I'm 32 and not ready to die - anyone else care to demonstrate it's not just older people this will hit hardest?

[Helenshielding]

I keep seeing posts by people saying they dont think we should be on lockdown to protect older people who will "die next year anyway" or similar.

Here's the thing, over 70s are not "old" these days. People can live well into their 80s, 90s and 100s now.

I'm 32, I've survived cancer (which is now clear- it is not a case of it being controlled, it's been gone for 10 years), I happen to have some lung damage. I dont know what my life expectancy is, but I know it's not 33.

So if you're moaning about socially distancing etc for older adults, stop. You're doing it to prevent deaths of all ages. Younger people with no underlying conditions are dying of this virus.

Stay home. Shut up. Stop moaning. We will all get through this a hell of a lot quicker.

Your post is lovely flockofgulls

There is no scenario in which healthy young people can carry on as if this is not happening.

This. It's baffling that some people seem convinced that they're being meanly prevented from carrying on as normal for no good reason, that everything would be fine and they could just have their lives as usual, uninterrupted.

@Interestingdrug72

Perhaps you aren't seeing them because some people, including myself, have been so shocked and upset by these comments that they have reported them and they have been deleted. They still live on in my mind though. I am so disgusted by some of the opinions being voiced on Mumsnet about older and vulnerable people. I hate to think that these horrible statements could be indicative of what a fair number of people really feel. Where is the humanity?

There is no scenario in which healthy young people can carry on as if this is not happening.

And yet the friends I know with symptoms got over it pretty quickly ie within a week.. Prince Charles at 71 and is up and about and the not particularly healthy Boris is still working.

@larrygrylls

I think that those who are vulnerable and old should be very grateful to those giving up their lives short term and, for many, putting their ambitions on indefinite hold.

This ^^ Jesus wept! What kind of society do we live in?

@BanKittenHeels this is so awful to hear, no one should have to go through what you are. And especially then have to see selfish twats harp on about missing out on their Easter break or whatever. You have all my sympathy. Many, many more of us are on your side than not. I truly believe that x

Well said @Michelleoftheresistance. Completely agree with you, I am so upset to read some of the stuff on here in the last days. Thin layer of civilisation indeed. It's not just that, it's the refusal to actually look at the facts which are that this is to do with stopping the NHS becoming overwhelmed and so everything going into meltdown. How many times must we repeat this? Yes, the lockdown will have effects. But they have to choose the way that brings the least risk to society. They cannot do nothing as that would be a million times worse. I'm also on the verge of tears reading some of these posts, and it's bad enough having to shield from my own family without being told I am a useless burden who should just shove off and get out of the way of the young and ambitious. Cos I have no ambitions of my own, obviously. Never mind that I write books and articles, because I'm sick thus don't have a life or deserve to live when it comes to a pandemic.

There was a poster who described older people as 'clogging up beds'. I find that hard to forget, along with the poster who was upset that baby groups were being cancelled to save 90 year olds who would die soon anyway.

I've been shocked that people on a site called 'Mumsnet' can think this about other people's mums and grandmothers.

A quarter of the world are in some form of lockdown, albeit a variation from country to country, yet people seem to blame our government for this...

Is your home and pension worth more than the life of a child dying of starvation in Africa?
No it isn’t but that’s why I do something about it.

@BanKittenHeels

Oh I give to charity too, that wasn't my question though and I think you know that.

Would you give up your home, your job, and your pension if it meant people you don't know in Africa could eat?

If the answer is yes then you'd have already done it.

I wouldn't. I'd give as much as I could possibly spare but I wouldn't make myself homeless.

So it's not really as black and white as "is your home worth more than my life"

On the surface it's an easy answer - yes.

But dig a little deeper and you'll quickly see the world has never worked that way before Coronavirus.

Apparently homes and jobs and pensions and economies are not important when the risk is ours. When the risk is someone else's (i.e the starving children in Africa, those in Syria etc) while we still care, we're not as willing to give up those things.

We're effectively asking those with very low risk to give up their livelihoods, homes, mental health etc for the safety of those with higher risk.

I'm not even high risk and I'm grateful that people are acting SO selflessly!!

We should be grateful. People of all risk factors and ages are making incredible sacrifices.

This isn't a black and white argument and far too many people are trying to make it that.

And yet the friends I know with symptoms got over it pretty quickly ie within a week.. Prince Charles at 71 and is up and about and the not particularly healthy Boris is still working.

So because you don't know any young people who get very sick with it they obviously don't actually exist. The media are making it up. Never mind the man I know in his 30s on a ventilator with confirmed covid, or the son of a friend in his 40s in an induced coma. Never mind the 13 year old boy who died today, or the 19 year old girl..they obviously aren't real and only the people you know are.

Leflic Italy aren't treating anyone over 60. Who do you think is on all the ventilators where drs are having to pick which patient gets treated and which ones get left to die?

Yes, plenty of people will be lucky. Some won't be. Even just the small proportion of the population who end up with the life-threatening version of it is more than there is NHS facilities for. This is why those most likely to end up with the life threatening version are being asked to try hard to not get it.

So that life support is available for the young, fit, 'normal' people who aren't lucky.

I think that this situation has shown that a large number of people only think of themselves, their own little family, the bubble they live in. They don't want anything to affect this, everything needs to stay on track. I was a cleaner, my income has gone and I will have nothing til June. A number of my clients are over 70, the oldest is 90. I don't want them to die. They mean more to me than just a way of making an income.

I am one of those on the 'my lungs are on fire' thread. I am sitting here with my lungs, chest and back burning. I have symptoms for over 19 days. This has really scared me. Regardless of how long this takes, or the impact on the economy, we all need to do our bit to save as many lives as possible. We will bounce back.

What has annoyed me the most during this? Is that I am still getting texts asking me 'can you come and clean my house'. A fine example of those who only think of themselves.

@larrygrylls
Recession= lost lives, lots of them. Maybe you are too rich to care (everyone’s selfishness takes a different form) but, if no tax is being paid, the NHS will get worse and worse, old people will die of cold every winter, families won’t be able to feed themselves properly etc etc.

You do realise that "old" people have paid more tax by definition than young people?

We're effectively asking those with very low risk to give up their livelihoods, homes, mental health etc for the safety of those with higher risk.

As has been explained up thread, the bigger picture is stopping the NHS from becoming overwhelmed.

A percentage of the 'low risk' people will have the extreme end version and need hospital/ICU care.

Even a tiny percentage in terms of population number, works out at hundreds of thousands.

No, you're really not sacrificing your livelihood needlessly when your life could be trotting along as normal.

@meonekton
Well, if what Lallygrylls says is what people think generally, this country is fd. There are no understanding, sympathy or anything.
Kind of sad to read her comment, sounds like she feels no shame in saying it.

You have hit the nail on the head.

Hear, hear OP.
Perhaps those that aren’t in the vulnerable category should think less about their monetary affairs and consider some gratitude that they aren’t vulnerable, and that they have their health? After all, when the game is over, the pawn and the king go back into the same box.
I survived cancer and my life expectancy is that of anyone else but the chemo caused lung damage which makes me very susceptible to this. I would hand over all my money to not have this vulnerability and not be in place where I am again worrying whether I’ll see my not quite 2 year old grow up. I’m pretty sure he doesn’t think my life is as disposable as so many posters on here seem to.

We started social distancing a week before schools closed to protect my eldest ds who is 12. He has two underlying conditions, both caused immune system errors which have permanently stopped two parts of his body working.

The callousness of many posters who accuse people like me of being hysterical 'because it only affects the old and those with underlying health conditions' has shocked me.

Do we really think that those who are more vulnerable are loved less? Or worth less?

Well there has been a death of a 13 year old boy in London today. No known undying issues. I know lots of posters will say it is one death but it is being reported that he died alone in hospital. His family was not allowed to go with him. They are absolutely devastated.

Think about that, a 13 year old child drowning in his own lung fluid on his own, with only strangers around him. But of course many more deaths like this are a cost worth paying so that we don't damage our economy.

Maybe as creative human beings we can come up with different ways of living that mean we don't exploit each other and end up facing a choice between maintaining a ' shit economic system ( where the many are exploited by the few) and mass deaths

We're effectively asking those with very low risk to give up their livelihoods, homes, mental health etc for the safety of those with higher risk.
The high risk are giving those things up AS WELL as being high risk.
And no one is asking them to give those things up forever. Weeks, months perhaps. But not forever.
Dying, however, is permanent.

I'm so glad you posted this op because I was getting afraid to post on the threads with all these attitudes abounding, because I didn't want to get piled on when I already feel so vulnerable. But this has shown me many of us are in the same boat and also that there are many who are not but who are compassionate and kind. Although there are a few voices who are not, I feel my faith in human nature is somewhat restored.

@DCICarolJordan

It wasnt bleomycin was it?

I'm glad there are people on this thread finding it helpful to share, know they're not alone or know that they matter too.

@Helenshielding sure was