Copy of letter sent out to NHS GPs re Shielding (03/04/20)

[ringi]

While infections are falling, the UK is still seeing about 1500 new confirmed cases a day, compared with about 1000 a day in March

It is not possible to compare the number of cases as testing was very limited in March.

 

[Bluetit1802]

It is well worth checking to see the figures for our local areas, which may help us when we do our personal risk assessments.
My Local Authority area is large in area, but mainly rural. The population is 60,000. The total number of positive Covid tests since tests began, and includes all people who have since recovered or died across the whole community including nursing homes and hospitals is 103 as of yesterday (9th June) . This is comforting to me, especially as I live in the North West, the worst performing region in the country. Public Health England records cases for each local authority area.

 

[Max68]

Glad I made a stand with Government guidelines with work now and remained working from home. Member of staff has tested positive for Covid and three other staff members are getting tested as they are unwell. School has closed again and they only reopened to more pupils last week! The staff member who tested positive has "no" symptoms currently and was just randomly selected for a test.

 

[Max68]

IMO another important reason to do everything possible to avoid this virus.

https://nltimes.nl/2020/06/12/shocking-nearly-recovered-covid-19-health-issues-months-later

"Many recovered coronavirus patients who did not need to be hospitalized are still facing serious health problems months later, according to a study commissioned by the Longfonds. While 94 percent say they do not feel as healthy as they did before the viral infection, some 60 percent of this group said they still have breathing symptoms which make it difficult to take a walk, and nearly half are unable to exercise, Longfonds director Michael Rutgers said in a statement. "We find this really shocking."

 

[Tannith]

My point exactly...
Full context of my previous post is that I was given instructions in two letters and several texts to stay at home. Same as the instructions in the broadcast messages. Though there have been no follow up messages in letters or messages. So, according to Boris, it is now safe for me to go out. According to the NHS letters, and text messages, I am advised to stay home until at least 30th June. I place trust neither, and make my own decision. As for suddenly feeling safer than before, I am quite ambivalent about it.

Also, I still am wondering anyone else has had a letter or text confirming what Boris said about those shielding could now go out?

I have just picked up 2 answerphone messages left on 2 consecutive days earlier this week by the Government service, asking if I still needed my food box. They left a number to call which I did, saying I did. This gives me the impression that they are trying to phase out the food boxes. That could mean they are planning to put an end to shielding. Your guess is as good as mine.

 

[Bluetit1802]

I have just picked up 2 answerphone messages left on 2 consecutive days earlier this week by the Government service, asking if I still needed my food box. They left a number to call which I did, saying I did. This gives me the impression that they are trying to phase out the food boxes. That could mean they are planning to put an end to shielding. Your guess is as good as mine.

My shielding friend received similar texts. She told them she no longer required the food boxes as she had priority supermarket delivery slots every week. She also received a phone call from her local council funded group asking if she was managing her housework and if she required help from the mental health team.

 

[Daphne917]

I have just picked up 2 answerphone messages left on 2 consecutive days earlier this week by the Government service, asking if I still needed my food box. They left a number to call which I did, saying I did. This gives me the impression that they are trying to phase out the food boxes. That could mean they are planning to put an end to shielding. Your guess is as good as mine.

Looking at it logically shielding will come to an end at some point

 

[Tannith]

Looking at it logically shielding will come to an end at some point

I am surprised that in the interests of saving the most lives yet getting the country back to work, they don't lockdown just people over retirement age and the vulnerable and let the rest get back to business. But then they'd probably be accused of ageism.

 

[KK123]

I am surprised that in the interests of saving the most lives yet getting the country back to work, they don't lockdown just people over retirement age and the vulnerable and let the rest get back to business. But then they'd probably be accused of ageism.

Hmmmm, just like when we hate it when people assume ALL people with diabetes must be fat or greedy and therefore vulnerable to Covid, I'm sure people over 65 think the same if they are viewed as vulnerable and frail. As far as I'm concerned that IS ageism, treating a group of people the same simply because they share something in common, whether age or health conditions. Similar concept to dishing out statins willy nilly.

 

[DCUKMod]

I am surprised that in the interests of saving the most lives yet getting the country back to work, they don't lockdown just people over retirement age and the vulnerable and let the rest get back to business. But then they'd probably be accused of ageism.

Tannith - My OH is 73. In normal times, he plays golf, or goes to the gym 5 days a week. He is very healthy. The only blot on his copy book is a large gallstone. Literally one, which is being monitored.

Were it floated he should be locked in, he would rebel. He wouldn't just object. He would rebel.

He is a man who was a career naval officer, to used to working in rules and guidelines - not all of which will ever have been to his liking, but just locking anyone away because of "miles on the clock" is pretty bonkers.

I totally respect how you have chosen to handle your assessed level of risk COVID, but others, of all ages, also need to be afforded that same courtesy.

 

[Tannith]

Tannith - My OH is 73. In normal times, he plays golf, or goes to the gym 5 days a week. He is very healthy. The only blot on his copy book is a large gallstone. Literally one, which is being monitored.

Were it floated he should be locked in, he would rebel. He wouldn't just object. He would rebel.

He is a man who was a career naval officer, to used to working in rules and guidelines - not all of which will ever have been to his liking, but just locking anyone away because of "miles on the clock" is pretty bonkers.

I totally respect how you have chosen to handle your assessed level of risk COVID, but others, of all ages, also need to be afforded that same courtesy.

Yes, I agree it would be ageist to do that. I am not specially advocating it, and would certainly not want to see anyone, even the very highest risk groups, actually forced to stay indoors. However I would have thought that older and otherwise more vulnerable people would actually want to stay in, because of their high risk of dying or being very ill if they got it. Many on here seem to wish they could get supermarket slots to enable them to stay in, but can't because they are not on the "shielding" database.They are therefore effectively forced to go out to get food when they would feel safer, and indeed be safer, indoors.

 

[Bluetit1802]

Yes, I agree it would be ageist to do that. I am not specially advocating it, and would certainly not want to see anyone, even the very highest risk groups, actually forced to stay indoors. However I would have thought that older and otherwise more vulnerable people would actually want to stay in, because of their high risk of dying or being very ill if they got it. Many on here seem to wish they could get supermarket slots to enable them to stay in, but can't because they are not on the "shielding" database.They are therefore effectively forced to go out to get food when they would feel safer, and indeed be safer, indoors.

I certainly do not want to stay in, and I am by no means alone in this, despite my advanced years. Along with many thousands of others, I actually want to spend time with my family, even at a 2 meter distance. I want to go for walks, I want to visit our special safe places for day trips, and when the rules on self catering English cottages are relaxed, I want to go on holiday. I am very aware that as I grow older I don't have a great deal of time left, and have no intention of spending it cocooned in my home 24/7.

 

[DCUKMod]

Yes, I agree it would be ageist to do that. I am not specially advocating it, and would certainly not want to see anyone, even the very highest risk groups, actually forced to stay indoors. However I would have thought that older and otherwise more vulnerable people would actually want to stay in, because of their high risk of dying or being very ill if they got it. Many on here seem to wish they could get supermarket slots to enable them to stay in, but can't because they are not on the "shielding" database.They are therefore effectively forced to go out to get food when they would feel safer, and indeed be safer, indoors.

As I stated in my earlier post, I respect if others want to live their lives differently to me or anyone else for that matter. I think what some people feel is that being stuck indoors, not taking part in society isn't really living, or more accurately, it isn't a life they find at all palatable.

Earlier this afternoon, whilst outside gardening my neighbour's long term, but non-cohabiting partner visited her. He has chronic leukaemia, so is on the shielding list.

We exchanged pleasantries, at a distance, and I commented it was good to see him and obviously asked him how he'd been He stated he felt imprisoned.

I don't for a minute think he's looking to meet his maker any time soon, but he certainly has had quite enough of being indoors.

 

[JohnEGreen]

I went to the shop this morning, normally a statement that would be totally mundane and unremarkable but not today and not for me, for today it was a death defying act of rebellion with the possibility of great risk attached to it. How times change.

 

[Mr_Pot]

I went to the shop this morning, normally a statement that would be totally mundane and unremarkable but not today and not for me, for today it was a death defying act of rebellion with the possibility of great risk attached to it. How times change.

I hope you remembered the Green Cross Code.

 

[Tannith]

I certainly do not want to stay in, and I am by no means alone in this, despite my advanced years. Along with many thousands of others, I actually want to spend time with my family, even at a 2 meter distance. I want to go for walks, I want to visit our special safe places for day trips, and when the rules on self catering English cottages are relaxed, I want to go on holiday. I am very aware that as I grow older I don't have a great deal of time left, and have no intention of spending it cocooned in my home 24/7.

It's not so much that I want to stay indoors, just that that is the only way I don't have to worry about catching the virus. Unlike you, I have no car to go to secret quiet places, or to see my grandchildren.Of course I would love to see them but it would involve public transport, bus, train & taxi in one case and buses and plane in another. Not possible Most people I know are my age, so they can't go out either. No way of chatting with friends then, except on phone. Walks would be pleasant, but also alone for the same reasons. I have a nice view,so staying in is not such an ordeal. I am just having to accept that 6 months indoors may be the price I have to pay for staying alive for the next decade. Social distancing means that all the things I would normally do when outside are off limits. Ordinary bacterial chest infections are pretty horrendous with COPD. They last for 5-6 weeks and the cough is very painful. Goodness knows what covid would be like even if you don't actually die of it. No thank you.

 

[JohnEGreen]

I hope you remembered the Green Cross Code.

I remembered it but did not follow it today has been a day when I threw all caution to the wind.

had a slice of toast for breakfast then went to the shop totally ignoring the green cross code had a bacon sarnie for lunch smoked three cigarettes had a roast meal for dinner including a roast potato stood in the back garden with an umbrella during a thunder storm and finished of with a bowl of rice pudding with a whole teaspoon of strawberry jam mixed in and I'm still alive and kicking . I think during last night at sometime I went crazy hopefully that will reverse itself tonight.

 

[ringi]

I am surprised that in the interests of saving the most lives yet getting the country back to work, they don't lockdown just people over retirement age and the vulnerable and let the rest get back to business. But then they'd probably be accused of ageism.

It can't work, as the people who most need protecting have carestaff and it is impossible to stop the carestaff socialising if the rest of the population are allowed to do so.

 

[JohnEGreen]

New advice for those shielding to be announced very soon says Matt Hancock, I don't think I will be waiting for Matt Hancock to push me out the door I will make the decision for my self.

 

[tanglung]

Talk it will be extended until end of July then it will finish.