# Just been told to shield

Discussion in 'Ask A Question' started by Doireallyneedanams, Feb 18, 2021.

1. ### Doireallyneedanams · Well-Known Member

Messages:
141
15
Trophy Points:
58
Errr.. I’ve been added to the new shielding list.

I am not diabetic, my BMI is 22. It was 30 when I was pregnant and it was last recorded as I had suspected gestational diabetes.

On my groups literally hundreds of previous GD pregnancies are reporting the same letter, but I can’t understand why diabetics aren’t told to shield, yet a previous gestational diabetes diagnosis are??

Has anyone been told to shield now?

#1
Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2021
2. ### bulkbiker Type 2 · Oracle

Messages:
19,129
12,658
Trophy Points:
298
Gotta keep the panic stoked somehow..?

• Like x 2
• Winner x 1
#2
3. ### Goonergal Type 2 · Master Retired Moderator

Messages:
13,058
19,923
Trophy Points:
298
Hi there

There’s a new system in place as of today, which uses an algorithm. From what I can see, running my own figures through this calculator, postcode is making a big difference.

https://qcovid.org/Calculation

And this is the basis for the algorithm: https://digital.nhs.uk/coronavirus/risk-assessment/population

Editing to show my scores (with an HbA1c in the 30s for over 3 years now, I think leaving diabetes out if the equation is justified as a variable):

- Based on non-diabetic status, postcode not added (risk of contracting Covid and dying)

Absolute risk - 0.0046%, 1 in 21,739, 55/100

- Based on type 2, no postcode added

Absolute risk - 0.0224%, 1 in 4,464, 74/100

- Based on type 2 living in my postcode

Absolute risk - 0.0346%, 1 in 2,890, 79/100

• Informative x 2
• Winner x 1
#3
Last edited: Feb 18, 2021
4. ### woollygal Type 2 · Well-Known Member

Messages:
1,473
338
Trophy Points:
143
Yes I’m type 2 and I’ve received the shielding email this morning.
My last hba1c was 58 up from 54.

ive got my jab Tuesday. After that I’ll ring dr to see why. But I want the jab first.

#4
5. ### Doireallyneedanams · Well-Known Member

Messages:
141
15
Trophy Points:
58
Definitely! I haven’t had any info on my vaccine yet. My post partial hba1c was 30! My BMI whilst pregnant was 30/31 so perhaps that is what they have and the algorithm is using, despite it being lower now.

#5
6. ### Doireallyneedanams · Well-Known Member

Messages:
141
15
Trophy Points:
58
I just did mine, no mention of gestational diabetes on there though? Just type 1 or 2 - of which I am neither.

#6
7. ### OB87 Type 2 · Well-Known Member

Messages:
320
706
Trophy Points:
153
Perhaps it is an error ? It seems a bit surprising that you would need to shield when you aren't even diabetic.

• Agree x 2
#7
8. ### Doireallyneedanams · Well-Known Member

Messages:
141
15
Trophy Points:
58
Doesn’t it? I thought due to the increased risk, and people not having follow up hba1c’s it could be a precaution, but since I had mine in August..

#8
9. ### TriciaWs Type 2 (in remission!) · Well-Known Member

Messages:
1,114
633
Trophy Points:
173
Having checked the new system I'm expecting a shielding letter any minute.
Makes sense as research done months ago showed that having 2 of the 3 key conditions increased risks from covid19, having all 3 was even worse. I complained to the govt when they ignored this evidence in limiting the classes of people told to shield before.
In addition to reassessing overlapping risks from health conditions they've added in areas with a high proportion of poor or overcrowded housing and increased the age risk.
The housing link is established but they have to use postcode as a proxy.

#9
10. ### eabhamurphy · Well-Known Member

Messages:
94
43
Trophy Points:
38
I got a shielding letter today. I'm type 1. Have to say I was very surprised! Didn't see it coming and I used the calculator when the news story came out earlier this week. Didn't seem high enough risk to be in the new group.

• Like x 1
#10
11. ### KK123 Type 1 · Well-Known Member

Messages:
3,979
2,512
Trophy Points:
198
Hi there, what was your 'score' out of a 100 if you don't mind me asking.

#11
12. ### Lemonie Type 2 · Well-Known Member

Messages:
240
86
Trophy Points:
88
I got my email today but I was expecting it. It doesn't just take into account illnesses but also ethnicity and if your are in a deprived area etc. It looks at the whole picture. Mine is because I am type 2 and have a couple of other autoimmune conditions and histamine intolerance.

It's done autonomously and does say if you think there has been a mistake to contact them. You also are under no obligation to shield. My score was 88/100.

#12
13. ### Robinredbreast Type 1 · Oracle

Messages:
18,447
27,596
Trophy Points:
298
I got 85 out of 100.

• Informative x 1
#13
14. ### lucylocket61 Type 2 · Expert

Messages:
6,132
2,685
Trophy Points:
178
I got 85/100 but no shielding letter or text or email.

#14
15. ### JFWinstone · Well-Known Member

Messages:
147
472
Trophy Points:
63
88/100 on the algorithm and got shielding letter in my email today.

#15
16. ### Ladybird1 Type 1 · Active Member

Messages:
43
36
Trophy Points:
58
I've just done the test and scored 96 out of 100

#16
17. ### Amrit1712 Type 1 · Well-Known Member

Messages:
107
55
Trophy Points:
68
I got 36/100 and received a shielding email today. Very confused

#17
18. ### HSSS Type 2 · Expert

Messages:
5,929
2,908
Trophy Points:
198
From the document @Goonergal linked to above

The research showed that most people included in the study who died from coronavirus would have had risk assessment results that placed them in approximately the top 2% of the population in England that are at the highest risk. For the combined risk of catching and dying of coronavirus, most results were higher than or equal to:​

• an absolute risk of 0.5% (or 5 in 1,000)
• a relative risk of 10 (or 10 times the baseline risk)
So no mention of scores out of 100 being the criteria used.
And

The CMO and senior clinicians decided that these thresholds should be used to help protect people who may be high risk.
Where data is missing, we have used some default values that have higher than average risk associated with them, according to QCovid®. This means that we are likely to be overestimating the level of risk for some people with information missing from their records and therefore identifying more people as potentially high risk (clinically extremely vulnerable).

As a result, some people may be advised to shield based on these default values.​

#18
19. ### Doireallyneedanams · Well-Known Member

Messages:
141
15
Trophy Points:
58
Having spent the whole afternoon reading various forums, I am still clueless.

Some GP’s have claimed it’s an error! Meant for current gestational diabetes only.

Someone called Diabetes UK and was told there has been a connection made between historic diabetes (gestational) and covid severity! And apparently a further surge in type 1 & 2 diagnosis following the recent mutations. I’m sorry, but if this was true, surely it would be breaking news! All over the place!

#19
20. ### bulkbiker Type 2 · Oracle

Messages:
19,129
12,658
Trophy Points:
298
Probably something like this guy
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ed-covid-vaccine-after-nhs-blunder-liam-thorp

• Funny x 4
• Like x 1
#20
• ### Meet the Community

Find support, connect with others, ask questions and share your experiences with people with diabetes, their carers and family.

Did you know: 7 out of 10 people improve their understanding of diabetes within 6 months of being a Diabetes Forum member. Get the Diabetes Forum App and stay connected on iOS and Android

Grab the app!