Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Are we sacrificing the young to save the elderly?

865 replies

RubyandBen · 15/10/2020 08:32

Reading another thread where someone was accusing the OP of wanting to sacrifice the elderly re CV. But the longer this goes on the more education and the economy are screwed is it actually the other way round?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
MJMG2015 · 15/10/2020 08:33

No

LemonTT · 15/10/2020 08:33

No

ChasedByFox · 15/10/2020 08:34

No.
Read about long covid. No-one wants to get this disease- the after effects are still being discovered. Dampening spread of the virus benefits everyone.

mygrandadsvest · 15/10/2020 08:34

Yes, I think so but then I'm early 30s with two young kids

FredaFox · 15/10/2020 08:34

Nobody is being sacrificed

022828MAN · 15/10/2020 08:35

Yes. Well really we're sacrificing 99.03% to save 0.07%.
Either way it's disproportionate and not rational.

Parker231 · 15/10/2020 08:36

Ridiculous statement- No - this has affected everyone- all generations. It is not worse for any one age group.

Dundundunnn · 15/10/2020 08:39

@Parker231

Ridiculous statement- No - this has affected everyone- all generations. It is not worse for any one age group.
Well it is because the average age of death from covid is 82. So it most definitely IS worse for a certain age group.
AvocadosBeforeMortgages · 15/10/2020 08:40

I think it's fairly evident that young people are being asked to sacrifice their education, jobs (young people are disproportionately employed in hospitality and retail), social lives and, as a knock on effect, their mental health.

A sacrifice of essentially almost everything that makes life meaningful, for the sake of a virus that they will almost certainly make a full recovery from, and for people they have mostly never met and never will - especially for those whose grandparents have already passed away

notevenat20 · 15/10/2020 08:41

In a sense that is the balance the govt has to strike. I wouldn’t want to be PM.

Juststopswimming · 15/10/2020 08:41

@022828MAN

Yes. Well really we're sacrificing 99.03% to save 0.07%. Either way it's disproportionate and not rational.
This.

But then this is MN and you'll find that only covid matters. And if you dare say otherwise then you're called anti-science.

MorrisZapp · 15/10/2020 08:42

@Parker231

Ridiculous statement- No - this has affected everyone- all generations. It is not worse for any one age group.
Do you have access to the news at all? This is hugely worse for one age group, the elderly. The average age of death from Covid is 82.
AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken · 15/10/2020 08:43

Yes

AgentProvocateur · 15/10/2020 08:44

Yes we are. And I say that as a 50-something with elderly parents.

Newgirls · 15/10/2020 08:44

When you think of students and teens and what they have had to give up this year, then yes.

Juststopswimming · 15/10/2020 08:44

Also the definition of 'vulnerable' on MN = people most susceptible to covid.

There are many posters who merrily ignore the 'vulnerable' who are at increased risk of DV, abuse, poverty, missed cancer diagnoses etc etc

Only covid matters. Only covid deaths matter.

user128472578267 · 15/10/2020 08:44

Ffs.

HitchikersGuide · 15/10/2020 08:45

Yes.

twinkletoedelephant · 15/10/2020 08:45

My son has an assessment at a school next week.... he has had weeks of watching his twin go to school while waiting for council to assign him a secondary school place.

If he doesn't get to go to the school so they can see how fabulous he is and offer him a permanent place, I may not be responsible for my actions .....or his.

notevenat20 · 15/10/2020 08:45

Yes. Well really we're sacrificing 99.03% to save 0.07%.Either way it's disproportionate and not rational.

It’s not irrational. 50,000 people have died so far despite massive restrictions on our lives. How many would have died already without those restrictions? 250,000?

If a foreign government threatened to bomb central London killing 250,000 we would certainly go to war with them.

notevenat20 · 15/10/2020 08:46

My son has an assessment at a school next week.... he has had weeks of watching his twin go to school while waiting for council to assign him a secondary school place.

What sort of assessment?

KetoPenguin · 15/10/2020 08:47

When you look at the mix of people in hospital with covid it's a lot younger than 80, many of these people would die without treatment. Boris probably would be dead without the treatment he had. So if the NHS is overwhelmed and people can't be treated then more younger people would be dying.

Mistigri · 15/10/2020 08:48

Letting the virus run loose screws the economy.

Controlling virus spread with short sharp measures allows your economy to recover (look at China).

Racoonworld · 15/10/2020 08:49

Yes

Dundundunnn · 15/10/2020 08:49

@Mistigri

Letting the virus run loose screws the economy.

Controlling virus spread with short sharp measures allows your economy to recover (look at China).

Ha! Oh yes because China are the most transparent and honest country to look to.
Swipe left for the next trending thread