearing school, people, illness, going out. It is really quite sad.

I went scientists to explain these risks properly. Are the shielded in danger by walking close to someone else?

I wrote another post saying I thought that the advice to go for walks and meet up for shielders was very last minute and unclear, and that more clarity was needed, and my goodness a whole pile on from shielders saying they knew all the risks, didn’t need anything made any clearer and telling me to sod off!

When others including the above are understandably now wanting to weigh up, is this good advice? What are the risks for me and my particular situation? The government and public health messages are supposed to give us all the facts to make an INFORMED CHOICE. I do not see the guidance and support for shielders to make an informed choice.

I know several people shielding and many assumed that going for a quiet walk with or without a friend was the same risk wise. It is not. Many felt a bit more pressure to go out when they didn’t feel ready. Some also felt that it ‘must be safe enough’ if the government said. As if the government had a solid scientific plan supported by public health directors. It does not.

It is messy, confusing advice.

Fair enough enough I missed you were shielding. However you didn’t read my post either I didn’t say my dc would be motherless I said the could happen so it’s not really a choice in the true sense of the word.

Anyway my main point is I always had that choice the only thing that has changed is the government are implying it is a choice I can safely take when it isn’t.

Maybe you live in a quiet area, maybe you can easily drive to a safer area. Maybe you don’t have you g dc, maybe your health condition is not a serious as mine and your odds of survival are better than mine. Maybe none of those things are true and you chose to walk anyway. Thats obviously up to you. But don’t claim shielders can know do some additional things. We could always do as anyone else.

@secondtime and @Typohere I see no catastophising? The poster said ‘could render them motherless’ which is just a fact. She has to weigh this up. I didn’t see her being extreme or irrational. Just factual. Her decision too, don’t belittle her and don’t tell her she’s ruining the mental health of her kids! No evidence for that.

@Typohere I really do fear for the mental health of some of the posters that are so extreme in their views that they will die if they brush past someone or get nearer than 2m.
Do you fear for the mental health of my consultant also? I am following his guidance. I don’t think I will die if I brush pass someone , I think I could catch Covid in the local environment given the complete lack of social distancing. My consultant sadly thinks my chances of survival are not positive at all.
You will be pleased to know though that my dc are blissfully unaware of how serious the situation could be!

@StayinginSummer

I went scientists to explain these risks properly. Are the shielded in danger by walking close to someone else?

I wrote another post saying I thought that the advice to go for walks and meet up for shielders was very last minute and unclear, and that more clarity was needed, and my goodness a whole pile on from shielders saying they knew all the risks, didn’t need anything made any clearer and telling me to sod off!

When others including the above are understandably now wanting to weigh up, is this good advice? What are the risks for me and my particular situation? The government and public health messages are supposed to give us all the facts to make an INFORMED CHOICE. I do not see the guidance and support for shielders to make an informed choice.

I know several people shielding and many assumed that going for a quiet walk with or without a friend was the same risk wise. It is not. Many felt a bit more pressure to go out when they didn’t feel ready. Some also felt that it ‘must be safe enough’ if the government said. As if the government had a solid scientific plan supported by public health directors. It does not.

It is messy, confusing advice.

Totally spot on. So many posters keep telling us to risk assess for ourselves but how? We aren't being given access to the information to assess our own risks.

I went out today but maintaining distance was impossible. Too many other people just didn't care. Wherever I could I moved, walked in roads, crossed over but there were too many times when it was impossible because both sides of the pavement had groups of people on them. How do I assess that? Is it dangerous for me to pass closely by other people? What if they brush past as they walk past me?

Yes, we are fearful. Receiving the shielding letters will do that to you. They did not mince their words.

@MRex I know and wasn't intending to go to shops anyway just wanted to know as still in need of a priority slot and only just started getting food hamper due to big mix up so would be difficult again if that stopped suddenly to keep safe as keep running out the in last 4 days before the deliveries

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras thanks I know. I’ve just been utterly ripped apart on another thread for daring to say that people are not being given good public health advice to make informed decisions. No one is, it is a mess.

I know at least three shielders who are so high risk they would probably not survive getting the virus, or if they did, could be permanently affected. One has young kids, he hasn’t seen them in 2 months. He hasn’t seen anyone. Now work is expecting that he may be able to come in, which he can’t. He obviously won’t, but with woolly vague advice it is putting unnecessary pressure on people. We haven’t seen even got contact tracing in place. People say they know the prevalence, but we have no idea until a good system is in place with local data.

@StayinginSummer

For what it's worth I agree with you entirely. The government could be doing so much more to ease restrictions safely - wait another two weeks before starting, have track and trace running, insist on face coverings on public transport.

And yes, those of us shielding need full and proper guidance and given in good time. Not the PM stating on Thursday that all restrictions remain the same for shielded and then have Sunday papers announcing that we can go out for a walk - what changed between Thursday and Sunday. It feels like government have no clue anymore and are just making it up as they go along. How can we trust what they tell us? Even just looking at their own silly "Nandos" risk scale and it clearly says that shielding won't be lifted until risk level is at 1. We are at 4 now, which says that full lockdown is necessary, so why is it being lifted? That's why I don't trust them. They aren't even following their own rules.

I don’t really understand the furore over this. Have we all become so incompetent and requiring to be spoon fed that it’s now impossible for there to be any suggestion that a reasonable way forward is to allow people can weigh up the risks vs benefits in their own individual circumstances and make their own decisions? Or do we all need to be told what to do at all times, in every possible permutation of possibility?

Why on earth can’t we just accept that if you are in the shielding group and do not want to go out for a walk, then you can make the decision not to go out . It’s an option, not an obligation.

Shielding is a recommendation too. It’s not enforceable.

As for furlough- my understanding is that furlough is to cover employees where their employer has no work for them to do (work cannot be done from home or there is no work to be fine due to lack of demand etc- e.g. factory worker where factory is shut or shop assistant where shop is closed or a waiter/waitress). The g’ment pays the wages to prevent redundancy. If you cannot work because you are in the shielded group, then you may qualify for furlough but it won’t be just because you are shielding- it will be because your employer has deemed there is no work available for you (even if you could work from home). Some employers, I believe, are choosing to prioritise shielded employees for furlough- so if they only need 50% of their staff to do the work they have available then they can furlough 50% of their staff, but they’ll make sure they’re shielding employees are in that 50% that are furloughed. But once furlough ends- either because your employer no longer qualifies for furlough (e.g. factory reopens and plenty of work) or because the scheme has come to an end- what you are paid will be between you and your employer to work out on what basis you will be paid (and obviously depends on your contract). I think there will be some legal protection for shielded patients- i.e. the employer cannot force them to come back to work before recommended they do so/cannot be made redundant based on the fact they are shielding etc. However, I think there are some people who will only get statutory sick pay- I have heard of a few who have faced that issue.

@jacks I don’t think people need to be told what to do or spoon fed.

I don’t actually think people are being spoon fed. They are being given quick sound bite advice which is ill thought out, with no rational.

Many shielders have not gone out, and want to, but want better information to weigh up their own risks and make their own decision.

I think that is entirely reasonable.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras I had several calls from frustrated and confused shielders, all wondering what to do. I honestly didn’t have all the information that they needed. Some felt that they were being a bit foolish to stay in now if everyone else was going out for example. So they weren’t weighing up their own risk, but responding to perceived social pressure. If the government thinks it’s okay I must be a bit of a silly person - that was some people’s thinking.

I'm not shielding exactly but have elevated risk. We are not changing anything here, home schooling, me WFH although dh works outside home, essential food shopping only in person and other stuff online non essential and disinfecting everything through door. Walks around local neighborhood only. Not socialising with people in person. If in three weeks or so there are no big spikes again I'll relax a little more within the optional relaxing. However I support those that can't wait to catch up.with loved ones in back gardens etc. I guess I'm just very data driven and there is a lot of unknowns atm.

JACKS111

I agree with you when you say 'jacks11 Have we all become so incompetent and requiring to be spoon fed that it’s now impossible for there to be any suggestion that a reasonable way forward is to allow people can weigh up the risks vs benefits in their own individual circumstances and make their own decisions? Or do we all need to be told what to do at all times, in every possible permutation of possibility?'

I think from some of the posts that some people do need spoon feeding and seem to think that every single question must be answered for their individual needs so that no level of any thinking skill or risk assessment is required from them at all. Some people will not be happy until the government personally address their individual circumstances and tell them exactly what to do but of course that is not possible. Instead of moaning and wanting every single little thing answered why don't they just stay in and wait until the virus is completely gone from society which could be years away or months away but constantly expecting the government to cover every angle for them is never going to happen.

Some people will not be happy until the government personally address their individual circumstances and tell them exactly what to do
They still won't be happy, because they'll disagree with whatever answer they're given. They'll ask where the evidence is. Then be upset there's conflicting evidence indicating A or B depending on a lot of other factors that they can't quite understand, the brighter ones will finally fall in that eventually someone had to choose. Mutterings will be made that the government said they were following science and it isn't clear.