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.

Keeping the vulnerable and their household in isolation seems to be becoming the most popular choice on MN. Would those of you supporting the idea like to tell me what we're supposed to live on? Perhaps you'd be happy to donate your wages to us? No? Didn't think so somehow.

Would those of you supporting the idea like to tell me what we're supposed to live on? Perhaps you'd be happy to donate your wages to us?

I'm not saying this is the right solution but surely it would be easier for the government to pay the wages of at-risk households rather than put the entire country out of work? I'm working from home right now and paying tax so I'm essentially donating part of my wages to those currently claiming. I'm happy to do that.

In Italy, anyone over 60 is now not ventilated. Who do you think is taking up all the ventilators?

The ablest, agist, would those I'm inconvenienced by needing to protect just do the decent thing and get on with dying so my life goes back to normal posts are really depressing. We have a conservative govt, do you really think they would be sacrificing financially like this without massive reason? Every western world country sacrificing financially like this? Does that not tell you that they know more than the general public do and this is fucking serious?

WW2 took decades to pay back. It was shit. This is what happens when global emergencies happen. Just letting people die en masse is not going to lead to happier outcomes, or continuing any real form of normality.

The existing government measures for employed / self employed would be there for you Bamboozled. It's just that it would have to cover fewer people.

Sensible answer @definitelygc but I bet that would be as unpopular as hell. People getting FULL WAGES to SIT AT HOME!!! I can feel MN hoicking it's collective bosom as I type. It's bad enough that people are sitting at home on SSP or UC in some people's eyes.

@IceKitten At present, DH is on SSP. If - and I stress IF - DH is laid off due to lengthy shielding, that's still a 20% drop in our income. I know a lot of people have interpreted the £2,500 maximum as 'all employee's will get £2,500' but DH is a good bit below that. It'll simply be goodbye to what savings we've got and I"m honestly beginning to think we might just as well get CV, hope it's fatal and not have to worry about the bloody future.

The ablest, agist, would those I'm inconvenienced by needing to protect just do the decent thing and get on with dying so my life goes back to normal posts are really depressing.

That's not the point though. The point is - what is our exit strategy? If the strategy was - everyone stay inside for 3 months and then this thing will disappear then people would happily get on with it. But the reality is that covid-19 is not going away. And at-risk people will always be at-risk. So what do we do - all stay indoors forever?

The exit strategy is - lockdown, relax, lockdown again, repeat til we have a vaccine.

This government couldn't even come up with a strategy that thought cancelling Crufts and Cheltenham was a good idea. Do you honestly think they've got any plan in place for the future, other than going 'Umm .... we haven't tried this yet'. They can't even agree among themselves how to define 'exercise' or 'essential'!

The exit strategy is - lockdown, relax, lockdown again, repeat til we have a vaccine.

But then in that case wouldn't it make more sense to lockdown those who are more at-risk of becoming seriously ill? Then the rest of us can build up herd immunity and reduce the chance of vulnerable people being infected. And also keep the economy going to pay for the salaries and treatment of those who have to isolate.

I'm not saying this because I just want to go to the pub and am tired of the inconvenience. I'm wondering whether what we're doing actually makes sense.

What happens when many more people become ill because we've delayed cancer treatments / planned surgeries etc? What happens when we run out of money to fund the NHS? What happens when people start committing suicide or becoming homeless because they're bankrupt? What happens when kids start having major mental health problems from being locked in tiny flats all day?

For those saying something about chemo etc being able to go on 'now we are in lockdown' I know that people near me are having scans cancelled for advanced cancer so do not think it is having such an impact.

Other conditions are being impacted, to a great extent.

Take a bit longer than 3 weeks before people decide it's the least worse, I give it 6 weeks

Why not pay full wages? We are throwing money around like confetti at the moment anyway

I'd quite like a comprehensive track/test/isolate policy as well but it appears in the uk that is too much to ask for

Self isolation of the vulnerable should always be a choice though. Some won't choose it.

We will be on lockdown, let the NHS cope with the ones currently affected, relax it a bit then the NHS will deal with the new infections and so on and so forth until hopefully we have a vaccine or the immunity lasts longer than a few months. The young and healthy may not die, but the evidence suggests a lot will need hospital care. If the NHS is overwhelmed, it will be the young dying too.

I'm one of the severely vulnerable. I am 30 years old. 2 young children. I have an autoimmune condition and I'm on multiple immunosuppressants. I am not anywhere close to dying. I'm sure you didn't mean it this way, OP (or I hope not) but my life is worth no less than anyone else's just because I've got this stupid disease.

I don't understand why it is only now the vulnerable have been given support and guidance, and it is only extreme groups such as those with organ transplants etc

Surely it would have been better to have targeted a bigger group for support- e.g. elderly, diabetics, high blood pressure, heart disease as a 'risk' group and given those people all more support to either have enhanced social distancing or isolation depending on their level of risk.

@FluffyAragog a question for you. If the restrictions are relaxed would you start carrying on with your life as normal again? Because to me it seems that until a vaccine is found those who are vulnerable will always be vulnerable. If the lockdown ended I'd be incredibly worried about my dad wandering into town as normal as he will still be at risk of catching it and being hospitalised.

So 1/3 to 1/2 of the population?

Since the fat ( as in BMI over 25) make up 62% of the UK population, even assuming some overlap in that list, I'd say closer to 70%

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.

I completely agree. I've seen it said so much lately, on MN and elsewhere, that people who are being shielded and can't go out to the shops should be able to use their blue badge authorisation in order to access shopping deliveries!!!

People have got no.idea about the number of us who are working and participating in society without any help or support from services and yet have very serious medical conditions. Maybe this will actually flag up just how many vulnerable people there are and how much of a knife edge we live on.

@definitelygc I know I'll be isolating for 12 weeks minimum. After that I'll follow the medical advice I'm given. I can't see my life becoming normal again for a long time.

Actually 44% of U.K. ICU patients are aged 16-59 and only 9.4% have very serious comorbidities — the type that mean they are non-independent.

www.icnarc.org/DataServices/Attachments/Download/b5f59585-5870-ea11-9124-00505601089b

So I’m not sure how much just isolating the fragile will help. It will lower deaths, certainly, because the over 70s die in far greater proportions. But the strain on the ICU and the NHS in general would remain high.

My DS is a supermarket worker. Over 70’s especially and Mum, Dad plus kids are not listening. Feedback from the early opening is that the old people are coming EVERY day. They like the special hour. The en masse family set up, well words really do fail me. The branch manager bravely asked them and was told that they all felt ok so thought they would ALL come out. Are some people that thick and stupid.

Having said that the sm needs to say ONE person only shopping. If you really don’t have anyone then of course you can shop with your children but keep a tight control on them PLEASE. Two incidents yesterday of kids running around the shop and customers asking the staff to sort it out.

My DH is doing emergency pharmacy runs and shopping. One elderly women has been ringing his number which is for urgent requests asking if he can get her a newspaper!!

Now.we have the eugenics people coming out of the woodwork. Obviously if you are fat or asthmatic or have a mild heart condition you need to take your chances because you have ,'an underlying condition' and are expendable.

I can guarantee that the majority ( not all of course) of people with this view see themselves as not being in any ' vulnerable' category

@definitelygc The strategy is to slow everyone getting it. There are always going to be patients who get COVID-19 and unfortunately die, even with the best medical support available. Then there are those who will survive COVID-19 only if they receive appropriate medical intervention. The former group, nothing can be done about other than prevention (social distancing and waiting for a vaccine). However, a proportion of the latter group may not survive if the NHS becomes flooded with COVID-19 patients all at once. However, they will survive if we slow this down which is what lockdown does. Additionally there are the group of patients who will need intensive care for other reasons (car accidents, heart attacks, strokes, etc). Again, it is important that the NHS does not reach capacity to ensure that appropriate care can be given to those patients, too.

I think this virus is too unpredictable for the herd immunity strategy. Look in the news and there are stories of healthy, young people with no underlying conditions dying from this. If you isolate the vulnerable only, I think the "healthy population" will feel resentment when deaths of healthy people start ramping up whilst the vulnerable are safely isolated.

I feel like people have had their heads buried in the sand and have thought that two weeks of school closures and staying home and all this would be over. We are in a state of emergency and people seem like they cannot accept that life will have to significantly change for several months, at the very least. Your life will be affected by this. The economy will suffer because of this. Mental health will be affected by this. But it is here and there is nothing we can do about it but listen to the scientists and do what they say. I know it is hard to accept and I feel a lot of empathy to people who had denied the severity of this and now have to quickly come to terms with it all. Why do you think the government has said they are reviewing (note: reviewing, not lifting) the lockdown in three weeks time - it's to keep all this in manageable chunks and ease us into the fact that this is going to be a long and difficult few months ahead of us.

For those saying something about chemo etc being able to go on 'now we are in lockdown' I know that people near me are having scans cancelled for advanced cancer so do not think it is having such an impact

I'm glad someone else has said this.

I've been called a liar multiple times for highlighting this and the fact that chemotherapy and other urgent tests like endoscopies and biopsies have been cancelled.

I can't see my life becoming normal again for a long time.

I'm crossing my fingers for a vaccine or treatment. Given that we have all the best medical minds in the world looking at this right now I'm hopeful. Hope you and the family are coping ok