Are we sacrificing the young to save the elderly?

[RubyandBen]

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?

Fine but don’t volunteer other peoples lives for population control purposes.

I’ve already said I would take all precautions when interacting with someone vulnerable.

But people need to reflect on how reasonable or realistic it is to ask people not to see their nearest and dearest for the sake of those shielding. We did it for the first lockdown. How much longer is it expected of us?

Goodness, is the world not divided enough as it is right now, without pitting the generations against each other?

I am baffled by how few people seem to have dealt first hand with the horrors sometimes inflicted by old age

Give over. I sat with my mother while she died from breast cancer/secondary bone and lung metastasises when I was a teenager and my grandmother while she died from dementia in my 20’s. am I qualified enough to say that a covid death very far removed from a peaceful or comfortable death - especially if resources are stretched and those supporting that death are traumatised because their usual resources are simply not there?

Death is a certainty but there’s a wider ripple effect and there is harm inflicted on more people than just the deceased.

Besides, death is one, fairly small, consideration here as has been pointed out over and over again. If covid just killed people in a couple of days we wouldn’t be having this conversation, as it is it’s drawn out and each serious case and death uses a lot of resources that we simply don’t have. Once they’re used up those resources aren’t there for anyone no matter the reason they need them.

@TheKeatingFive but dont you think that's up to the person who's most vulnerable to decide? Grandma may not be quite finished with her life yet, however much the kids need childcare miss her.

It does get very complex when you get into care home scenarios, where the decision of an individual could have far reaching consequences for many. I honestly dont know what the right answer there is.

For the elderly (AND those with dodgy immune systems), Covid is often PERMANENT i.e. death. That's it. No more life.

For everyone else, the measures are TEMPORARY. You'll recover and have a happy life.

Ecosse,

Your comment about the nurses filming Tiktok videos (coming from a pampered protected management consultant) is pretty vile. I assume your area of consultancy is not medical?

Stressed people are allowed a break. Do you never take a break (I assume you do, considering you have posted here several times today).

And, in addition, you cannot turn a burns clinic (for instance) into a Covid ward easily. The skills and equipment are not fungible.

If you speak to A&E consultants and nurses in ICU or the actual Covid wards, they were very close to being overwhelmed. One hospital had to reduce target SATs from 93% to 90% as they were short of oxygen. It was a very close run thing.

And when you say you never turned a client away, was that face to face or over Zoom or Teams?

I’ve already said I would take all precautions when interacting with someone vulnerable.

How would you know? We don't wear a sign! Unless you assume EVERYONE you are in contact with is potentially vulnerable?

@TheKeatingFive

Fine but don’t volunteer other peoples lives for population control purposes.

I’ve already said I would take all precautions when interacting with someone vulnerable.

But people need to reflect on how reasonable or realistic it is to ask people not to see their nearest and dearest for the sake of those shielding. We did it for the first lockdown. How much longer is it expected of us?

Well done you, doesn’t take away from the fact that you’ve alluded to it not being an issue for you if lots of people die because the world is overpopulated. Crack on and reduce the population yourself if that’s truly what you believe. People are too quick to bang on about overpopulation as long as it’s someone else dying and I find it a repulsive argument touted by sociopaths.

Pandemics on average last about two years based on the last couple of centuries, so about that with varying degrees of restrictions. Pretty accessible information for any adult with the internet who doesn’t just settle for whining at other people about how hard their life is.

@larrygrylls

Ecosse,

Your comment about the nurses filming Tiktok videos (coming from a pampered protected management consultant) is pretty vile. I assume your area of consultancy is not medical?

Stressed people are allowed a break. Do you never take a break (I assume you do, considering you have posted here several times today).

And, in addition, you cannot turn a burns clinic (for instance) into a Covid ward easily. The skills and equipment are not fungible.

If you speak to A&E consultants and nurses in ICU or the actual Covid wards, they were very close to being overwhelmed. One hospital had to reduce target SATs from 93% to 90% as they were short of oxygen. It was a very close run thing.

And when you say you never turned a client away, was that face to face or over Zoom or Teams?

So true Larry. I read that post earlier and typed a response but then deleted as it wasn't as polite as yours!

Ecosse just loves an NHS bash

that you’ve alluded to it not being an issue for you if lots of people die because the world is overpopulated

I was responding to a point about death being a constant in life. It’s a fact. I’m sorry.

Pandemics on average last about two years based on the last couple of centuryes

I have elderly parents who could die from many things that arent Covid. Plenty of family examples of sudden deaths of heart attacks and strokes. How long do you want me not to see them? If they die in that time period is that a reasonable ask?

How would you know? We don't wear a sign! Unless you assume EVERYONE you are in contact with is potentially vulnerable?

Well I’m not actually interacting with many people right now. The only people I want to spend time with are friends and family where I would obviously know.

but dont you think that's up to the person who's most vulnerable to decide? Grandma may not be quite finished with her life yet, however much the kids need childcare miss her.

Of course.

My parents, like many other people of their age, would prefer to take their chances, in the knowledge that many things could get them that aren’t Covid.

If they thought differently, I would of course respect that.

And no need for the bitchy aside btw.

@AvocadosBeforeMortgages

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

Second this! Is it all worth it for something with a 99% survival rate? Life goes on, or rather it should

@TheKeatingFive see them all you want based on your own personal risk assessment but the law/guidance is never going to reflect your individual situation. Accept that if you want to break restrictions you will do so without the backing of an official blessing and possibly be breaking the law.

I will see my elderly father because he needs support that if he doesn’t receive puts him in more danger than covid. I can’t get an official exemption but I’m happy that I could justify my case if it was a problem.

@notevenat20

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.

Hardly the same, we cannot go to war with COVID and win. 99% of us would survive if we let it run its course and allow those who wish to shield to do so until there is a vaccine

Hardly the same, we cannot go to war with COVID and win. 99% of us would survive if we let it run its course and allow those who wish to shield to do so until there is a vaccine

Sorry posted too soon and I don't agree with the above comment. Maybe 99% will survive if we have a functioning health service. if we don't continue with restrictions the fatality rate could actually be far higher.

@Jaxhog

For the elderly (AND those with dodgy immune systems), Covid is often PERMANENT i.e. death. That's it. No more life.

For everyone else, the measures are TEMPORARY. You'll recover and have a happy life.

Temporary for some. For those who've died prematurely because of lockdown, whose treatment has been suspended meaning they are now too late to be cured, for those whose condition has now become permanent, such as blindness, deafness etc, frail elderly people whose condition declined through lack of social support, those who couldn't take the isolation or the loss of a long-built business and killed themselves, not so much. What about the people who, in fact rather than theory, will never work again?

But, again we see on Mumsnet, that only the effects of Covid matter. These caring, selfless posters aren't that fussed by the people who suffer or even die of other things, even though they hugely outnumber Covid deaths and suffering.

No. The young aren’t being sacrificed at all.

They might not have to go out drinking or partying but hardly the end of the world. Probably better for their long term health anyway.They have education however it’s done and numerous means of keeping in touch with people.

Yes

But, again we see on Mumsnet, that only the effects of Covid matter. These caring, selfless posters aren't that fussed by the people who suffer or even die of other things, even though they hugely outnumber Covid deaths and suffering.

You probably count me in that group but you are wrong. I care about all these non covid issues deeply. I'm a parent, I have parents, I care about our country. But I just can't see how the situation would be any better without restrictions to lower the transmission. That goes for the economy and the health of our nation.

you do realise that elderly people find lockdown so stressful that a number of the ones I 'befriend' have said they would consider suicide if it happens again :(

It's not to 'save the elderly' more to save those aged 40-60

you do realise that elderly people find lockdown so stressful that a number of the ones I 'befriend' have said they would consider suicide if it happens again

Some elderly people.

And rather than go, oh right then, no lockdown- can't we think about asking these people what the worst things are and try and put some things in place to mitigate that? In any case, contact to prevent someone's mood dipping so low they were actively suicidal would have been an allowable exception even at the height of lockdown, so if the people you talk to are genuine, visiting them to prevent that would be within the guidance.