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?"

The problem is that this is a new virus. That means sometimes knowledge changes, something previously considered unsafe is now considered safe or vice versa, the risk of certain conditions changes etc. Countries are all learning and looking at each other to figure out the impact of different approaches too. Anyone can look up most scientific evidence online, I sometimes read random papers because they're interesting and haven't seen any research referred to yet that Google can't find. Unless you work in the field though, there's a chance you won't recognise a good from a bad study, nor understand some nuanced implications. Government advice is also all online and detailed, so you can look it up easily using government websites. I feel a little frustrated by seeing so many comments that information "isn't clear" when someone clearly just watched a clip on the news and didn't read any detail to get their questions answered to make their own decisions.

@StayinginSummer

I think there is quite a lot of information out there re general risks of transmission if distanced contact- I.e. it is minimal. Not 0% but low- though obviously if you go to somewhere really busy where it is hard to socially distance (e.g. a busy beach or beauty spot). The risks start to rise.

However, it is quite difficult to give more specific advice in individual conditions/circumstances- especially when patients have multiple co-morbidities which all interact to alter the degree of risk in an individual. I think for many, walking outside for a short period with social distancing with a member of your own household or one friend if you live alone, is not a massive risk. If I was a transplant patient, I might have a different perspective than an elderly person with severe COPD- both are very vulnerable but their risks are different in nature in a number of ways. In the former case, I’d probably be significantly more risk averse. I don’t think the government can advise you on that.

An elderly person, or someone nearing the end of my life, might decide that spending a large proportion of the time they have left stuck in their house on alone or not being able to see close family or friends may take the view that although they are vulnerable they will take the risk of getting out to see others because the alternative is just as bad/worse.

I agree that the announcement was quite rushed out and I think it could have been done better. I don’t think it’s crazy for people who are shielding to be able to go for a short walk with appropriate social distancing. I think some people are descending into hyperbole (‘they’re trying to kill is now”, “being forced out”) regarding something which is an option, not an obligation.

Sorry I should say- risk if transmission is minimal if there is distanced contact outside (and assuming the person you are with has no symptoms) and with only a member of your household or one friend. Clearly if you go for a walk somewhere busy where you cannot keep your distance, that might not apply. Going for a walk in a deserted spot is a different thing altogether (like my parents, for instance- my father I’d shielding but could walk for miles without ever meeting another person).

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.

No, we aren't all incompetent. My background is in nursing and I'm trained in infection control. I can work out risk when I have the necessary information!!

I want to be able to go.out for a walk. I'm someone who, despite my illness and disability, has gone to the gym three times a week for many years. I'm noticing the huge decline in my health during this lockdown because I don't have the space to exercise properly. But, I want to go out safely. To do that I need information. Government have said two meters distance but yesterday on my walk many times it was impossible to maintain that due to.the numbers of people out and the fact that they were in groups. So, how does that impact my risk? Two metres is desirable but is less than two metres dangerous? Who knows?

Today I've seen a newspaper article stating that less then two.metres doubles transmission rate - is that correct? Who knows because we haven't been given proper, detailed advice.

In the early days of this virus some people I work with (no longer a nurse) were wearing gloves and told me that I should wear them. Now, I have the knowledge to understand the futility of wearing the same pair of gloves for hours, across multiple tasks, so I refused and instead washed my hands as often as I could, used hand gel frequently and went bare below the elbows. That's what happens when you have information. Knowledge is power, so, if you want me to make my own decisions give me the information to do so.

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras - www.google.co.uk/. Knock yourself out. You'll have to start accepting at some point that the virus is new, so everyone in every country is still learning about it, but all the information is there for you to find.

I do think there’s a learned helplessness from some people since the pandemic. I get that people are very scared but we have to make our own assessments of risk. I’m no Tory and I dislike this government and the way they’ve handled many things but this is a new virus, they are learning all the time.

distanced contact outside (and assuming the person you are with has no symptoms)

This is exactly what I mean. You are weighing risk without good information. A large proportion of transmission is through people with no symptoms for example.

I really don’t think the public health message about how to weigh up different risks - inside - outside - how long you meet someone for - the fact that much transmission is asymptomatic - viral load - how long the virus is on surfaces inside vs outside - whether you meet up with someone who is also in contact with others...

Perfectly possible to give people really good information to weigh up their own risks. This has not been done. So many half known ‘facts’ and half truths out there. I’ve been told that visiting another household is no more risky than going to a shop. Really not true. Everyone is bit all over the place rather than having a clear framework in which to navigate a safe gradual ease of lockdown.

Today I've seen a newspaper article stating that less then two.metres doubles transmission rate - is that correct? Who knows because we haven't been given proper, detailed advice.

Completely agree. I have good information due to my background however so much of what I read, on social media, on mumsnet, taking with my friends, it is vague and fuzzy information. I do not see people weighing up risks with enough information to make an informed choice. And you can see that in action with packed beaches, people either saying I’m just doing what I want now or others staying in lockdown, like two extremes.

Without good information I think our society is becoming more divided.

So now the lives of the most vulnerable are being used in place of a dead cat.

What I want to know is, why are we suddenly talking about dead cats?

@MRex

The information that I need isn't available on Google. We need an understanding of why government took the decisions it took. We need to know who actually is at an increased risk from Covid, does more than one co morbidity increase your risks, if you have a high risk in one area but a much lower risk in another does that lower your risk, how likely are you to catch it in one environment Vs another, how successful are measures like hand washing, changing clothes, washing shopping etc?

In order to make a risk assessment you need to be able to measure the risks. I don't know if someone I come into contact with has it or not, so how do I assess the risk?

Perfectly possible to give people really good information to weigh up their own risks. This has not been done. So many half known ‘facts’ and half truths out there. I’ve been told that visiting another household is no more risky than going to a shop. Really not true. Everyone is bit all over the place rather than having a clear framework in which to navigate a safe gradual ease of lockdown.

Yep. On another thread a poster has deemed it safer to meet with a person from another household to have sex than to shop in IKEA - now, either they get up to some weird things in IKEA or they have no clue what they're talking about.

@0v9c99f9g9d939d9f9g9h8h

So now the lives of the most vulnerable are being used in place of a dead cat.

What I want to know is, why are we suddenly talking about dead cats?

It's a saying. It means you metaphorically chuck a dead cat on the table to divert attention away from a subject you don't want people to focus on.

I’m on the shielded list. I have been out for a walk three times a week. I live in an area where there are many spacious walks where social distancing is not a problem. I will meet up with my adult children - keeping a social distance.

I will not head for the shops, supermarkets, garden centres, beach or any place where social distance is not easily maintained. It is far safer for me to have my children over to my garden than to meet them in a crowded park.

Just because the Govt say I can go out and mingle doesn’t mean I have to.

People on the shielded list are capable of thinking for themselves.

@PennyInMyPocket

The government have absolutely not suggested that shielded people should “go out and mingle”. In fact they have specifically told you not to!

They have said that you can go outside for a walk while maintaining strict social distancing and that if you live on your own you can meet up with one other person (again socially distancing and they say ideally it should be the same person).

Shielding isn’t a legal requirement, so you can meet up with your children if you want to, but don’t think the government is recommending that you have contact with others.

Yes, shielding has never thankfully been a legal requirement. Right fro the start people can take their own decisions on that eg if you have 6 months to live you might want to spend it with your children not holed up alone at home or you might hate your children so are really glad you have the chance for 6 months alone.

The government have absolutely not suggested that shielded people should “go out and mingle”. In fact they have specifically told you not to

I was simply responding to the OP.

As a person on the shielded list I will keep myself safe - as I’m sure every other person on the shielded list will!

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras - you really need to start accepting that everything isn't known and being hidden from you. Read this about the varying views on just your one question about distance outside: www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52522460. Now, you can do your own detailed scientific research to decide, or you can take advice offered by government generically about safety. What you can't do is keep grumbling that information is known but not provided, because that's ridiculous.

[quote MRex]@Hearhoovesthinkzebras - you really need to start accepting that everything isn't known and being hidden from you. Read this about the varying views on just your one question about distance outside: www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-52522460. Now, you can do your own detailed scientific research to decide, or you can take advice offered by government generically about safety. What you can't do is keep grumbling that information is known but not provided, because that's ridiculous.[/quote]
I'm not saying that it's known and I'm not being told.

I'm saying how can I do my own risk assessment without knowing key facts? If those key facts aren't known by anyone, including scientists, then how do I assess whether something is no risk, low risk or high risk, for me?

Has anyone else had a call from the shielding helpline today? I've missed it twice in a week as I'm quite deaf and I don't know how they would know of you were dead or not. You can't call the number back in case some genius suggests that. Has anyone been taken off the list by phone? I doubt it's that as had three letters (2 hospitals and GP).

@VaTeLaverLesMains yes they are just calling people to see if they still need/want food boxes.

I just had some government issue chicken meatballs

@VaTeLaverLesMains

I had a call last week just to check if I needed help or if my needs had changed.

I have been shielding since the end of February. I won't be changing anything because this government is clueless.

I'm on the shielding list and thankfully WFH. I also have considerate employers so they are happy for me to continue to do so for as long as needs be.

I've largely followed the guidelines throughout. the only exceptions are walking the dog. We live in a rural area so quite often see no one. If I do, I can keep my distance. I've also been out in the car a couple of times- just for a drive to keep the car battery topped up. I've had to make a decision whether to send my DD back to school. She has gone back as that is more about her mental health than mine. She is in a small school with a very small class. Throughout, we have tried to balance the risks.

What I won't be doing is going shopping or other areas where I know where there lots of people as that will increase my risk of exposure.

so I am heeding advice but still being sensible.

I also had the call mentioned above and as per pp, it's just updating their records. No I don't need food boxes but I do get the priority slots and my meds delivered.

I never even knew chicken meatballs existed before pandemic. I think my definition of chicken is different to the tin definition.