The “I just had a sit down in the park with crisps” brigade

[Candodad]

You are the problem. The rules are simple. Go out and exercise and then go home. Just that, nothing more than that.

To be fair then problem is actually bigger than that and has been brewing for years as we increasingly become a country with rules but almost everyone has an excuse for why that rule shouldn’t apply to them/their child/family.

The danger is surely that you might fall and sprain your ankle so be unable to walk home, or be hit by a cyclist, or mugged, or have someone out with their carer approach you due to a lack of understanding (as happened to me last week). All of these things involve unplanned contact with people and not all of them are other people's fault.

When's the last time you went to for a walk, HearHooves?

The Monday that Boris announced vulnerable people should self isolate. About 17th of March was it? They contacted the shielded group the following Monday but I spoke to my consultant on the morning after Boris announced about elderly and vulnerable people and he told me to shield immediately.

Is it 100% safe HearHooves? No-one can say that because being alive is to be at risk of dying constantly.

A couple of people die every day in the UK falling down stairs. And about a quarter of a million every year suffer injury severe enough to go to A and E after falling downstairs.

Around 6,000 people a year in the UK die in accidents at home. With millions being injured. So being at home isn't 'safe'.

Every time anyone leaves the house they're also at multiple risks.

But on the whole, these risks are tiny.

Literally nothing is guaranteed 'safe'. So Governments issue guidance and people need to have some common sense and risk assess.

So Governments issue guidance and people need to have some common sense and risk assess.

You all keep saying "risk assess". Yes, I know. But usually we know what the risks are and assess accordingly.

What I don't understand is what the specific risk here is in me leaving my house. They've said dont meet with other people, don't meet face to face with others - surely that's covered the "people" risk. So what is the "don't leave your house" guarding against?

If it's as someone else said, accidentally bumping into someone, ok, then I kind of understand but is it possible to catch it from a couple of seconds contact?

If so, then being in a park or sitting on park benches must also be a risk.

There is a risk that we will be approached in a park by someone who is infected for enough seconds to catch it, yes. For the fifty billionth time, those people you are so envious of with their sitting and their crisps and their park benches are allowed out despite the small risks because they know a lot of them will catch it yet not die. You think going to work at B&M right now is safe? Course not, but their employees who are not shielding are expected to be there and the gov has allowed them to open because they sell food.

One of the reasons for the shielding group is so that your employer cannot force you to work. It's not actually a prison sentence

People have explained it to you repeatedly HearHooves.

What are you still not getting?

Hooves do you think the government know exactly what your risk of stepping out of the house is and they’re choosing not to tell you?

You are 100% guarenteed to die at the end of your life. All humans are.

Until my body conks out for whatever reason, I'm happy to take the risks of running/ walking and eating crisps on a bench all in the same afternoon. I like to live life on the edge like that

There is no exact science stating risks. There are far too many variables. It is known that the highest risk is being in an indoor environment in prolonged contact with people showing symptoms of Covid 19, hence PPE being essential in hospitals. That said, there are thousands of healthcare workers who have had high exposure and not become infected several weeks in.The less time you spend in contact, the more the chances of spread go down. It was suggested at the press conference last night that assymptomatic people are appearing to be less contagious than those showing symptoms. We know that the virus can be detected on a surface for varied amounts of time, but the level of contagion will be affected by conditions such as heat, UV light and humidity. Sitting on a sunny bench to eat your crisps will hypothetically be a different risk to sitting on it on a damp, shady day. People shielding will have different risks depending on their condition. Asthma will be different to a transplant patient on immunosupressants, that will be different to a healthy parent shielding a child. Going out will depend very much on your local area. I can confidently avoid proximity to people late at night and probably see no one at all. I could potentially safely shield and go for night runs. I don't have to worry about shared doorways/ lifts/ corridors, and avoiding clusters of people also going out late because there's a high population density that other people will have to consider.

There is no personal absolute risk assessment so stop demanding one. If you err on the side of caution and stay in, do so, but stop scaremongering and whatabouting at people who are responsibly managing their own lives within the known information, guidence and laws. Find some non-Covid distraction as dwelling on it clearly is not being healthy.

(No benches were harmed during this morning's run, but I ate my crisps first, for their lovely salty, starchy goodness. )

I dunno how much clearer we can be.

Shielding group = very likely to need hospital bed and/or die, cannot control external factors, stay in house

Non-shielding group = many need to work, can shop and care for the shielding group, may not need hospital treatment even if licking benches, let them out in limited capacity so as not to overwhelm NHS.

She isnt getting it because it keeps the thread all about her. I think it's just getting all this attention is breaking up her boring day. Nobody is that stupid that they cannot figure out that the risk is greater outside mixing with other people than in your own home/garden. She knows fine that nobody can guarentee what risk there is or not but it keeps her at the forefront of the thread.

Links and explanations have been done to death yet still she complains of 'not understanding, ' its BS.
Maybe do something productive to boost yourself Hooves? Take up an online course, read. Sun-bathe in your garden, do some gardening? Anything but continually bitching about how unfair it is and telling everyone else they don't deserve to do anything you 'cant'. Did it ever occur to you that not everyone is over the moon at being at work and at risk of catching it, i work in a suoermarket and i know some people are terrified in there but we still have to work to feed our kids and keep a roof over thier heads if we can. Its not a choice for many people.

Willow2017

Thanks for the character assassination and sorry to burst your bubble but no, I don't understand.

I don't understand if the risk is people why the government didn't say that to us.

"If you are in the shielding group then you need to avoid all people who aren't in your household. You can go outside to exercise but take care to not touch anything or to be in contact with any other people".

There we are. Very clear and tells everyone what the risks are.

Saying do not leave your home implies that there are risks other than coming into contact with people. That is what I don't understand.

I also work in a supermarket so I understand exactly what is like. Thankfully the supermarket that I work for has allowed anyone in the vulnerable group (not even shielded group) to stay at home for twelve weeks on full pay, so no one who is concerned needs to be there.

I don't understand if the risk is people why the government didn't say that to us

Because at the time of printing the letters, at the beginning of a pandemic of a novel virus, which had only been in existence for a couple of months, it was impossible to know exactly that the risk was. And therefore the safest course of action for extremely vulnerable people is to stay in their own home.
Unless, as I asked before, you think they know you can catch it from the air and just decided not to tell you?

Because Hooves, as has been pointed out repeatedly. The guidance doesn't just say that does it?

Read more than a few lines and please, please employ some logical thinking.

I sat on an old tree stump in my park yesterday.
And had a Twirl. (The chocolate variety).
I took my antibac wipes. I was there for 5 minutes, after walking around the park for an hour. There was a young family playing frisbee across the park and it was lovely to watch them having fun.

I don't feel that I put me or anyone else in any more danger. More risk when I do my parent's weekly shop to be honest.
I'm going to take a Crunchie next time, and find a bench. I feel I'm missing out.

Drivingdownthe101

So, if they know more now then why can't they update the information? Many of us were informed by text before we got the letters so it's easy to send updated information.

Read more than a few lines and please, please employ some logical thinking.

I have read it all, multiple times. It doesn't answer my question or make it any clearer.

It explains about contact with people in various situations but still says do not leave your home. So, beyond not having contact with people. It's more than just avoiding all contact.

Because the risk IS people in close contact Hooves. And even then it's likely very small as a) that would have to be someone with COVID and b) close enough to be coughing on you.

If they're not, the risk is so, so, so tiny but you think it's going to kill you.

• Staying at home and shielding You’re strongly advised to stay at home at all times and avoid any face-to-face contact if you’re clinically extremely vulnerable to protect yourself. This is called ‘shielding’.*

Strongly advising.

You all keep saying "risk assess". Yes, I know. But usually we know what the risks are and assess accordingly.

No you don't.

Take car driving. How risky it is, depends on how you drive, how others drive, road conditions, lighting , route, speed, how tired you are, how tired other drivers are and loads of other variables. Some, of those figures can be given in general statistics. But nowhere near all.

They can't tell you if you will survive. Again there's thousands of varibles that could determine the outcome. The liklihood, is that if you crash at low speed, you will survive but its not guaranteed. Your car could be shit or the body work damage. It could crumple in a way that causes death.

Right now, its thought the shielding group will are more likely to need NHS care. Not definite. But more likely.

But no one can tell you the individual risk of you going out, there's too many variables. Or the likelihood of you needing hospital care if you do get it. Or what the result you getting that would be. Again, too many variables.

You get what the rest of us get. The updates and advice. They you do you own risk assesment. No one has told me the risk of me going to the local shop or how big the risk of me needing hospital care is.

I have been given advice and judge the risk myself.

You need to do the same. There's to many variables for anyone to work out your risk.

The fact is yes, it might be airborne, but the WHO says finding this out would take years.

www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00974-w

So better to be safe than sorry. Don't go for a walk if you feel there may be a risk aside from other humans. As for the rest of us we're fully expected to catch and recover from it whether it's airborne, benchborne, or coming home on Weetabix.

I have to say hooves, how has another thread become all about you and discussing why no one can inform you of your level of risk?

How has your situation got anything to do, with the risk associated with sitting on a park bench?

We don’t know that they do know more now. For the people that are medically extremely vulnerable, the safest course of action is to stay at home. They are playing it safe for obvious reasons. But of course you know that.
As I said upthread, a good friend of mine has CF and she’s obviously shielding. She is going for a 5km run at 6am every morning as she has decided that for her, the risk of losing her fitness and reducing her lung capacity is more of a risk then the very slight chance she might breathe in some droplets when she encounters no one.
That’s her risk assessment.

Thank goodness I never eat Wheetabix. One danger ticked off the list.

It seems to, tenuously, be some kind of "If you're all allowed to sit outside and eat crisps, why can't I go for a walk" logic. When our guidance is to slow, not stop, the spread, and hers is to stop her getting it at all.

Shitsgettingcrazy

I'm not asking for my individual risk in percentage terms.

I'm asking what is the danger I am facing simply in leaving my home?

You cite driving a car but you do know what the risks are - having an accident, mechanical failure, object hitting the car etc. You don't know if those things will happen but you know what the dangers are

hammeringinmyhead

Thank you. That's answered my question and was exactly what I assumed - that they suspect it is airborne but aren't entirely sure.

Hearhoovesthinkzebras

Its not a character assassination if its stating the bloody obvious. You keep repeating the same thing over and over despite numerous explainations. You cannot be that dim you really cant.

The risks are coming into contact with other people. You cannot guarentee others will stick to social distancing in fact its impossible to do so in shops where people leave common sense at the door. Any contact with people carries a small risk its up to you as an adult to do your own risk.assessment you dont need someone to spell out every little detail for you (and even when people have explained things you just question it anyway). Why are you even asking if you don't want like the answers?