Lockdown- just the over 70s and those with pre-existing health conditions after 3 weeks?

[SummersMahoosiveClipOnFringe]

Given that this group of society are predominantly those that end up in ICU/hospital should the focus be on keeping them in lockdown whilst the rest of us just crack on getting things back to normal and building up immunity?

Most of us are likely to get it after all. Surely the government's focus should now be on mass testing to determine how many of us have already had it to work out the true scale of risk?

If we go on like we are aren't other people with serious medical conditions likely to die because they aren't getting the care they need?

Won't our country be crippled for years with the cost of all this and therefore impact on what the NHS can do for future patients?

The more I read the less convinced I am that we are going about this the right way.

I think there's a massive impact on what the NHS can do for existing patients, never mind the very real problems we are likely to have in future. Cancelling cancer treatment and stopping smear tests, baby vaccinations and dental treatment seems to be all out of balance to me.

Yes this is a serious problem. But so are other illnesses.

Looking at the unexpected uptick in UK death rate we are going to need more extreme (not less extreme) measures to minimise unnecessary deaths due to NHS overwhelm:

mobile.twitter.com/whippletom/status/1244230267096555520

This has been explained so many times on here. In three weeks we will be reaching the peak, this doesn't just affect the vulnerable groups any more. The NHS still wouldn be able to cope even if it was just "healthy" people admitted to hospital, plus with everybody back at work there would be road accidents plus more people needing A and E for minor injuries. Elderly people would still have heart hearts and strokes and breathing difficulties not associated with coronavirus. The restrictions are in place to stop the NHS beung overwhelmed.

The uptick is because one day was an anomaly. 12 hours of recorded deaths. Please please do research before posting this crap. It’s so unhelpful

Cologne- infant vaccinations are still taking place as they are dependent on a timescale, plus some hospitals are still carrying out cancer treatment. I think it depends on your Health Trust.

From the ongoing comments from the press conferences about the antibody test, I assume that the plan is to test key workers first and then roll out to the general public.

So those who have the antibodies will be able to return to work etc, schools will reopen first those immune and then we wait and see if cases increase again.

Repeat testing every 3 weeks or so and gradually release the lockdown.

Hmmm- I am not convinced. ICU with respect to Covid-19 has just over a 50% recovery rate. That's a lot of resources and and what cost to others both short and long term?

It still mostly effects the group of society outlined. Most people get it mildly enough such as they can self-manage.

Indications are that many of us have already had it so if you look at the chances of contracting it and needing NHS input when you are not over 70 and/or with pre-existing conditions-then you could argue the measures are drastic.

Testing needs to be massively fast-tracked now so we have a realistic picture to manage this.

The uptick is because one day was an anomaly. 12 hours of recorded deaths. Please please do research before posting this crap. It’s so unhelpful

That’s not what the experts who are doing the research informing the government are saying, if you read the linked information. It is from an interview today with one of them.

The vulnerables include
The over 70s
The fat.
The diabetic
People with heart conditions
Asthmatics
So 1/3 to 1/2 of the population?

The death rate of the rest would still overwhelm the NHS

The vulnerable list is very broad. I am classed as vulnerable as I was born with a heart defect that does not affect the way I live my life at all. I am in my early 20s. The vulnerable aren't only old people and people knocking on death's door. Anyone with diabetes, asthma, etc. It is a long list.

If you let life resume for everyone else but the vulnerable, it means everyone I live with will be back at work and school mixing with others and bringing home the coronavirus. If you force any household with a vulnerable family member to stay home, it would probably be at least half the homes in Britain having to stay home.

If you think this is going to be over in three weeks, or even three months I worry that you have not being paying attention.

Sorry should have clarified- the most vulnerable group.

The majority of people are all going to get it if you haven't already been exposed to it.

The lockdown is just slowing down the inevitable - this approach has other major negative repercussions.

If you are morbidly obese there has never been a better reason to restrict your intake.

Our children are going to be crippled with debt to pay for this. I heard someone say today on radio ‘should we protecting the elderly who will past away anyway for the sake of a generation’

I don’t agree with this statement but I don’t think people truly understand the economic impact of all of this.

"The lockdown is just slowing down the inevitable" well yes that was the whole point.

Yes op I totally agree with you, we should have mandated vulnerable patients shielded at the beginning. That would have prevented this surge. Probably will now need longer than another 3 weeks.

No. Not least because some of the vulnerable group that you are so happy to condemn to a life indoors include people such as my sister (early 40s, 3 children), who’s currently having chemo via infusion for cancer. No way could that be given at home. Going to hospital for treatment carries an inevitable risk to her at the moment but it’s somewhat mitigated by lockdown.

And it’s not just those currently in active treatment for life-threatening conditions (and who are hoping that their treatment isn’t stopped due to the flood of Covid-19 patients), it’s those like the PP who have underlying conditions that don’t usually affect them at all. How do you know that you’re not one of them?

OP, you say the focus now should be on mass testing to see who has already had it. My question is - does this test exist? I thought we can only test for someone who currently has it, not an antibodies test to see who is immune? Or am I wrong?

I popped this on another thread but feel it is relevant for this one...

People are going to be paying a shed load of tax after this-including the self -employed.

Minimum of £150 billion is likely going to be borrowed this year.

A 1% increase in the basic rate of tax brings 1.5 billion in per annum.

The interest alone on our current national debt is £48 billion- which is 8% of all the money the government raises in tax.

Tests latest...

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/29/the-two-tests-that-will-help-to-predict-spread-of-covid-19

Summers

If you knew that one of the 'rarer' fatalities was going to be your child, or that you or a close relative would die from something non covid related because of the strain on NHS caused by not delaying infections, would you still be in favour of lifting restrictions? I don't mean if you suspected, I mean if you knew. Perhaps you would, I know some people say they would, but just wondered.

Also when it comes to isolating only the most vulnerable....I wonder if you realise how much this is affecting younger and fitter people. I heard an interview yesterday with an ER Dr from NY and she was saying the thing that stands out most about this illness for her is how it is severely affecting young and fit people...something she said is quite unusual with the flu but with this bed after bed is filled with them. The last data I heard from US said nearly half of severe hospitalised cases were aged 20-54. Former surgeon general advised that emphasis on how it affects mainly the elderly was misguided.

So even if all the elderly and 'most' vulnerable were isolated, the system would still be totally overwhelmed.

Interesting link @SummersMahoosiveClipOnFringe .
DD (medical physicist), said to me several days ago that the test delay was due to a shortage of lab capacity and the shortage of reagents needed to test.
The chemicals used in the reagents, apparently, are imported and, of course, every country is affected by this virus hence, they have no spare stocks for export. 😥

I think an awful lot of 'over 70's' made it abundantly clear that they weren't prepared to self isolate, OP. So it's really a bit of a non starter I'm afraid.

Agree with PPs about just how many people are vulnerable. I have several health problems that don't affect me too badly day-to-day; I am able to work and take care of my kid etc. There are probably a lot of people you know that are more likely to suffer a more severe episode of COVID.

This kind of thing comes up a lot on Mumsnet, even pre-pandemic. Many people don't understand the depth and scale of health problems that are hidden disabilities.

Ok here's what I don't understand. This virus is incredibly infectious which is why it has spread so quickly around the entire world. So when we lift restrictions it will start to spread again. Anyone who is in the vulnerable group will be at risk of catching it and ending up seriously ill. And we know that those who end up on a ventilator have only a 50/50 chance.

So how do we get out of this? We can't keep everyone indoors for ever. It seems to me like our only route out is either a vaccine for those in the at-risk groups or a treatment. So why not isolate only the at-risk households until we find a vaccine/treatment? Then the rest of the population can get "herd immunity" and reduce the likelihood of vulnerable people catching it.