Looks like shielding might be returning

[2X4B523P]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8727553/Up-4-5million-risk-Covid-told-stay-home-new-shielding-plan.html

Couldn’t see another thread but excuse me if I’ve missed it.

So shielding is currently paused and it looks like there’s a plan to restart it and with extended to more people.

@Azerothi surely the majority of people aren’t weighed by their GP?

The Telegraph article seemed to be saying that there would be a review of the shielding criteria this time round.
In March far less was known and some of the conditions on the list then have not proved to be as vulnerable as first thought. I think huge numbers of people with asthma were told to shield and there has been some research that shows they do not seem to fare worse with covid.
Also for children only a very small number of very sick children would fall into the shielding group.

How would gp surgeries know what everyone weighs? Plus surely it wouldn't be for every single overweight person, that's more adults than not in the UK.

What about the doctors, business owners, nurses, teachers, etc who are among the 4.5 million? Lots of "vulnerable" have pretty important jobs Yes, I agree. If the government say obese people are vulnerable (even though this is a much bigger risk factor for men than women), then are NHS staff going to have to work while non-essential workers have to shield? Not workable at all.

"Also for children only a very small number of very sick children would fall into the shielding group"

90,000, all of whom should have been getting individual consultant-led new advice on whether they remain on the shielding list

I hate when people discuss shielding in 'them and us' terms, in evidence on this thread with the suggestions that 'they' should stay at home do everyone else can get on with their lives.
Those shielding are not dispensable burdens on society, in fact many are the exact opposite, they work, have families etc, and just have the misfortune to be vulnerable to increased risk of becoming seriously ill for whatever reason.

I have been saying that this is the obvious solution.

Many 'shielders' (myself included) should lock themselves down .

The current situation is never going to work. But there is no way to get the economy running, the health service not overwhelmed through winter AND kids at school. We really can't have it ALL ways without sacrificing one of those.

The best solution is to protect the vulnerable. We need to do this to ourselves. If like me, we continue to work from home. (I will be anyway regardless of government decisions) Many shielded we're in the same position do they don't need to be supported. For those who can't WFH they need to be furloughed until the R is way down. Probably until next spring. Meanwhile everyone else not at risk can get back to normal.

The only issue then , that needs to be worked out is how to educate those shielders who have school aged children. So some tough choices to save your life. Perhaps Covid shielders schools . Where the kids are in much smaller bubbles and therefore more distanced or a proper online 'school' set up by department of education. With laptops and internet provided . Much less hassle the the whole countries kids at home. In the thousands rather than the millions as most shielders (I think it was around 4 million) are older and don't have kids.

The shielding list MUST be only those officially designated as such by the NHS. No 'self diagnosing' . Those at most likelihood of dying or suffering long term consequences.

Once we are all locked away again, people can really get on with life and get the economy going again to help pay for this relatively small proportion of those that need protection.

At the moment we have the expectation of the curtailment of life for the masses to protect the few. It needs to change to the protection of the few by the economic assistance of the masses.

Forgive me, I’m slightly confused. 😚 Is there more than one poster who have received shielding letters? I can see that Azerothi got one dated 4/9/20 but then other posters are saying that a thread was deleted. Sorry if I’m getting overly confused. With 3 DCs who may need to shield again, I’m just trying to get my head round it.

It is one thing to ask people to shield when the rest of the population is taking a hit...to ask people to shield , to give up everything, because as a country we can't do enough to protect everyone, test, trace, pay people sick leave, wear a mask , it is pathetic

but if they add type 2 as well, then they'd need a bigger increase than the one suggested Yes, also type 2 diabetes would affect a lot of people (and many are undiagnosed, so what to do about that - it's not like they are going to be screening the population, is it?).
Some factors are clear: age, immunocompromised, etc. Some are mixed and depend on interaction between several factors e.g. obesity/gender, and some are going to be controversial, e.g. the very higher risk factor of being BAME. Some are work-related, but the government aren't going to stop the bus drivers, front-line nurses, meat-packing workers going to work. Although in the local lockdown areas of Australia they did actually shut down abattoirs and meat packing factories (leading to panic buying of meat). Specific measures like that are actually more effective than saying anyone who is obese (without specifying gender, work environment, lifestyle etc.).

Surely just being overweight wouldn't mean you'd have to shield? I suspect it would be a very tightly defined category of people and probably not everyone who was asked to shield last time, but maybe new people - because more is now understood about the illness and the effects it can have.

ask people to shield , to give up everything, because as a country we can't do enough to protect everyone, test, trace, pay people sick leave, wear a mask , it is pathetic I agree. The government would do better to vastly improve testing capacity and the track and trace system as its main priority. That is what has worked in countries that keep the virus under better control so far.

It’s not about them and us @Evilwasps. Coronavirus affects some individuals much more than others- it simply makes no sense to lock everyone at home and stop them contributing to the economy when the vast majority will suffer no or very mild symptoms if they catch the virus.

There would be no money left after a second lockdown to fund the NHS and other public services. It makes much more sense to protect people who are vulnerable (financially and practically) rather than shutting everything down.

If Boris can find billions for his Moonshot, why can’t he use those precious funds on better test, track and tracing? Then we might stand a chance of keeping better control of the situation. As it is , it feels as though we lurch from one disastrous scenario to the next like a malfunctioning pinball machine!

Exactly

It’s like saying ‘well if I can’t go out no one can’!

The other 63 million lives are being sacrificed for 3-4 million

It’s crazy

Support the vulnerable so half the country still has a job

I always wait for announcements not newspaper reports . But I do know the nhs are making a lot of preparations for a new wave .

That might implicate not full lockdown like before but an adapted scheme. Perhaps they might furlough just people at highest risk of hospitalisation. It might make sense.

Apart from hospital and doctor appointments, Iv been out twice since March

The thought of continuing to shield for the foreseeable is not fun, but of-course necessary...

Im extremely vulnerable

I just really want to spend Christmas with my family!!!

Another issue is, even if an accurate list of shielding criteria could be established, the rest of the population cannot carry on as normal (even in economic terms) because then the virus would be endemic in all areas of life and the shielders would never be able to come back out of shielding until there was a highly effective and reliable vaccine and everyone had received it.
Shielders cannot be expected to live like that for months/years without end.
The only humane solution is to keep virus levels as low as possible in the entire population.
And in localities where the virus is thriving then tighter restrictions are needed until levels decrease.

There will be no money left...exactly like there was no money left after the Second World War, yet the world didn't fall apart then , and they managed to create the NHS.

country money does not work like a household budget.

Ginoginelli I find your posts inflammatory. Are you seriously suggesting the shielders should lose their jobs so everyone else can keep theirs and life for them can return to 'normal'?

@Evilwasps

No one is saying the shielders should lose their jobs- they should be furloughed if they wish with their government paying wages.

The alternative of a second lockdown would Alead to tens of millions losing their jobs.

We need to fire up the engines of the economy to avert complete meltdown when combined with no deal brexit. You can shield if you want to but everyone else needs to get back to work

When I was last weighed by my GP, it was a good few years ago, and I was in the BMI 25-30 (overweight) category. I am now in the obese (30+) category. Add that to a condition which means I am in the wider clinically vulnerable group and it makes me wonder if I should be shielding.

But who is going to phone up their GP surgery to ask if they can update their weight?!

I really don't think the government can afford to furlough the millions of obese people in this country, and what about the BAME population or those with diabetes? The most straight-forward criteria is age, and that only works because many of the over 70/80's are already voluntarily living shielded lives.

But how is that going to work. Take the company I work for as an example. We're doing reasonably well and I have plenty of work. According to a previous post my wages should be paid so DH can (hypothetically) shield. Someone else is going to have to pick up my work while I sit at home doing nothing, not even needing to shield.

As I said it's hypothetical, but it could well happen to some people.