Is it time to Free the healthy and shield the vulnerable

[Alex50]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52543692

Lots of elderly people do though

Lots of elderly people do what?

Die. The stats for Covid deaths are that a huge huge percentage of people survive: high nineties per cent no matter which stats you follow

The shielded ( should ) get help with shopping, prescriptions delivered and a letter to show their employer when they ask for support eg they can ask to be reassigned to a job that can be done for home

The shielded ( should ) get help with shopping, prescriptions delivered and a letter to show their employer when they ask for support eg they can ask to be reassigned to a job that can be done for home

😂😂😂

Oh, that's hilarious. Well, I've got a letter to give to my employer I suppose. No prospect of WFH so guess I'll just lose my job. As for the rest - yeah, not happening.

Mascotte

That's not what the post said though. It said going in a car poses a much higher risk of death than dying from the virus.

We have two toddlers who are in the shielded category. If my husband has to go back to work I genuinely don’t know what the hell we are going to do! A lot of shielded people are living with and dependent on people who are not shielded.

My DC are very vulnerable but they are not sick. We already have 12 weeks of not being able to leave the house I really worry about the impact on their development and health if this goes on for too long. Also purely selfishly months at home with a 2 and 3 year old is a tough gig!

It does if you're not elderly

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras over 25,000 were seriously injured in car accidents in 2018, nearly 1800 died. Just over 300 people 45 or under have died from coronvirus.

@Alex50
“There have only been just over 300 deaths from coronvirus for under 45’s most of those had underlying health issues, the risks are tiny. I know some may have been ill at home but there are many things we can catch and be very ill and recover. Lockdown is going to cause far more health issues if it carries on to long, one being mass unemployment.“

Absolutely agree with this.

@hopeishere
“ The "vulnerable" are people with rights too. What if they don't want to be inside?”

They don’t have to stay inside, they can go out if they want to. The risk is theirs to take, should they want to.

Why should the whole country stay inside though? There needs to be a balance and releasing the non vulnerable from lockdown to get back to work and stimulate the economy is a balance. We need people working and paying taxes so the vulnerable can receive financial support to stay inside. The current situation is unsustainable.

Alex50

Absolutely none of that is relevant to what the poster said. What's injuries got to do with anything?

The poster said the vulnerable have got more chance of dying in a car accident than from Covid - that's not specifically relating to people under 45, it was re vulnerable and dying. So,no, there isn't a higher risk of dying from a car accident than from COVID19. That's just ridiculous.

It's been seven weeks and I've only just got access to shielded Tesco slots, thanks to a 'computer says no' glitch. I get my prescriptions from pharmacy2u, which is available to everyone. There are no protections for the shielded in terms of jobs or schooling - just a variety of limp suggestions.

We need people working and paying taxes so the vulnerable can receive financial support to stay inside. The current situation is unsustainable.

There are roughly 20 million vulnerable people. Are you really advocating for the government to pay them to stay at home, while you go out to work? I mean, great if you are, but somehow I doubt it.

What do you suggest @Hearhooves?

@Hearhoovesthinkzebras

Are you including those who are already living off pensions in that 20 million? Because they won’t cost any more than they did 3 months ago.

Mine and DPs parents are vulnerable due to age. They are all on final salary pensions and live in mortgage free properties. The lockdown has barely affected them. They are in support of the non vulnerable going back to work as they can see the impact on personal finances.

Same thing I've suggested all along. We all have to wait this out until the R0 falls to a low enough number but then we need to test,track, trace and isolate.

@TazSyd

Well they are included in the vulnerable group but estimates for numbers in the whole group are between 17 and 25 million so a wide range. I don't know how many pensioners there are. Regardless, the numbers are in the millions which is a lot of people to argue should be paid to stay at home for the duration.

I'm just waiting to see how long it will be before someone suggests that people who are at risk because of obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, alcoholism, drug use, and lifestyle-related organ damage shouldn't receive financial support to shield because it's their fault.

And then, I suppose, that people shouldn't have children if they aren't prepared to care for them, so no support for parents who cant work whiles schools and nurseries are shut.

@broomstick

The problem with that argument is where does it stop? Should people who do dangerous sports like rugby or skiing not receive NHS care, if they get injured, because they caused it themselves?

The vulnerable are vulnerable, no matter what the circumstances, and a civilised society should protect its vulnerable. In the same way that all citizens should receive free at the point of service healthcare, no matter what the circumstances.

we can’t stay in lockdown to protect a small minoritY

There have only been just over 300 deaths from coronvirus for under 45’s most of those had underlying health issues

So you mean 'the young' should be allowed to do as they please while the over 45's should stay at home.

Do you actually understand how many more people would have died if we hadn't been locked down?

Do you understand lots of people don't know they have 'underlying conditions'?

Do you understand what they call 'underlying conditions?' (Diabetes-even controlled, nigh blood pressure, asthma, BMI>27 (what's yours?) all kinds of things that are rife in the entire population.

@Madein1995

Why are we making all the healthy people stay indoors miserable when actually their chances of dying are little greater than their chances of being run over?

Jesus. Try educating yourself god knows there are enough threads explaining it.

Clue: it's not all about you. Do you not have family/friends? Healthy young people WILL die if they lift lick down too soon. How many should we allow to die before you think it's unacceptable to try to stop it?

The shielded groups also "includes drs, nurses, public transport drivers, retail etc". Not just old people who don't count because they're old and they were going to die in 6 months anyway.

Well luckily it’s not down to mumsnet to decide when lockdown is lifted.

Surely it makes more sense to hold on for a few more weeks so everyone can safely start to go out and about more rather than try and keep a third of the population locked down surviving on state aid until a vaccine arrives ?

I'm a plump 50 year old but happy to take my chances. I need to earn money to support my dc who needs to get to school abd socialise

Just over 300 people 45 or under have died from coronvirus.

That's whilst we're in lockdown. You could add a few noughts if we weren't!!