Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Getting coronavirus now

27 replies

Fatnorthernwoman · 11/03/2020 13:17

Relative over 65 thinks it would be best to get coronavirus now as at least she would get medical help if it was needed it's said that a very large percentage of the population will get the virus so she's prepared as far as possible but says she's being realistic
If she gets it later then its been said on the Italian website that anyone over 65 or with underlying conditions would not be a priority if intensive care beds are full.

OP posts:
user1469190646 · 11/03/2020 13:18

And?

LizzieSiddal · 11/03/2020 13:20

I thought this a week ago. I'd much rather my family and I got this virus now rather than in a months time.

AccountAntsy · 11/03/2020 13:21

She’s still better off trying to prevent herself getting it in the first place by limiting contact with anyone who might have had it and practising good hand hygiene.

So says the NHS, rather than “the Italian website says”.

MadeForThis · 11/03/2020 13:22

I thought there were people who had been infected twice?

Lumene · 11/03/2020 13:23

It seems to take about 3 weeks from getting it to being critically ill and risking death, which could be right in the middle of the peak.

So bad strategy.

Reginabambina · 11/03/2020 13:24

Are you in Italy? If so it’s too late for that. If not, the Italian website isn’t exactly relevant here.

Lumene · 11/03/2020 13:25

Also if everyone decides that and doesn’t take good precautions eg washing hands etc the peak will be higher and resources even more limited so worse for everyone. Including your relative.

So potentially selfish and deadly to self.

DressingGownofDoom · 11/03/2020 13:25

No I think better to delay it until after the peak, summer so less pressure on the NHS etc.
Not that we have a choice anyway.

Egghead68 · 11/03/2020 13:29

Best to try not to get it.

You can get it more than once.

If you have to get it as late as possible might be best, once the peak has passed and when they have more idea how to treat it (several drugs being treated atm).

Egghead68 · 11/03/2020 13:29

Being tested not being treated

Original poster
Fatnorthernwoman · 11/03/2020 13:30

Sorry about the Italian website it was one I could find that said that at least 60 % of the population is likely to get infected. Can't find information relating to UK but as people are the same throughout the world then maybe it is relevant.
Angela Merkal has just made a press statement saying similar levels of infection expected in Germany

OP posts:
Peasfox · 11/03/2020 13:30

I see the logic but apparently there is no evidence to suggest you are immune for a period of time once you have recovered so can catch it twice

I’ve not looked online to try and verify this mind

BloomedAgain · 11/03/2020 13:33

Those infected now are likely to hit the predicted start of the peak.

PutYourBackIntoit · 11/03/2020 13:33

I did wonder whether some people might start having Coronovirus parties like they used to with chicken pox.
Two issues with this though are that you can get it twice (and worse), and there have been cases where incubation has been more than 2 weeks.

Butterwhy · 11/03/2020 13:34

Seen as though there's no evidence that having it once provides immunity then nope!

tryingtoprep · 11/03/2020 13:39

Definitely best to try to avoid catching it. I wondered the same as your relative (I have an underlying condition) but it's a dangerous risk.

The ICU bed thing. If the worst case scenario happened, it's not that people would be denied treatment because of their age or underlying health exactly, it's that doctors would have to take the difficult decisions of prioritising those most likely to survive. People not prioritised would be unlikely to survive even with ICU. Remember also it's still just worst case scenario.

Far far better to practice social distancing, avoid busy shops and public transport, wearing gloves when out, maintaining as healthy s lifestyle as possible (I know it depends on circumstances). If she's already retired it's easier. If she's still working, she should wfh if possible.

tryingtoprep · 11/03/2020 13:43

It's in our control to an extent, the likelihood of catching it. Taking stronger action would lessen the risk. Measures to mitigate the spread such as working from home for those who can, children out of schools temporarily if possible for the parents, postponing or cancelling some large gatherings.

Original poster
Fatnorthernwoman · 11/03/2020 13:47

Thanks for all the replies she's doing charity shop working and doesn't want to let them down.
Like people say if she's got it then that's that but hopefully she hasn't like many older people says she's lived through we are all going to die of aids, swine flu, sars, bird flu and doesn't think its as bad as the press are saying

OP posts:
tryingtoprep · 11/03/2020 14:10

I hope she stays well OP.

Is it a voluntary or paid role? She's over 65 but how is her health in general?.Does she have any underlying conditions? It might be best if she temporarily gives up the job, but if it benefits her mental health (isolating at home can be lonely) perhaps she could work in the back room, sorting through donations, rather than public facing till work.

It's important to keep on living life. We all just need to take some precautions.

Original poster
Fatnorthernwoman · 11/03/2020 14:31

Thanks she's working as a volunteer but most of the volunteers are retired so if everyone went off the shop would shut. I think that's not a bad thing but it's not my descion to make.
I will chat to her tonight but I'm pretty certain that it will be business as usual for her until something happens that directly affects either somebody near to her or the charity decides to close the shop but then the charity will be unable to function as it has been doing.
It's a small local charity so no massive back funds like some of the nationals

OP posts:
Isla727 · 11/03/2020 15:40

As others have said 2 weeks incubation + a few weeks until pneumonia might mean she gets it at the worst possible time. If she's just doing voluntary work then she has the perfect opportunity to put that on hold for a few months.

iVampire · 11/03/2020 15:46

Until they know for certain whether you get lasting immunity, this could be a very bad plan

I read that the tests only show if the virus is in your system, not if you have an immune response to it. That second sort of test will come though. won’t it? And then we’ll know more about extent of immunity

Is it possible that it takes a while to clear fully, so you can test negative before it’s completely gone, and that symptoms can re-emerge at any point until it’s totally gone?

Jerseygaly · 11/03/2020 15:58

Other countries have been using antibody tests