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?

No, just common sense.

If no one is out working then who will provide for the elderly and the vulnerable.

Also, you have no idea what my age or health is, so hold your horses.

@ChardonnaysPetDragon

Look, I was happy to follow the rules first time round, I'm now happy to wear a mask and to stick to a rule of 6 or whatever.

But that's it, I have do desire to do anything more, and apparently millions more think like me.

Well, if you don't want to do anything more, why the heck should anyone else?

OH yes, don't even get me on the missed education and socialisation for the young.

There might actually be some ageism, but it's the young who are on the receiving end.

Because I realise there are risks and I'm happy to take them.

I don't expect the state to suspend everything to keep me safe.

But ChardonnaysPetDragon it's people of I presume your age who are needing ITU care not your parents in their 80s.

Sorry, what's ITU care?

Intensive Therapy Unit - critical care.

@ChardonnaysPetDragon here's the stats you wanted @mumwon posted this link earlier this morning:

www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity/

Apparently the average age of someone dying with covid is 82. The average age expectancy in the UK is 81...

So yes, the current Covid madness has gone completely out of proportion.

Chardonnay - the risk to the health system is greater by just shielding the vulnerable compared to whole population. This is because - if the virus spreads through the population, more healthcare workers and other essential services get sick and isolate, hospital beds get filled with patients.

Most shielding people will have higher than average contact with essential carers and medical professionals, so it is v hard to completely shield them. Risk to them goes up if population incidence goes up

There are people there for many reasons, we don't suspend everything to deal with those.

We still sell cigarettes, we sell alcohol, we drive. Those are major causes of death. But the state makes money out of them so is now flexing their muscles over COVID.

Also, why would people of my age need the ICU more than my parents' generation? If it's for the reasons stated above then yes, I agree.

And then shielding the elderly makes double the sense, once to keep them safe and then to keep hospital beds for the younger.

But you also have to take into consideration that health care is shutting down for COVID unrelated cases. How is that helping those who need help for anything other than COVID?

Yes definitely

People get sick every year and have to take time off work - it’s not a new thing

This is because - if the virus spreads through the population, more healthcare workers and other essential services get sick and isolate, hospital beds get filled with patients.

So? The vast majority have no symptoms or very mild ones, most people can afford to just ignore it. Those who can't can be shielded.

Chardonnay - if medical professionals/carers don’t shield if they are high risk (eg had a contact with positive case or someone in their family), they spread it to all their patients (who are sicker than average already). More people with longer stays in hospital, higher death rate.

Hospital beds are already filling up. What do you think happened in Wuhan, new York and north Italy?

@MarriedtoDaveGrohl I'm nodding my head laughing in agreement at your entertaining posts.

@Requinblanc

Apparently the average age of someone dying with covid is 82. The average age expectancy in the UK is 81...

So yes, the current Covid madness has gone completely out of proportion.

We are 19 pages in and we have still not agreed that the fact that the average age of people dying is currently 82 is not the urgent reason why we are taking such measures? Hospital admissions are rising, these people are far younger on average. There is no vaccine and there are 50 million or more yet to become infected. Of that 50 million, millions of them may require hospital beds that will just not be available. It is a highly infectious disease that we now know can be transmitted by asymptomatic people. It really is not out of proportion when you consider this.

If it was possible to shield everyone who is vulnerable, then there wouldn't be any deaths in the first place. Clearly it is impossible, especially as many of the vulnerable are of working age and many people don't even know their vulnerable until they end up in ICU. When people make a simplistic suggestion that everyone should just get on with it while those were vulnerable shield I think they are either a bit naive or in actual fact are just don't care as long as they're all right Jack.

Sorry ChardonnaysPetDragon I phrased that wrong it's not that your parents wouldn't need that level of care it's that they just wont get it. Someone in their eighties who became very unwell with covid would get oxygen therapy in hospital at best. Some might get palliative care at home.

The sad fact is hospital during a pandemic is not the place to be if its for a procedure that could be delayed. It is almost impossible due to the incubation period to guarantee that patients are covid free so there is always the risk of it spreading to other patients.

Then we are, we are sacrificing the young to save a the elderly, and by sacrificing the young and the economy we are also putting in danger everybody down the line.

Happy days.

@ChardonnaysPetDragon
So how do you propose we shield the 15% of ecv who have kids?
My dh can wfh home thank God but we have to send our kids to school in bubbles of 90, 130 and 150.
At the moment it is not too bad as cases are low where we now live but if it is allowed to rip though not so much. I would hate to be ecv with dc in more affected areas.
Dh need to have regular blood tests and other appts and I provide some care and woh.
Many othe ecv are teachers, medics etc. It is not so simple.
That is not even including cv who are another larger group.
Letting it rip is not going to help the NHS or the economy when so many are ill ir shielding.

ChardonnaysPetDragon what do you class as elderly?

The sad fact is hospital during a pandemic is not the place to be if its for a procedure that could be delayed.

And by delaying procedures we are putting people in danger. But not COVID, so who cares?

70+, elderly, for me.

So how do you propose we shield the 15% of ecv who have kids?

And what do you propose for the millions who have children but are at danger of losing their jobs and home while we kill off the economy?