Omg. The next step in the strategy. And if we all stick together it may work

[Bool]

Next step in UK strategy. Lock down all the over 70s (and other immunocompromised - kids / adults) for 4 months. Lock them down. Then make it illegal to close schools. That means we gain immunity to the virus as a population and keeps the beds open for the unusual cases that are not foreseen.

@BelleSausage unregistered cars is going to become a thing very quickly. I am
Ofsted registered and live by a hospital. I suspect my house is going to fill up quite quickly if I decide to offer my services

@nellodee nobody is stopping you from locking down for 2 years...

my 87 year old grandmother would rather be dead than locked in her house for 4 months with no contact with her family.
She won’t much like the way she dies, though. It’s not like going to sleep and not waking up.

So what about those “oldies” who have carer’s in to help, who is to say they aren’t carriers of the virus or have gone to work as they can’t afford to go sick for weeks or months at a time.

Reducing their exposure to being only their carers is still a significant reduction in risk compared to being out and about. Better barrier precautions could/should also be used to reduce this risk further.

And her we have the basic quandary...many people will struggle with lockdown situations, especially the elderly who may feel they have limited healthy days left anyway.

Do they have to sign a waiver saying do not treat me as I knew the risk?

We can't treat everyone if they are all ill together

Only various forms of isolation prevent that happening

@HoffiCoffi13 nobody will force her into isolation. It would then be her decision to take that risk. It’s a shame though because likely she would need help and wouldn’t get it if you read what is going on in Italy.

This is likely to rumble for 2 years until international vaccination programmes are completed
And reports say longer for the U.K to get any vaccinations, because we are not in the EU.

Yes they are, Bool. This requires a whole country, war time effort. People cannot act unilaterally. We need to unite and do this together.

Like every other country in the world is doing.

Sounds sensible.

Of course, if people act independently, they will not need to lock down for 2 years. They can just hunker down until July. By which point, the plebs will have built up herd immunity through their enormous self sacrifice. A relatively short period, and fairly painless - for those who can afford to do it.

What do you suggest I do? All the nurseries in my area are fully booked. How do I isolate my vulnerable parents and still go to work with a pre-school aged child?

@BelleSausage

Yes you have a problem. You're going to have to stay at home till the nurseries become free. I'm hoping the government start providing childcare to help those in your situation - they should do this anyway like the Nordics. Fact is, you have to protect the parents right now.

@nellodee so you are suggesting the entire country goes into lockdown for 2 years until we have a vaccine right

I cant understand how this would work for thr vast majority of elderly people who are looked after by a number of people : relatives, doctors and carers as well as volunteers and the odd friendly neighbour.

Are we saying they will now not receive any help or that we are going to trust all these people to be well? How will we vet that as some people are infectious without symptoms, some just need to work and might ignore initial symptoms etc

Can't see it working unless you lock all people up in homes and vet all carers. Who will pay for this?

Where does it say this is the next step @Bool

I am guessing the priority for governments will be ensuring that essential infrastructure remains operational - healthcare, electric, gas, water, internet and food. Without these we cannot live and society would very quickly breakdown if they weren't available.

Education (it can be done remotely - yes it may not be ideal) , making non essential widgets, selling lifestyle services can all shut down for a time without it being insurmountable for society as a whole. Yes it is inconvenient and uncomfortable for everyone & some more than others due to personal circumstances. Some of the impact can be mitigated. It will require mortgage holidays & ban on collecting rents (or to have these paid by the state), state run food banks, and many more structural changes, but if the governments aim is to keep the population safe there are ways and means to offset the individual financial implications. What is not clear is to what extent the population will accept wholesale changes to their daily living and how much we are willing to pay in long term tax changes.

There is so much that is not clear, but the one thing we do know is that it is not going away anytime soon.

Option 3 is utter fantasy. Will not work.
Option 2 is correct

Bearing in mind this is over 70 I don't think the vast majority are looked after. Thinking through all the over 70s I know of there's one who has regular carers (she's 80 and it's a recent thing), one who is in a care home and has been for a long time, the rest are essentially self sufficient with small amounts of support from family, occasion gp appointment and so on. There are challenges to be solved but they're not worse than the challenges from not isolating them

Not necessarily a full shut down. More China style. And no more than 15 months now probably.

If you do not think that is a reasonable proposition, I suggest you go back and truly think about the alternative vision. Because Boris IS expecting 40,000,000 people (that's the lower, 60%) to become infected over a relatively short period of time. And no-one is actually thinking about what that looks like. The scenario I painted above sounds impossible, but please, can someone paint a picture of 40,000,000 people getting this virus and us being done with this by September in a way that does not involve massive death?

People really struggle to think about things in large numbers. They stop making sense to them after a certain point. If people die at the rate the WHO says, on a 60% exposure, we are looking at 1.4 million deaths. That's more than the entire city of Birmingham. If we work at the government's lower 1% figure, we're looking at wiping out an amount of people equivalent to the entire population of Coventry.

Does it really sound that unreasonable for the entire country to come together for a year or so to prevent this?

Unfortunately this is an ageist disease that will kill a reasonable proportion of this age group. It is not unreasonable that there will be expectations on said age group to take reasonable steps to protect themselves over the coming weeks and months. If this means avoiding busy shops and even self isolating then so be it.

Ignoring common sense will have consequences. I work in a hospital and we were told last week that we will be rationing certain cancer treatments, to cope with staff shortages and reduce all pressure on ITU. If pensioners have to do their small bit to also reduce this pressure then surely that isn’t unreasonable.

Bool I’m not saying she wouldn’t stay at home, she is sensible and wouldn’t want to risk over stretching the NHS any more than necessary (she was head nurse of a children’s hospital for 30 years). I think it would kill her though. Her husband died recently and she’s very depressed, and she would see it as having nothing left to live for.

She has already accepted that she won’t see my DC for a few months (school age so too risky) but is absolutely gutted about it.

This thread baffles me. People claiming that their Mum will be bored or rather die then be in isolation. We ALL need to change our ways. The supermarkets aren’t some day out where you can take the whole family.

At least not at this present time.

It won’t be like this forever.

NHS Bucket video

Sorry - not NHS. Still interesting though?

@HoffiCoffi13 I understand. It’s not a nice situation. Our generation haven’t had to sacrifice an awful lot. This is going to be 4-5 months of sacrifice.