Rant alert! How do those who want Lockdown to continue justify the suffering of everyone else?

[Thefrenchbaguette]

My 3 month old has been waiting for a hip scan to confirm her rather obvious DDH. She needs a harness, the GP already confirmed she will need one and put in an urgent referral at her 6 week review and still nothing because they're not doing them at all here! You can only use a harness up until 6 months and after that the treatment for DDH is an operation! My baby is going to have to have a completely unavoidable operation or suffer lifelong damage to her hips because the NHS is just not interested in anyone who doesn't have Covid19! There isn't even the option to pay for it to be done privately! I am furious and so sick of seeing countless threads and comments about how lockdown needs to be continued and even stricter! All very well with your comfortable house and perfectly secure income and no real risk to your overall well-being but what about everyone else who is suffering?!
A friend had an abnormal smear come back in January but the follow up has been indefinitely postponed! How many people are going to miss life saving diagnosis', life saving treatments! It's disgusting and I feel so unbelievably angry at what this country has come through so 90% of people can avoid getting what is essentially a bad cold!

Corythatwas

I wouldn’t say that it matters so much what their quality of life is....more that after we have had our four score years and ten (and a bit more nowadays) we have to assume that death is coming (relatively) soon even if we are in tip top health.

All of us must expect to die and also expect usually our parents to die before us. This is what being mortal is. I will be heartbreakinly sad when my parents die but if as I hope they make it into their 70s or even 80s I cannot claim to be supprised when it happens or demand the world be stopped to make prevent their death.

There is an obsession with immortality in this country. People on the news saying that they are “shocked” that their 90yr old relative with diabetes and heart failure died of covid (or of anything) and it’s a terrible tragedy . Life expectancy is in the 80s so how can anyone be surprised that someone who is 90 has died of something?

I wonder if the countries move away from religion means that people fear death more?

People that are admitted to nursing homes have on average less than a year to live. One of the saddest things about lockdown is that those people are confined to their rooms alone now. They have months left anyway, and because we are all so scared of them dying they are spending those months alone. They will die this year covid or no covid (I suspect that the flu deaths of winter 20-21 will be reduced from normal) but because as a society we cannot accept death we are making them die alone without family there. That’s a tragedy.

NonothtatDr, nearly all my posts are actually about a 23yo. Not four score and ten. Twenty-three.

And many of my posts on this and the other tread have been about the false dichotomy between vulnerable otoh and ready to die on the other.

People who are confined to their nursing home rooms at lockdown- you don't think that might partly be to protect members of staff? And their families? If you are not allowed to visit, you don't think that might partly be to prevent you from spreading infection to the wider society.

Yeah ok, I'll put my hands up. I was shocked when I realised a younger colleague- who will never feature in any statistics as she didn't die- has suffered damage to inner organs which may be irreversible. Belief in immortality and all that. Or at least in the desirability of people being allowed to experience middle age.

While I totally agree that if your child needs a hip scan they should get it, it really has nothing to do with lockdown. Rightly or wrongly the NHS reorganised expecting a huge influx of people dying from COVID-19 and if anything lockdown has made it easier for appointments for non COVID conditions (as it has reduced the cases) not harder.

Of your daughter were to die from covid that would indeed be a tragedy and I hope she does not. However it’s not at all what I am trying to say.

I am not sure how a prolonged lockdown helps your Daughter or how the lack of normal social and medical care helps her. Pages back I said that a short lockdown when it looked like healthcare services faced being overwhelmed as had happened abroad was sensible to ensure their was nhs capacity for those sick of covid and to ensure those sick with other stuff got their treatment as well, and I thought that was what was planned. I work in the nhs. There was a lot of fear. Plans for people dying in the community uncared for in their final days. Plans for mass morgues and graves etc. End of days type stuff. The argument which I think still holds is that if so many people got covid the hospitals filled up (and the staff got sick) and then there was no treatment for sick people from covid or other stuff, then death and disability skyrockets and it’s all disaster movie stuff. The way I thought it was supposed to work was that a lockdown should have made it more likely the OPs dd got care by ensuring essential services could continue not less.

Somehow it’s got all confused on a national level. Nhs capacity was not exceeded (other than a few local issues) but somehow the things we were trying to avoid by lockdown - the lack of Medical treatment for other stuff like cancer and paediatrics and heart attacks has happened anyway and I can’t quite figure out why. It’s not protecting patients as there getting sick anyway from other stuff, it’s not protecting staff as they’re at work anyway......things people say like the “surgeon can’t operate on OPs DD if she’s died of covid) - well no she can’t but not seeing DDs daughter in outpatients to for a harness is unlikely to give her covid and if she’s not doing her paediatric clinic then she’s likely redeployed and at greater risk of getting covid - (surgeons have been used to help turn patients on ITU). If the kid doesn’t get a harness then they will need an op and that will need an an anaesthetic and that is much more likely to transmit covid and take away someone essential (the anaesthetist) from covid work...:.it makes no sense in any way.

If your daughter is high risk then she should stay in if at all possible, potentially till their is a vaccine. If she gets unwell she should get treatment. Keeping everyone else inside until there is a vaccine, once it it’s clear that health service capacity has not been overwhelmed, does not help her as far as I can see. In fact a lower R in the community will slow the production of a vaccine as there isn’t enough community transmission to test it. It also fecks over the economy which will cause a massive recession meaning that In the future your DD may not be able to get the care or services she needs as the country is broke. Stopping the education of young people means that there will be less people available to care for all of us in the future - where we expect the doctors and nurses of tomorrow to come from I have no idea because we’re not training them at the moment. I am not sure what lockdown is doing to help your DD or any of us actually.

With regards to nursing homes, the staff should already be wearing ppe / they have to go into the residents rooms to care for them so it can’t be that. (Clearly staff rooms etc should be non resident so staff can eat and have a break not in PPE) It does stop residents transmitting covid to each other but then we’re back to my previous argument about living vs prolonging life and I don’t even think it prolongs life - People are dying from being in their rooms - of dehydration and lack of motivation to continue. Transmission to wider society could be a factor For not allowing family visits but it wasn’t the one that was I risky promoted - we’ve now changed “your a danger to granny” to “granny is a danger to you” except it dosent have as much weight that way Round as the you is in average a lot less at risk.

I am sorry that your colleague has organ damage. That’s shit. I am again not sure how More lockdown would help her or people like her unless you are advocating lockdown until a vaccine? (And then we get into the potential S/e of a vaccine which we won’t know for 20yrs or so)

@loubieloo4. So sorry to read this.

I am not sure how a prolonged lockdown helps your Daughter or how the lack of normal social and medical care helps her.

Lockdown could help as it will mean that there are fewer COVID cases so the NHS has more capacity. Isn't that obvious?

NonotthatDr what would help my dd would be if her school takes the time to set up a teaching programme that enables her to take part safely rather than rush back before the test/tracing app is up and working or a plan for on-site safety has been worked out.

Because, guess what, she is one of those young people who need an education. If there is a sudden return, not only will she not be able to take part: whatever online and other provision that is currently available for her will stop. The plans of providing certain essential elements at a later date when hopefully infection rate has gone down/testing is working better will be shelved. So everybody else gets a nicer education and she and her mates (she reckons there may be 5 or 6 of them) get nothing.

But the worst thing is having to sit in meetings and hear her classmates discuss this as if she is someone who doesn't have the same right to education as they do or alternatively someone whose safety doesn't matter. That is truly debilitating.

It is true that we don't have a vaccine, but we certainly have the capacity to set up an efficient testing and tracing system. Other countries have managed to do so, so these things are obviously possible.

Other countries started testing arrivals at the borders a long time ago, we are closing the border when we are pretty well the country with the most infection risk.

The latest info I have seen suggests that 1 in 10 of Covid cases are ill for 3 weeks or longer: the percentage of those who suffer permanent damage is not known. But that is going to hit the country hard if a large number of people need long term rehabilitation.

@fedupofbed, that sounds horrific.

You're also not the first person I've heard from who's been unwell for a long time after the initial Covid symptoms have passed. One of my colleagues is still suffering facial numbness and shortness of breaht 6 weeks after being ill, and has only been able to return to work p/t (WFH), because he is exhausted after a few hours of being up. He was a very fit 40-year old rugby player who now has to stop for a rest halfway up the stairs.

Some infections can leave some people with complex auto-immune conditions, I wonder if Covid may turn out to be one of these? I really hope not.

“Lockdown could help as it will mean that there are fewer COVID cases so the NHS has more capacity. Isn't that obvious?”

No it’s not obvious. As I said in my post, lockdown made sense when there were capacity concerns. There are no longer these concerns, so why lockdown?

We cancelled clinics to avoid infecting pts abd they are running virtually

Corythatwas

I agree with all you have said about things that could help. I think most of them need implementing.

None of them are general lockdown. I would argue that the ending of a general lockdown could be used to provide additional resource for people like your daughter. Stopping a general lockdown does not mean stopping protecting the vulnerable. It gets the non vulnerable out working and being educated to keep things going. I can see it must be shit to know that your the one that can’t go back but that can’t stop everyone else going back.

Option one
Lockdown till a vaccine. Fair to all (except those keyworker who have to keep on working and sending their kids to childcare) no kids educated. Healthcare on covid only footing. Businesses fold. Economy tanks. Vaccine takes ages. People die or are disabled from other stuff. No new drs or nurses or new anything. Many more people die without their family. Mental and physical health of he population plummets.Recession - bad one. Government goes bust. No nhs. No social care. No care homes for the elderly Or vulnerable. Many destitute and dead. A generation of Badly educated children and young people struggle to find a future. Life expectancy drops due to all the above.

Option 2
Lifting of general lockdown with more useful measures to track and trace and shield. Enhanced at home provison for the shielded but agree still crap for them and not fair. Economy restarts, non covid healthcare restarts, education restarts. Smaller recession. Vaccine available quicker and shielded can come out . Government less bust so can continue (although reduced from ore covid social care, health care aNd education). Lives continue and society recovers.

No it’s not obvious. As I said in my post, lockdown made sense when there were capacity concerns. There are no longer these concerns, so why lockdown?

There are no capacity concerns because of lockdown though. There might be capacity concerns if we lift lockdown as the NHS will obviously prioritise people who are dying and there will be more cases if there is no attempt to stop the spread. Plus hospitals become dangerous places with regard to getting infected.

@sprinklesone, I'm a boomer who doesn't want lockdown to end, but not because I don't want to get Covid (we think we both had it a couple of weeks before lockdown) but because I don't want to see unnecessary deaths in any age group, or the NHS struggling to manage Covid cases and therefore unable to carry out elective treatments.

The R rate is still perilously close to 1. When it goes above 1, the rate of transmission starts to increase exponentially. At 1.2, the number of cases doubles when the infection has been transmitted 5 times. At 1.5, it doubles after just over 2 rounds of transmission.

The R rates published by the government are a bit of a guesstimate anyway. Different methods of calculation give different results and the government combines them. If the methods that give the higher R rates turn out to be more accurate, the true R rate could be higher than 1.

With an incubation period of approx 14 days, the R-rate today is a snapshot of how things were 2 or maybe 3 weeks ago. I'd have preferred to see the R rate down to 0.8 in all areas before easing lockdown, so that there was a bit of wriggle room.

Testing is still inadequate. The numbers tested are low, it is taking a long time for people to get results. There are a small, but significant proportion of false negatives. There are lots of accounts of HCPs testing positive despite being asymptomatic but most asymptomatic people will never be tested and will never know they're carrying the virus.

The accounts from people experiencing long-lasting problems after having Covid are alarming. It's too soon to know what proportion of people suffer such problems, how long they last or how incapacitating they can be.

This virus is a massive unknown and I think it's prudent to proceed with extreme caution until testing, tracking and tracing have improved. We're still behaving as though lockdown were in place: essential journeys only and WFH.

If the government won't do what we think is right, we have to do it for ourselves.

Lockdown till a vaccine. Fair to all (except those keyworker who have to keep on working and sending their kids to childcare) no kids educated. Healthcare on covid only footing.

Why would healthcare have to be on a covid only footing though? It never has been. It was just limited to urgent cases. If we continued lockdown there would be fewer covid cases and more non urgent cases could be seen.

Nonothatdr, I'd be fine with Option 2 in many ways as long as government are upfront about the actual reliability about the testing/tracing system and do not lift lockdown until they have evidence it is up and functioning.

We also need a continued support/furlough system that enables those shielding to continue to shield, given that they are not all 90 years old.

We also need to locate people who should be shielding but currently aren't because they are unaware of their high BP or whatever.

We also need a system to educate the children who need to be shielding and the children of shielding parents.

We need the population in general to understand that if there is a new spike and the NHS threatens to be overwhelmed new measures may need to be put in place.

We need to stop using language that puts "young people who need an education" in a category of their own which does not include shielders.

@LakieLady you need to think about other age groups. Those that are precariously housed and need education. Young people who need to be able to meet friends and have relationships.

You can stay locked up as long as you like but this has a less negative impact on some groups than others.

We need to stop using language that puts "young people who need an education" in a category of their own which does not include shielders.

I disagree. All young people including your daughter must have access to education. But her access will need to be different to the other 99% of people her age. There needs to be provision but it shouldn’t drive what everyone gets.

I didn't think having high BP meant you had to shield?

and if anything lockdown has made it easier for appointments for non COVID conditions

Except for all the departments which either remain effectively closed or which are doing VERY limited treatments/consultations etc. We're a hell of a long way from the NHS being "open" as normal.

We also need a continued support/furlough system that enables those shielding to continue to shield, given that they are not all 90 years old.

And find a way to bring in staff to replace all those who can't currently work due to shielding. Who is going to deal with the patients of hospital consultants who are shielding, for example? Or teachers, or nurses?

sorry, that was careless, dolly, re the BP: was thinking of a specific situation

No it’s not obvious. As I said in my post, lockdown made sense when there were capacity concerns. There are no longer these concerns, so why lockdown?

Without lockdown, we could well be back where we were in March, with Covid rampaging through hospitals, infecting patients who were already there for no Covid reasons, and a massive staff shortage due to huge numbers of staff off sick or self isolating due to symptoms. The NHS was days away from total collapse back in March! That could happen again very easily if numbers are allowed to rise exponentially again.

@Alsohuman

The really distasteful thing about this thread is the comparison in the value of lives. No life is worth more any other. And one death being assigned tragedy status while another isn’t. Reading this paints a very bleak picture of our society.

For as long as it has existed, public health policy has implicitly and explicitly valued younger people's lives by way of evaluating all decisions against quality life years.

Why has covid19 turned this eminently sensible rule of thumb on its ear?