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.

Oh FGS!

There seems to be the same misunderstanding now as back then.

Do none of the posters here understand that SHIELDING IS GUIDANCE.

It was drawing people attention to the fact they were vulnerable and for their own good they ought to take certain measures.

It was NOT LAW and could not be enforced.

You can do what you want if you shield. But accept the risks.

I don’t think people will do it
3 of my very close family were shielding on the extremely vulnerable list and none of them will do it again. They have discussed this.

We would have to sell our house.

@donnadenise my GP knows I’m obese and I’ve never been invited for a flu jab. I pay for my own.

Absolutely! And just perform your own risk assessment. If you live in an area with 0 cases, go about your business. Area in local lockdown, batten down the hatches.

@Hipsterpotamus

Shielding was never stopped, it was paused - everyone was very aware that it would be coming back.

The additional 2 million people will be from the vulnerable group, not the clinically vulnerable group - probably those with diabetes and those who are pregnant due to the high risk of it being flu season as well.

There isn't a 'vulnerable group' and a 'clinically vulnerable group.'

Clinically extremely vulnerable were told to shield. The wider clinically vulnerable group were told to take extra precautions.

I’m in the shielded group, I agree with shielding us to enable the economy to recover but please think how you word this. Those saying it’s guidance, consider the choices we have to make, risk it and if I get seriously ill it’s my fucking fault for not following the guidance, I’m wasting a hospital bed, potentially dying and leaving my family when I could have listened to the guidance.

There’s shielded people who can’t earn unless they work, we have children at school and doing a levels, businesses to try and keep going. We’ve already done months of lonely isolation, our mental health is fucked and now we face months more.

Please please think how you voice your opinion, we aren’t inanimate objects with no thoughts or feelings, we see your posts, hear people expressing disparaging thoughts.

If we need to shield to protect the nhs and economy and us, protect our jobs and income.

@JinglingHellsBells

It's not just those shielding, it's their household members too, i.e. spouses, children, etc - they wouldn't be able to go to work/school either

It never meant any of that!

It meant that the advice was you reduced contact with anyone out of your home and stayed away from shops, public transport etc but no one could make you do that.

There's no point in one member of a household shielding if other members are out and about working/schooling and no one gives a toss about social distancing anymore. The non vulnerable household members will catch it and pass it to the vulnerable. You really can't shield if household members are out and about as normal unless you're living completely separate lives in different parts of the house.

Telling obese people to shield isn’t exactly going to help them be not obese if they can’t go out for exercise.

@Ginogineli

Familiy members wouldn’t have to shield as that’s not happening now - or isn’t with my colleagues

It's incredibly hard to shield when you live with other people. During the first round we were told to sleep and eat in separate rooms, use a separate bathroom if possible, not spend too much time in the same room, keep 2 metre distance at all time, keep cutlery and crockery separate and that was with schools closed and lots of workplaces closed. I can't imagine how difficult it would be if children continued going to school (that's a big risk for bringing it into the home) or other household members had to go out to work.

How do you stop anyone from bringing it into the home and infecting the shielded person? It was considered too high a risk to let us even go out for a walk so how can it be ok for kids to be at school and bringing it home?

Are people thinking that people who are overweight/obese, but have no medical conditions to make them extremely vulnerable, will be advised to shield? I simply don't think that is or will be the case at all.

Personally I imagine shielding will be recommended on age ie perhaps over 70, and underlying medical conditions as before but with tweaks (eg a lot of DC removed, immune suppressants removed and T1 diabetes added - and that's just examples off the top of my head, I don't have enough medical knowledge about it obviously) but not solely on weight alone!

I seriously doubt that overweight/obese but otherwise "healthy" people will be advised to shield and I very seriously indeed doubt that there would be any employment/income protection for people falling into this group.

And at the risk of sounding like a Daily Mail reader myself, I was advised to shield due to a lung condition (among others) and it's shit. I can't unfuck my lungs to reduce my risk sadly, but I could lose weight if that was the only factor making me CEV.

As usual it's probably the well worn government tactic of divide and conquer, just applied to shielding - eg "my taxes aren't paying for Janet to stay at home because she's overweight froth froth froth" rather than "why aren't the government protecting people who are medically at the highest risk?"

(See also "why is my neighbour contributing to the test shortage when her DC clearly just has a cold?" Instead of "why the fuck we do not have a proper testing strategy and capacity?")

Look sideways, not up - I think that's the governments main strategy, and also their most successful...

@EDSGFC

What happens if those asked to shield, refuse? Maybe we can't afford to live off of SSP or reduced wages, lose pension contributions, possibly our jobs or isolate ourselves again from the world, just so that others can socialise to their hearts content.

Shielding should be a voluntary ‘package of support’ you can opt into if you are on the list. If you want to ignore it and take the risk then that should be up to you but the rest of the population’s responsibility should stop with ensuring the support is good, not with having restrictions placed on them.

Is this a problem only for people who can't work from home?

We who were previously shielded were told it was paused and could be resumed if there were a local or national spike in numbers. That's what this us? With potentially more people being added to the list.
When we were shielded we were told to socially distance from our household and eat and wash separately and maintain social distancing. We were mostly spared that because of the lockdown.
We have been told by the PM to work with our children's schools if we were shielded.
None of this should be a bolt out of the blue.
It's gutting yes. But surprising no.

I really don’t think they’ll add that much to the shielding list. They won’t want to pay wages for people who can’t wfh. It makes no sense to add them now when cases are lower than in March and the hope is to avoid the second wave being so bad. I know MN loses its collective shit over us fatties and assumes that we’re all walking time bombs though.

@Theramin The names I used were the original names used - they were then changed. But it's pretty obvious what my post is talking about.

@Didkdt exactly. Everyone who was shielding was told it was a pause, it's only those who weren't shielding who seem to think that it was stopped in totality.

@notevenat20

Is this a problem only for people who can't work from home?

No. What a ridiculous comment

This isn’t about work it is about quality of life.

Have you tried being in your house for months on end without going out

For some the risk of death (small) would be preferable

One of my family is terminally ill , imagine living the short time you have locked up in a tiny flat totally reliant on other people

@notevenat20 if you couldn't work from home last time you could have been furloughed - it was one of the reasons employers were allowed to furlough staff. I suspect they will do the same this time around, but only for those who have to shield

[quote MadameBlobby]@donnadenise my GP knows I’m obese and I’ve never been invited for a flu jab. I pay for my own.[/quote]
I thought it was NHS guidelines to offer it? I had it before I lost weight and didn't have to pay.

I think you’re right @SNAFUandFUBARsimultaneously. And as an obese person I completely agree with you and don’t think you sound like a DM reader at all.

I don’t think “just” obesity will be added to the list but maybe with comorbidities like diabetes, older age etc.

Personally I’d be happy to fund shielding for family members as well.

The shielded and their family should be furloughed on 80% pay, high-quality online school provision should be set up for shielded DC as well as DC who have shielded family members (with laptop and internet provided).

I’d also make sure practical things were in place- so food and medicine deliveries provided.

That would give us the best chance of avoiding a catastrophic national shutdown which would decimate the economy and your DC’s futures.

Shielding should be a voluntary ‘package of support’ you can opt into if you are on the list.

It's a bit difficult to make it voluntary though if it's the basis of the strategy to protect the NHS so that the rest of you can carry on socialising. If all of us shielders refuse, catch it and take up the hospital beds it'll screw up the plans won't it?

@donnadenise who knows, put it this way, the only way I knew I was meant to get a flu jab was when I saw it on the “vulnerable” list before lockdown!

@MadameBlobby

Telling obese people to shield isn’t exactly going to help them be not obese if they can’t go out for exercise.

They can do exercise at home if they are prepared to make an effort to lose weight.

This is half true. Shielding was about us playing a role in the NHS not being overwhelmed because we the 2 million caught Covid and needed high level treatment. It was made clear that those shielded would be at the back of the line for ICU if we caught it because it was believed our chances of survival would be less.
I can envisage that if too many of the shielded did not comply it would be enforced.