• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Covid and Work, Covid Advice and General Chat


Children are at extremely low risk of becoming ill from the virus. Adults - and particularly older adults - are far more likely to be seriously ill and die from complications. The largest study done so far, involving more than 55,000 hospital patients, found that only 0.8% were under the age of 19.8 hours ago
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-5...ren are at extremely low,under the age of 19.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52003804#:~:text=Children are at extremely low,under the age of 19.
This report goes on to point to the remarkably lower rates of transmission from kids to adults from the studies done to date. So we should not imagine that this spreads in the same way that cols and flu do amongst the young.
Schools are not like care homes in terms of the actual risks of serious illness and death in the setting and to the wider community.
In the meantime please think about the risk to our next generation (the ones that have to pay for the lockdown and your ongoing support if you opt out of going back to work) if they cannot return to school in September or have to be taught in masks or have an inferior version of education (blended learning).
The lockdown was supposed to protect the vulnerable but it seems to me we failed at this because we neglected care homes for the sake of saving the NHS. Lets not throw children under the bus too! (Children's Commissioners phrase not mine).
 
I agree. The rules are absurd but it is also true that it seems a lot of infection occurs in homes (I woould interpret the lack of clarity on this as being about a reluctance to stigmitise the Musliim communities in the North West) therefore if you are afraid of infection or live with granny perhaps you should take additional precautions like not going to the pub but if you are unafraid and healthy why not use our pubs? Yes the infection rate will go up but if the rate of hospitalisations and deaths doesn't go up (and it didn't after BLM marches and mass invasions of the Dorset coast etc.) why does that matter?
The government seems happy to decimate large parts of our economy (beauty, travel , city centres, small pubs and restaurants) so I am not sure why people feel this is a question of lives over livelihoods. IMO this is a weak government that has got itself trapped in its own fear-mongering narrative and now doesn't dare to show a clear way out of this fiasco.
 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...more-easily-schools-than-thought-report-warns

So looks like we're back to over tens at least being thought to be just the same as adults in transmission .
All this talk of them not being able to transmit or unlikely to do so is based on no proven scientific basis at all. Funnily it fits a model that pushes the economy first so parents can go back to school. I have to wonder if that is why this theory is do actively promoted by some.
Nobody argues that fatalities amongst young children are anything but rare but their role as spreaders is completely unknown. If you're vunerable you need to be just as vigorous in your shielding procedures as around adults.
As to those in care homes they were effectively abandoned to their fate at the start of the pandemic with the government telling the public that care homes were safe environments ( rather like they are saying about schools) they were not supplied with the ppe they needed ( rather like schools magically are not an environment where face masks are necessary but shops are) . Then there is the unforgiveable way that the government encouraged patients to he discharged back to care homes from hospitals so transmitting the virus to the most vunerable population of all. It's clear to see what the outcome of this policy was. So if I'm asked to simply trust the government on what it says and believe their science that suits their agenda then forgive me if I decline.
If you're vunerable you need to look after yourself because to you at least your life is more important than the economy.
 
I agree a lot of infection occurs; n the home. You live closest to these people so it's logical if one has it they are more likely to transmit it in the family. However the virus has to be brought into the home in the first place and that is obviously from an outside environment.
You reference BLM marches ,south coast beaches outdoor environments and imho it's looking increasingly likely the virus does not transmit well outside unless singing shouting and cheering are high levels. People in this thread are concerned more about indoor work environments where transmission is more likely so are asking for the option for the vunerable to work from home and if not then for strict risk assessment of the work area. They do not seem to be getting these option. I have no specific issue with pubs but more with the absurdity of the rules which I see you agree .
 
Last edited:
I don't think anyone doubts the importance of education for children, that's a given, but the Government are playing a game of let's see what happens and with experiments and data from the scientific community that proves absolutely nothing one way or another it's a dangerous game.

This is the only link I can find re ONS figures reveal 65 COVID-related deaths in education workforce. Interestingly it's from early May and one has to realise for the three or so months that these statistics were based on a majority of schools would have been closed, bar those catering for key workers children or those with Care Plans.

https://schoolsweek.co.uk/ons-figures-reveal-65-covid-related-deaths-in-education/

As I say education is important but what concerns me and not just in an education setting, is the Governments apparent about turn on the clinically vulnerable. After all it was the Government who back in March told people with certain conditions that they were vulnerable. It was the Government who stated that half of those were to shield and half were to stringently social distance and work from home. It's now the same Government who are insisting that those same people go back into the workplace and yet what has changed with the virus? Er, nothing!! It's suddenly become a one size fits all regarding risk guidelines and that is very wrong.

I can remember (a long time ago) being quite affected when I was at school and we lost our History teacher mid term with a heart attack. We talk about the mental aspect of no school for children but ignore the possible mental impact on how the cross the board opening of schools could affect the health of the children themselves, staff, parents, siblings and grand parents.
 
Well said Max. I dont think there can be many people who are not deeply concerned about the physical and emotional wellbeing of all childeren from pre schoolers. My grandson starts "big school" in September . So far the source of comfort in this pandemic is the hope that he and his two year old brother are not physically as at much risk from the virus. Emotionally of course is a different matter and its heartbreaking.
I'm one of those much maligned baby boomers. I enjoyed university without a lifetime of debt. I'm mortgage free thanks to my parents hard work. If needed rather than opt out of work and lounge around on benefits that my grandsons will be paying for I have a small amount of savings that can keep me safe for a while. Yep I'm alright thankyou very much. That's not the point though is it? It's about compassion and understanding for those who are in a very different position. Those who through no fault of their own or sheer bad luck find themselves in an impossible position. It's not about unfounded fear or laziness. It's about ever changing guidelines ineqitably applied. Anyone can find themselves in a vulnerable position financially or due to an accident or sudden onset of illness. Everyone should find it within themselves to find some compassion and look more deeply at the society they live in. A society is judged on how it treats it's most vulnerable. Certainly at the moment we should be hanging our heads in shame.
 
I don't like the linking together of fear with concern.

Concern for others as well as ourselves.

Concern is being caring and responsible. It is not cowardice, fear or anything negative.

Concern is the spur to protect all of us.

Speaking out against unknowns is not cowardice or fear. It is being sensible and considerate and caring for others.

Especially when the risk of an unknown, like the rate of infection from children, has such serious consequences for everyone.
 
Max68 said:
Totally agree with both above posts. Our ability to consciously show concern, care, empathy, support, protection of the vulnerable are traits that are "meant" to separate us as human beings from others in the Animal Kingdom.
Click to expand...
Apart from elephants apparently.
Edit to add: They mourn their dead. Also they hang back to allow an injured elephant to keep up with the herd.
 
Last edited:
Please don't assume that someone who puts the other side is heartless or lacking in concern.
I get that there is anxiety. I was anxious as I continued to work until I was furloughed when my workplace closed.
We have been told to be anxious and IMO the wearing of masks and the ever changing rules keep us anxious/concerned because if this virus is still out there and it is and it will be in the coming months AND you fear you are at high risk of death or serious illness then of course you would be doubtful about mingling again at your place of work. You will know that not everyone is scrupulous about their hygiene, social distancing or masks. The media has now gone from reporting actual deaths (very low) to case numbers (rising but so far not leading to more hospitalisations or deaths
But this level of fear seems unjustified based on the actual case fatality rates which even in an apparently high death rate country like ours are still at 0.08 % (88 in 100,000 ) with that risk concentrated in the over 80s who have very weak immune systems due to their co morbidities. For comparison I've listed the recent pandemics of our age
disease Estimated case fatality rate (CFR)
SARS-CoV 10% (NOT THE CURRENT VERSION)
Venkatesh and Memish (‎2004)‎
Munster et al. (2020)
MERS-CoV 34%
Munster et al. (2020)
Seasonal flu (US) 0.1 to 0.2%
US CDC
Ebola 50%
40% in the 2013-16 outbreak

Isn't it valid to question why everyone is so anxious and yes I know I am in the minority here and in doing so I am not being 'supportive' of your concerns which seems to mean I won't just agree with everyone that is all too scary and that we need to go and hide for the forseeable future.

WHO (2020)
Shultz et al. (2016)
 
Hi All,
I’ve not read all the previous posts as there’s a lot, but I’m uncertain re getting back to normal work role. I’m 62 with T1 for 46yrs. BG results not too bad and I’m a little overweight - bordering on the edge of obese but Bmi actually 29.
I’m a social worker but working from home throughout this pandemic as clinically vulnerable. My boss is about to do a risk assess to see if I can return to going into peoples homes to assess again - with Ppe?
I’ve had a chat with my doc and she said the risk assess should come out as high and she wouldn’t advise I return to full work role due to Covid still being very Relevant and spikes being seen in areas about 25mls from here.
I need to discuss this with my manager.
 
I hope it goes well. I'm sure there are ways risk can be reduced. GP has reservations so that is important. Hopefully your manager will be fully supportive.
 

I know where you are coming from Nicole and see your side of the coin as well. I'm certainly not particularly bothered about Flu for instance and so far in 50 years I haven't had it, bad colds yes, but never flu. I've had Norovirus and Food Poisoning and never felt so ill but whilst it took me a good month to recover from Norovirus I knew that sooner or later I would be back to 100%.

That's the difference with Covid. We are always nervous of the unknown and we just don't know with this virus because some stats say this some stats say that and Government advice is so wishy washy! It's not "just" a case of you will either live or die with Covid but what are the possible effects long term going to be? I read an article yesterday saying that Doctors will have to interact with recovering Covid patients via Zoom or phone because there are quite a few that will need longer term treatment after recovering. Some people still can't walk for long before they get breathless, others are suffering in other physical ways, some quite serious and only 6 months or so into this pandemic we don't know what the longer term effects will be.

I don't think it's necessarily a case of hiding, it's more a case of wanting to be in control of your own risk. When I get in a car I put a seatbelt on. If I got into the school minibus and was told I wasn't allowed to wear a seatbelt I would question it and wear one anyway. If I was told no then I would refuse to ride in the minibus as I am in control of my own risk.

Today I went to a restaurant for the first time. Went and sat outside with my ex and had fish and chips for the first time in about 5 months!! (A treat and it was lovely!!) I was a bit nervous and looked at the cutlery and salt pot in a way I have never looked at cutlery before!! Felt quite awkward but there was only one other couple tables away and I wouldn't have gone if it had been inside. Still feel though did I do the right thing, but it was my risk and by sitting outside I negated some of that risk. When I am due back in a classroom come September though it's like it or lump it. I'm inside and I have no choice in the matter and am heavily relying on others who as you quite rightly say will maybe not be as "hot" on their hygiene and social distancing. Now I'm nervous because the Government told me as a diabetic that I should be nervous and yet I am now not going to be allowed to assess my own personal risk as an apparently clinically vulnerable person (which the Government told me) if I want to still have a job and a pay-packet, and that is what is wrong.
 

I have acquired some brilliant mini wipes, perfect for wiping cutlery, round the rims of cups and glasses or anything else like that. They are in small sachets, so easy to carry about in pockets, wallets or handbags. We are currently on holiday and have taken advantage of the eat out to help out 50% discount on meals in places where we could eat outside. Like you, I have been anxious about cutlery, drinking vessels, cruet sets etc. but having these wipes has been a godsend for us. So easy to wipe round anything, and even the table and chair arms or any touchable surface in eateries such as menus. The ones I have are 70% alcohol, They are called Microsafe moist wipes. https://www.medisupplies.co.uk/Wipe...e-70%-Alcohol-Skin-Surface-Disinfectant-Wipes (other suppliers available).
 

Thank you. Do you know you forget about things like chairs etc. I sanitised my hands as soon as I was back in the car. We did consider going away for a couple of days at a place where you can either eat in the room or outside but we don't know the rules on sharing a car as obviously e live alone but in different houses!
 
Sounds like a plan. Up until a week ago the rules seemed quite specific on car sharing. Then they changed and it all seemed less specific. I havent looked this week so they may have updated again. I suppose as with most things it depends on who sharing with etc etc. Hope it works out
 
It's not just "live" or "die" though.

I have long tail covid-19. I have been ill for 12weeks now. I have better days, and worse days, but not back to normal days. I don't know when I will fully recover, or if I will fully recover.

There are, as yet, no statistics for people with this but, judging from the numbers on social media, there are a lot of us.

So let's stop thinking and discussing the risks only in terms of risk of death please.
 
I'm sorry to hear that. What is it like? Were you hospitalised? Very best wishes for a full recovery.
 

The risk of death from contracting the virus is nowhere near the figure you have quoted of.0.08.
I fear you are comparing a crude fatality figure (deaths as a percentage of whole population) with case fatality rates for SARS and flu ( deaths as a percentage of those actually infected)
Although there is much work to be done on what this actually is most scientists seem to be saying it's around 1%
If you look at current UK figures of around 400, 000 confirmed cases and around 50 000 deaths this looks much higher ( about 15%) but this is because not everyone who get s tthe virus gets tested .
A case fatality rate of about 1% is much more accurate than the 0.08 figure you quoted but I must stress is not yet proven. However the given is that we must always compare like with like so if you talk about case fatality rates in one part of the post then that needs to be compared with a case fatality figure. We can't compare apples and pears.
Also again you talk about fear and anxiety again as others have said I am probably no more fearful and anxious than the next person just because I believe we should be taking appropriate action to protect the vunerable in the work place.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…