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.

Shielding wasn't paused for everyone. My MIL has been shielding with my poorly FIL since March. She has not been outside her front gate since then and was told by her doctor that her shielding will last as long as there is any risk to it being passed on to him. They can't afford to take any chances. I just feel so sad that we can't visit to help with his care and give her a break or so she can spend time with her grandchildren. She is very much on her own. They are due a review with his doctor soon but with the cases rising I can't imagine the advice will change. I really worry about how long she will have to go through this and my boys are desperate for a hug from their Nanny again!

The question is though why should shielded people get income protection when in normal times those who end up unable to work for health reasons end up with fuck all. It's interesting to see just how many people are calling for special treatment because they are suddenly the ones affected.
Personally I think if shielding has to resume the government should base the payments and protections for those shielding, and whose employers would otherwise require to be at work, on statutory maternity pay (with the normal entitlements for means tested benefits where appropriate). For companies who are having to make redundancies I think in the circumstances it would be entirely reasonable for the protections to be waived so that the company has the best possible chance of staying afloat and so that as few as possible who could be at work lose their jobs.
If the government chooses to extend the furlough scheme in specific industries or jobs, which are still faced with extreme barriers to opening, those who are shielding should be treated the same as their non-shielding colleagues until such time their colleagues return to work.

I agree with pp who pointed out that even being obese is actually not a significant risk factor if you are a woman aged under 50. So the government are going to have to be a lot more specific about the risk factors and address some uncomfortable risk factors about ethnicity and work-place exposure if they go down this route.

Plus being an NHS worker alone was a major risk factor in March, April etc. So what do the government do about that risk factor? (Buy enough PPE, ensure that PPE is not the cheapest, lowest protection possible?, make sure there is enough of the full hazmat type PPE for those treating known/suspected cases rather than a plastic pinny)

Well I am cev and I won't be shielding this time. My dc will go to school where they can and I won't be dancing around the house trying to avoid them till there is a vaccine.

@Redcherries

Hospitals have not been anywhere near to being overrun at any stage in the U.K., and there is no evidence from countries in Europe that are either ahead of us that they ever will be.

Only 7% of hospital beds set aside for COVID patients in Spain are currently being used.

Any lawyers know how shielding specific groups stacks up with discrimination legislation?

Do you think we could ask everyone to take vitamin D please

@mids2019

Any lawyers know how shielding specific groups stacks up with discrimination legislation?

In what way?

StatisticalSense

Because then a lot meant to be shielding are likely to refuse and carry on going to work, risking getting ill and clogging up hospital beds, possibly for a long time, thus depriving the "healthy" people of a bed. Or do you propose just leaving them to die at home?

@Calledyoulastnightfromglasgow

Do you think we could ask everyone to take vitamin D please

I have been doing this, even if it doesn’t do anything positive it won’t do any harm

Could you just pay the bread companies to lace bread with vitamin d. Surely no one can get through winter without an abundance of toast?

@mids2019 you are covered by the Equality Act according to my GP if you are shielding. I think that is also the case if you contract Covid due to it being a public health issue.

Those shielding last time would have all been covered by equality act though

Other papers are also saying the same
www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/fat-old-isolate-coronavirus-live-cases-surge-a4546231.html

metro.co.uk/2020/09/13/number-of-shielding-people-expected-to-double-as-coronavirus-cases-soar-13264822/

Care homes have been sent alerts apparently
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54137078

The weight warning will be more inline with the campaign about weight last month. It won't be about gps sending them out because of weight, but more eat less, move more.

Thankfully it will also be a huge relief to millions of parents whose children should be shielding but were facing fines unless they were sent in.

However, not so good for the nhs schools if staff are shielding and of course others who cannot wfh.

That NHS 'at risk' link has 'are taking medicine that can affect the immune system (such as low doses of steroids)' as a moderate risk. That will be anyone who has asthma, which includes a large amount of the school-age children. They can't just stay at home. Some will stop taking their steroids and just rely on rescue medication if that happens.

The government needs to take more responsibility than this shielding. They need to provide more testing, better and more reliable and much faster testing.
They need to ensure that where-ever in the world a vaccine is developed that works, that the UK has full access to it.
They need to ensure that any vaccine is given to the entire population so that true herd immunity develops.

@EDSGFC
I probably wouldn't phrase it quite like that but yes I would quite clearly tell those ECV that if they chose to ignore shielding advice nobody would prevent them from doing so but that their decision would be taken into account when considering treatment options available to them.
If there is money available to continue financial support to certain groups I would prefer it used to support those whose industries have remained closed and have no prospect of opening (especially considering that in some cases, notably hospitality, many of the lower level workers will be those in full time education who generally have no access to benefits).

@Ecosse I’m aware of that, I was referring to if an icu is over run and said that in my post.

@Azerothi do you live in a local lockdown area?

I think they do need to add diabetes to the shielding list as diabetics made up around 1/4 of deaths.

It's a BMI of over 40 that places you at increased risk, so not every obese person.

I was shielding and the thought of having to go back to that actually makes me cry. I had only started to relax in the past couple of weeks and enjoy a bit of freedom and see some friends and family. I have 2 swimming sessions booked for next week too to try and get some of the strength back I have lost since March.

I do agree that those of us who are vulnerable have a responsibility to look after ourselves and should be locked down tighter than the rest of the population but it is still soul destroying.

What comes after this wave? It doesn't look like there will be a vaccine for a long time so is it a case of letting the population catch it in a more controlled way to achieve herd immunity.

Covid is never going to go away so as a population we are going to have to develop immunity - naturally.
@Aesopfable that’s not scientifically possible.

Regarding ICU care for shielders.

@midgebabe

Exercise at home, in a small house/flat? Jog on the spot for 6 months ? Yeah, great idea.

Needs must ? You have to do what you can

Between a quarter and a third of the population are obese, BMI over 30, they surely can’t all shield. I wonder what the age criteria will be, I’m 62 but normal bmi. I imagine it will be 65 or 70 or that will be a large chunk of people if it is any lower

@Evilwasps

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 don't understand. How is suggesting that shielders should be able to stay safely at home on full pay with food deliveries in place whilst the rest of us stay out working to keep the economy going (and risk getting covid) making shielders 'dispensable'? Would you prefer we say shielders should still have to go to work and put themselves at great risk

[quote Azerothi]@Windyone If anyone is weighed at their GPs, the government will then have those statistics.[/quote]
They won't. The government only gets anonymised data from GPs. That's why the original shielding letters had to come from hospitals or GPs, not from Government.