Over 70s to self isolate

[Dodie66]

Over 70s are going to be told to self isolate even if they don’t have the virus and this will be coming in 5-20 days and last 4 months
www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/breaking-coronavirus-over-70s-told-21694397?fbclid=IwAR2k9MqPf7vOzNcnqfVroLXVp0sQjYRmihHKBiL9pvdhSi5780WpYkgFNnI

Jane, instead of finding excuses of why it won't work, perhaps try to think of ways it will work.

Fortunately I am not in charge. But it doesn't do any harm to look at the pitfalls. In fact its sensible ffs.

Can't speak for others but I absolutely do get the scale of it.

The sort of lockdowns being done are not severe enough to stop spread. That would only happen if the average infected person was only able to come in to contact with less than 1 person who they could infect. Italy still has factories open, people are still moving around, and most of the population haven't had it yet. Evidence from Diamond Princess found half of those who tested positive had no symptoms, and that's in an older than average cohort of people. There is no way Italy et al are doing enough testing to be reducing the level of contagion enough for this to die out IMO.

Alternative so what actions should be taken?

How do we stop the spread / slow it down enough for our health services to cope? And to ensure that the maximum amount of people survive?

Alternative, you should change your user name to VoiceofReason. MN has really shown its true, ageist colours in the last few hours.

@AlternativePerspective to be blunt, they won't "clog up beds" because they won't get them. This is happening right now in Italy. Where there are more patients than beds, doctors are being forced to decide who to prioritise and they are choosing younger people who will be more likely to recover and more likely to recover quicker, to free up the bed for someone else.

Because it’s so much better for the 70 plus in Italy atm?
Stay inside to protect yourself.

Alternative thank you. Some of the language being used about older people on Mumsnet has made me cry.

And I agree Matt Hancock looks very tired. Regardless of your personal opinion of their approach these senior medics and ministers have an IMMENSE responsibility to get this right. I'm sure many of them are having sleepless nights over it. They are human beings like the rest of us, probably with elderly and vulnerable friends and family like the rest of us. They will not be making these decision likely just to save themselves a few bob.

My mother is 72 and works for the NHS. Also with “brining back retirees” how is that supposed to work.

I get a feeling that a lot of people on this thread don’t know any 70 year olds and assume that it’s a very old age. It’s really not in this day and age.

Well I think it’s eminently sensible. And I say that as a 74 year old who runs her own business, walks and runs regularly and has a wide social circle. I’m still 74 though, and have had pneumonia in the past, so I have already taken the decision, with my husband, to self isolate from now. It seems a small price to pay for peace of mind. I will do online shopping and keep in touch with family and friends online too. Fortunately, this is a quieter time of year for my business.

There are many things that are unknown about this virus but one thing that is coming over loud and clear is that older people and those with underlying health concerns fair worse.

The proportion of a population that requires critical care will vary depending on the demographics of the population. The virus doesn’t select a certain percentage of each age group and make them really unwell. It won’t say, oh only 10% of people here are over 70 so I’ll pick on some younger ones to get my 20%.

If we reduce the number of older people and those

Sorry my toddler hit send!

Those with underlying conditions who contract the virus we should reduce the number of people who require critical care and ultimately pass away.

That’s not to say we will remove the problem entirely, some you get people will still get critically ill. The hope is the reduced stress on the health service overall maximises care for everyone I assume.

I don’t know this is definitely the right plan but it has always been the plan and I can see the logic.

It's not ageist or ableist to recognise that over a certain age or with certain health conditions are the ones most at risk.

It's not ageist or ableist to advise these groups of people to isolate themselves as much as possible. It's not advice to protect the young... it's advice to protect themselves and others like them.

And if any individual of any age wants to ignore advice then they need to accept they will be putting others at risk (as well as themselves if they are in the at risk group) and many will view that as selfish regardless of age.

What isn't clear is how far any policing of the advice will go. Like now, the advice is to self isolate but we know many won't. They just expect a number to ignore advice. I expect it will be the same with this proposal for over 70s where they expect a certain % to follow the advice and some not to and include that calculation in the management of the spread.

@RainbowPenguins correct and well said about those who make decisions. As it happens, I think that many over 70s will get it. My own parents and my in laws included. The question that I have is lots of old people have medical appointments - will these continue? My own mother is being investigated for something which could possibly be the big C. My dad has appointments to do with his diabetes. Mil her cataracts. Another question: the news items that I have read mentioned "elderly and vulnerable". I wonder if that means an elderly person who is vulnerable. Or younger people who are vulnerable. If so, I also wonder who is classed as vulnerable? I know that somebody being treated with chemotherapy would obviously be classed as vulnerable. But what about chronic asthmatics, as an example. Or type 2 diabetics. I realise that we don't have the answers to these questions yet, but it has made me ponder.

@Spoketoosoon, I thought "confuse their education" was rather apposite.

*And to those talking about fit and healthy people in their 70s, DM is one of those - she was horse riding every week as well as being active in her daily life.

But she caught pneumonia when she was 70. It took her 2 years to fully recover. She is now a fit and active woman who is nearly 80 but I do not underestimate what this illness could do to her body.*

I think this is what people fail to understand about age, just because you are well and fit and can "keep up" so to speak at 70+ or whatever impressive age does not make you immune or immortal or give you the body and immune system of a robust fit 25 year old. The body ages internally and along with that come serious complications from illnesses which you might have easily recovered from even 10 years earlier.

I cannot understand how anyone older does not grasp this and would willingly put themselves in danger. This is not a mild illness especially for those who are older and risk having more serious symptoms.

I'd rather be alive and cooped up in my home than have to deal with this at an advanced age. The NHS simply does not have capacity and we will get to the stage where they ration beds if we are overwhelmed.

I have just had 'the conversation' with 79 yo DM who says she is ok with it. She will get bored ometimes so will make a cup of tea and put tv on for 30 minutes! Sh will do what she need to survive. I have crohns, asthma and 2 years post cancer so likely to be in same boat. I am more concerned about my dog walking but guess I will be able to continue with that as I am out and home before 7am, don't have to touch anything and never see anyone.

Catrescue when I heard it from Hancock it was clearly two groups in the spacing in how he spoke; elderly people AND those with health issues. Not elderly people with health issues.

I'd rather be alive and cooped up in my home than have to deal with this at an advanced age

Is it beyond your understanding that not everyone feels the way you do? Many, many of us fear looking down the barrel of dementia, for some of us this may be our of avoiding it. I’d rather take my chances because I’d rather die early of corona virus than live to be 100 with dementia.

Blubell “ I'd rather be alive and cooped up in my home than have to deal with this at an advanced age”

But how do the over 70s in your life feel about it?

Especially those living alone in tiny flats?

Just spoke to my 75 year old Mum, who lives with us and our 12 year old daughter (in a granny flat). She’s reluctantly accepting it, but wondering if she can go to her other over 70s houses to visit.... if they’ve not shown symptoms after isolation of, say, 7 days.... do you think that’s acceptable...? She’ll go stir crazy otherwise!!!

People should take responsibility for themselves. Can’t be doing with the short-sighted attitudes on here and all the “what if [insert ridiculous situation]”.

I’m the first one to complain about ageism on MN (which is rife) but I don’t think people are being ageist here, just logical.

I’m not yet over 70 (though I’ve suffered a bit of a shock in that 2 weeks ago I was scooting down the most difficult slopes in a ski resort and have returned to find myself categorised as “elderly”) but even so I have been taking, and continue to take, sensible precautions to limit my exposure to others. If I had any underlying health conditions I would probably already be self isolating because I don’t expect other people to sort my life out. And if taking a few simple steps to curtail some non-essential activities means that I won’t be competing for a ventilator against a 30 year old with 3 children, then all well and good, because although I’m perfectly healthy and hope to live a happy life for many more years, I can’t really see a reason why I should get the ICU bed ahead of them.

Is it beyond your understanding that not everyone feels the way you do? Many, many of us fear looking down the barrel of dementia, for some of us this may be our of avoiding it. I’d rather take my chances because I’d rather die early of corona virus than live to be 100 with dementia*

Absolutely fine to feel that way, but do you expect treatment if you get COVID-19 if you intentionally ignore the government advice (I know it's speculation at the moment) and get it or will you opt out of treatment? Because how is that different from having health conditions managed and treated until 100, except one is the cause of natural ageing and out of your control and the other is almost intentionally getting an illness then selfishly expecting a bed when resources are limited and you could have avoided the situation

I’d rather die early of corona virus than live to be 100 with dementia.
I hope you won't be calling an ambulance when your lungs start to fill with fluid from the pneumonia. So many of the over 70s who insist they would rather die from Corona seem to think it will involve quietly passing away in their sleep, rather than an agonizing death from drowning while your organs go into multi-system failure. It's completely unrealistic to think you won't need hospital care, and that your decision to deliberately increase your risk of infection doesn't mean you will be taking precious medical resources away from someone who didn't deliberately put themselves in that position.

The question that I have is lots of old people have medical appointments - will these continue?

Presumably the urgent ones will have to, my DM has one at the end of March for something that could kill her anyway if not treated.