Men should stay at home to minimise risk. Can we have this conversation?

[DJLippy]

The stats are showing that men are far more likely to die from Corona than women. It's a 70/30 split according to some estimates.

However when I go out on my daily bike ride I notice far more men in the streets than women. They are very vulnerable to Covid I am concerned. Should we encourage men who are not key workers to stay at home? Would society be able to function?

Many of the key services are staffed by women. The NHS workforce is 74% female and nurses and health care assistant workforces (who provide the most intimate care) are 90% female. Even doctors (who we often imagine as male) are 45% female.

The key workers seem to be split by sex quite a lot. For example - nurses and teachers overwhelmingly female. Drivers, engineers, road crews ect overwhelmingly male. Obviously they are allowed to travel freely. They are doing vital work.

Is there a case to be made (to minimise risk) that men should stay in the house?

Aside from the genetic aspects which make men vulnerable to Covid, stats show that men (as a class) all have much lower personal hygiene than women. Women obey the hand washing rules better than men. Therefore women (as a class) are less likely to spread disease.

Meanwhile police have to concentrate their resources on Covid related issues. Considering that men commit 90% of violent crime maybe it's best we introduce a law which keeps the sex with the greatest propensity for criminality in the house.

I cant help but feel like if the stats were the other way around women would be living under house arrest. Or at least face a lot of social pressure to do so...

Can we have a conversation about this?

So some couples might decide that the man should go out shopping, while the more vulnerable woman stays at home, nice and safe.

This couple has! Don't judge everyone as thoughtless or sexually stereotyping.

I am getting old and have a heart condition, and he is fifteen years younger than I am. So he does the shopping, wearing a face-mask (a tee-shirt one with paper towel between the two layers, which will afford him 80% protection and also if he happens to have cv give 100% protection to everyone else -- why are more people not wearing these?), and when he has brought the shopping home he leaves his shoes on the mat outside, washes his hands immediately, puts the paper towel in the bin and all his clothes and the mask into the washing machine, and goes straight to have a bath.

This has been talked through and thoroughly planned so we haven't had to think about it again on the two occasions he has gone out shopping since 15th March. Making the shopping list on the other hand takes about two days, because it has to be incredibly detailed: he is so mortified if he gets something that is a bit wrong, or fails to fetch one of the things on the list. Instructions are essential... ("If not this, then that if possible; don't worry if there is no the other" and so on.)

Today he got eggs! The right sort and everything! Good hunter-gatherer!

My husband has taken to getting eggs as the excuse for getting the newspaper on Saturdays.

So some couples might decide that the man should go out shopping, while the more vulnerable woman stays at home, nice and safe.

DH does all the shopping now as I breastfeed. Idea is he can self-isolate in the spare room if he gets symptoms - this is the best way we found to protect our DS who isn’t the biggest baby and would probably be very unwell if he caught it.

ErrolTheDragon

Absolutely, and it will be multifactorial too, no doubt.

One hypothesis I've heard for more black Americans being severely affected, apart from poverty, access to healthcare etc, is vitamin D deficiency, which, if true, is going to have serious implications for Africa and India.

There might well be some truth in it as darker skin makes vitamin D more slowly and vitamin D has a role in the immune system.

The biggest problem is just the relatively low numbers available to study I think. There aren't enough people in each category to be able to.identify patterns at the moment.

I'm not sure if we can justify putting all men under house arrest perhaps they should all wear a tag though so that they can be tracked at all times?

ErrolTheDragon
The data from China indicated that being on immunosuppressants is a risk factor, whereas having an autoimmune condition (eg Hashimoto's thyroiditis) for which the treatment isn't an immunosuppressant wasn't.

Well, that's good news for me because I have Hashimoto's and I had been wondering. But on the other side of the coin I have to take an ACE inhibitor, which may be a risk factor according to some sources. (Including The Lancet, which I no longer take all that seriously after their publication of Andrew Wakefield's abbysmal "research" paper without peer review.)

Women are expected to change their behaviour with regard to vulnerability to sexual violence, so it's not unreasonable to wonder if men should change their behaviour in this case.

For men to change their behaviour, ie stay at home, the women that they live with will have to be willing to go out shopping. Would that work?

They'll also have to stop working if in key worker jobs, so 55% of doctors to stay at home, 70% of police etc. How do we work that?

UYScuti
I'm not sure if we can justify putting all men under house arrest perhaps they should all wear a tag though so that they can be tracked at all times?

It's called "a smart phone", isn't it?

If men are mostly at home, a 70% reduction in police will be fine.

I would have thought essential services men would be allowed a choice. But given what police are up to at present, sadly I can’t include them in that.

One hypothesis I've heard for more black Americans being severely affected, apart from poverty, access to healthcare etc, is vitamin D deficiency, which, if true, is going to have serious implications for Africa and India.

It’s more likely to due a predisposition to high blood pressure, heart disease, and diabetes at a much younger age than white people. You can live with all three conditions for a very long time when properly controlled (I have relatives who are still kicking around with all three at 100) but the minute you are exposed to a viral illness it can destroy you.

I agree. Especially older men with middle aged spread. Although this may be self defeating and contribute to the growth of middle aged spread further. 😁

For men to change their behaviour, ie stay at home, the women that they live with will have to be willing to go out shopping. Would that work?

Good point. This would have a knock on effect.
Men staying at home would mean women would have no choice but to go out, willing or not.

I would have thought essential services men would be allowed a choice. But given what police are up to at present, sadly I can’t include them in that.

You do realise that essential workers aren't just police, right? Even if you think we can loose 70% of the police (?) how about firefighters, lorry drivers, telephone engineers, refuse collectors, gas engineers, electricity engineers? All of those, the over whelming majority male, can stay at home, right? So, you're ok with having no phone, internet access, power, food in shops and don't mind if your house catches fire over the next twelve weeks?

Ok.

GrumpyHoonMain

Possibly, though I think vitamin D plays a part in those conditions too.

Again, much more research is needed but a lot of drs are recommending taking vitamin D3 now.

Men staying at home would mean women would have no choice but to go out, willing or not.

Presumably, single men would be assigned a single woman to take care of their needs too?

If men are mostly at home, a 70% reduction in police will be fine.

Why would men who would cause trouble suddenly start following the rules for this?

People arguing that my plan wont work because the police force are Male should read the original post where I mention the key workers who are (as a class) male. Obviously men have some uses and we cant keep them all locked up them buses wont drive themselves will they?

Oh, so men need to stay at home, unless they are of use and then it's ok for them to expose themselves to twice the risk of dying? Is that what you're saying?

Oh, of course, yep sounds like a totally reasonable argument. Absolutely.

I think that requiring an at risk section of the populace, who also have a higher propensity to violent criminality as a class, but letting those that are of use slightly more freedom sounds every bit as sensible as many of the suggestions currently floating round or being enacted, tbh.

Sorry, there should have been a 'to stay in' somewhere in there for clarification.

It's not letting them have more freedom though is it? You aren't giving them any freedom, you are expecting them to expose themselves to a greater risk for your benefit.

My husband is an essential worker, currently having to go.into.peoples houses every day. I agree, let's tell men to stay home. I'm shielding so it will keep me safe too.

Great idea. All men to stay at home and women, who are at much lower risk can step up.

As I understand it (I'm not an expert), if you catch it 'in passing' - from someone in the supermarket - you are likely to get a smaller dose of the virus. Then at home, when your family catch it from you, they tend to have a bigger dose and therefore get more ill (much like chickenpox). Because of this, in our home we decided it's better for DH to shop and risk catching it, because he's likely to get more ill if he catches it from me. It's the viral load theory.
Whilst it makes sense to us, I don't know how sound an idea it is really. That's what we're doing as it stands.....

Yeah, women pull your weight a bit more...

No PertElla, just the awful selfish C*swomen

In Malaysia, they went the other way and only allowed the 'head of the household' out. This apparently led to some problems with supermarket shopping:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-52040256

It should be noted that the OP had a thread deleted last week because she suggested that the fact that the virus was disproportiantely killing men was a good thing.