Should lockdown for the over 70s be extended when it’s relaxed for everyone else?

grow just for absolute clarity your point no 2 is everyone over 70 ( regardless of whether they have a medical condition or not) plus anyone of any age with certain medical conditions. I think the press are ramping this up ( to coin a phrase) because big business wants the nation back at work regardless so is basically attacking the need for lockdown on many fronts - and many over 70s are needed for childcare.

I don't get it either, except that there are so many misleading, and quite frankly wrong, messages circulating around social media. I can't read the whole article, but it seems as though even the Sunday Times has jumped on this bandwagon.

It's doing my head in too. There are three groups:

1 The extremely clinically vulnerable (as you say estimated to be about 1.5 million), who have been told to stay at home (shielded). They have quite serious medical conditions and are eligible for food boxes and online supermarket shopping slots. They are not discriminated against by age, but by medical condition.

2 Those over 70 and with certain medical conditions - generally speaking, these are people who are eligible eligible for an NHS flu jab. They have been warned that they are at high risk and are strongly advised to stay at home if possible. The warning is for their own benefit, but they are not eligible for a food box. They are not being locked up in their own homes.

3 Everybody else.

It really isn't that difficult to understand. The government seems to think people will do the right thing and follow the guidance they've been given. Sadly, it seems the trust is, in some cases, misplaced.

grow the coverage of this issue over the last few days is literally doing my head in. The press is getting it wrong (quelle surprise) Matt Hancock got it wrong ( truly disgraceful) and lots of people on social media including GN. The people who got the letter ( or should have) number about 1.5 m ( I’ve seen various estimates). They got the letter because of a very specific medical condition which made them clinically extremely vulnerable and were basically told to stay at home for 12 weeks - they are described as being shielded. No one in this group got a letter based on their age. A much bigger group including over 70s, people with diabetes, hypertension, asthma etc were classified as clinically vulnerable and advised to minimise contact. But they are all as free to act within the guidance as anyone else. I just don’t get why people don’t get it.

BlueBelle I only feel safe within my four walls because I don't trust the plonkers around to have kept to the rules! If I knew everybody had been as careful as I've been, I would actually feel safer leaving my four walls.

BlueBelle For the very last time … If a 70 year old has no underlying health issues, he/she is not restricted from doing anything that the vast majority of people have been advised not to do!!

What the government has done is, quite rightly, warn people over 70 (and those with certain medical conditions) that they are at greater risk of being badly affected by the virus. They are, therefore, being warned to be especially careful to observe the rules about social distancing.

Why, oh why, to people insist on claiming that they are being discriminated against, when they are being warned about something which could affect their health and life?

I feel as though I’m missing something - the over 70s are not being treated differently to under 70s in so far as what they can and can’t do. The only difference is the advice. What they are getting ime is the advantage of a priority booking slot and generous offers of help from local communities. As and when changes are introduced, it’s surely not feasible that the Government would mandate ( as opposed to strongly advise) certain groups to have minimal social contact. Atm there is absolutely no difference so far as what a 70 year old and a 35 year old are allowed to actually do.

I m not suggesting we go out to a party growstuff I m meaning that there should be and it seems as if there will be a level of movement and not a strict line of 70
Why would a reasonably fit 70 year old be protected more than a 65 year old
I have no intention of going to meet ups or even meals or anything like that but I will go out and not live the rest of my life in fear, or waiting for a vaccine that will be hurried through and may not be the full answer anyway, I totally understand anyone who se not too well whatever age staying confined but it shouldn’t have a cut off age it should go by the persons health and that does seem what will happen
By the way I m in total support of anyone of any age staying within their four walls if thats how they feel safe

How would primary school teachers and other school staff be kept safe?

BlueBelle The reason I don't feel safe about going out is because I know there are enough people out there who have been bending the rules and are inadvertently spreading the disease. They might not care about themselves, but they are affecting other people's ability to go out.

Franbern During the winter of 2017/18, there were just over 50,000 excess deaths during the winter period. It's normal for there to be excess deaths during the winter months. Approximately a third of them are caused by respiratory diseases (probably flu). It's not true at all to say they were all caused by flu, although in 2017/18 some of them were.

That works out to about 500 excess deaths a day. At the moment, the ONS is reporting approximately 6000 excess deaths a week (almost 1000 a day), which is almost double the number of excess deaths - and 2017/18 was a bad year!

The number of excess deaths (most of them caused by Covid-19) is unprecedented.

There seems to be a confusion here.....saying that if you are over 70 and fit and healthy, you are at no more risk than younger healthy people.

Unfortunately the evidence says otherwise. It seems that being older carries an inherent risk of getting the virus more severely, regardless of state of health beforehand. We should heed this, and be grateful that we have that information.

if primary school children are to go back to school to enable parents to return to work and if 70+ are to remain isolated - please do tell me where those children are going to go at 3pm??? Not credible is it?????

At last medical opinion is changing and now coming round to the idea that we should not be on lockdown only using the blanket age of 70. There are many 70-year-olds that are fitter than 60 or 50 there are many 50 and 60 year olds that are very poorly unfortunately, so I see no value in a cut-off age it should be advice only and voluntary I am sure most 70 year olds are not daft (we ve lived though a lot of life) and can make our own decisions as to whether we need to isolate fully or use sensible restrictions
I have never ever been a risk taker I ve never been a law breaker but I do feel totally capable of understanding this virus as much as anyone and being able to make an informed decision
I m not going to expect to go to my music festival or the cinema or even for a meal but I do expect (when we have the go ahead of course) to be able to go out and about without feeling everyone is calling me selfish and thoughtless
I also am respectful of anyone who can’t feel safe enough to go out and they should stay in as without a doubt

The winter 2017/2018 recorded 50,000 (yes, fifty thousand) deaths from flu in UK. No lockdown, no daily updates, no closures - no reports. Not many people even knew these figures.
Okay, I know the difference, but the flu vaccine that year just did not work, and the deaths came and came.
I do think that lockdown was a good way of spreading out the pressure on the very long-term deliberately, under-funded NHS, by a government who had failed totally to make any sort of proper advance preparations for a Pandemic that had been projected as going to happen for some years.
However, having finally got round to do something, they then had 'project fear' in place to ensure obedience by the citizens.
It has worked, there are now spaces in hospitals for those one percent who get this virus and will require hospitilisation.
Because of lack of proper testing, there is no knowledge as to how many people have actually contracted this disease, with just fairly minor effects. Be a long while before anyone does have these figures.
The 'project fear' has worked, probably too well. So many people will now have this idea that if they dare to put themselves outside of their disinfected and bleached homes they are going to die - and cause the deaths of their loved ones.
I am going on for 80 yrs, have continued to do my weekly Supermarket shop in oldies hour and am very impressed as to how well the supermarket chains are managing this. Do not feel at risk when I am there. Was also delighted and impressed with B&Q who re-opened and have put in such very good protection for all including their staff.
I go out most days. Not for a walk, not able to do that, but for a trundle round on my scooter.
My main worry is not for me catching or passing on this virus - it is for the serious economic hardships being born by far too many people. Also, for the mental health, particularly of our children and young people who have been cooped up in their homes for weeks now and are being taught that contact with other people is very dangerous .
Obviously I do not think that lockdown can just be undone. It will be a long time before pubs, sports centres, restaurants can re-open. Travel on public transport will have be kept restricted for a time for those who really require it for commuting to and from work - not for leisure.
But shops, need to open, building projects need to get going again, and people need to start realising that hashtag avoid humans is not only wrong but probably, in the long term, far more dangerous and damaging than Covid19.
Yes, and I do think they need to start getting children back to school. Not all at one, slowly, probably dividing classes in half and having them in over a day - half in morning and half in afternoon.
This is nothing to do with their educational needs, it is to do with their mental health. Dread to think how many decades of psychological damage has been done to our children.

Hetty we are putting peoples lives at risk by allowing ourselves to be dependent upon them.

That’s a shame Rosalyn as you are not alone in your thoughts. It is true that our individual actions affect others, but I’m so sad about the attitudes that are beginning to emerge in all this. The suggestion that we oldies are selfish and putting other people at risk if we dare to question the ‘rules’ is, to me, just an extension of the pitting of generations against one another. There are those who already believe we take up too much oxygen, we boomers who have had it easy, robbed the young of their birthright, and are sitting pretty with our gold plated pensions in our huge houses.

Why can’t we accept that we’re all in this together. Anyone can catch it, anyone can infect anyone else, anyone can die. If I decide (and am fortunate enough to be able to do so at little cost to myself) to stay at home to protect myself, that choice has implications for others; for my family members who do my shopping and who may themselves become ill and infect my grandchildren, for delivery drivers, for bin men and postal workers, the list goes on. If my daughter catches this from a trip to the supermarket to buy stuff for me I will never forgive myself. But can’t we just stop the blame game? It’s random, it’s no ones fault.

Rosalyn69, you said 'We are bring discriminated against' - really?

Yes, I do agree that it's mainly about protecting other people. I can't understand why you'd object to that, though.

Isn't it just plain selfish not to consider others?

Iam64, spot on. You'll also have the peace of mind from knowing, for certain, that you didn't put the life of somebody else at risk!

For my own sanity I can’t post on this thread any more.

sorry, I should have cut that to half its length before posting.\

GrannySomerset, your John Dunne's "no man is an island" is a perfect contribution to this discussion. Thanks also to Luckygirl for her contribution.

We are all in this together from cradle to grave. Our individual actions will impact on others. It isn't age discrimination to remind us that the majority of deaths from Covid come in the over 80 age group, the second group are the over 70's. The growing evidence that people from BAME backgrounds seem to be more sick and more likely to die if they get the virus is also key information.

The NHS and hopefully care providers are beginning to look at how they can give greater protection to front line BAME workers. They make up a high proportion of medical and care staff, so thats not going to be easy.

The advice we're given not to smoke, drink excessive amounts of alcohol, to eat a varied balanced diet and to exercise to our physical and mental health is supported is just that, advice. It's the same for anyone over 70, we're given the advice that we are more at risk if we get the virus. No man (or woman) is an island and if we care about society as well as our immediate loved one's, we should follow it.

I'm in a shielded group, plus Im over 70 so the advice is not to leave the house for 12 weeks. My letter arrived six weeks into lock down but I'd assumed I should be shielding, so I had done. I'm breaking the strict guideline in one way only, that is I walk once a day. I keep the distance, jump into shrubs and streams when I hear those wretched mountain bikes racing up, or joggers but otherwise, everyone keeps a friendly distance. I believe the risks are minimal and balanced by the need to keep moving and get fresh air. No one is 'making' me do anything. I don't feel discriminated against. I feel desperately sad I can't do my usual care of grandchildren, can't hug them or my own children, my friends and loved ones. I want to live if I can and come out the other side of this.

I have been staying in. It’s not nice, I miss just going out as I please . My great niece and her husband are ignoring any guidelines because they reckon they have had the virus. They might well have done but without a test, who knows and they are young and robust anyway.
I don’t know what to think. I do think that they just aren’t worried. It’s the generation that were never affected by flu epidemics, polio or Aids. It’s all new and I don’t think they understand how dangerous some things can be.

The article is in the Sunday Times.

The BMA said: “A blanket ban on any section of the population being prohibited from lockdown easing would be discriminatory and unacceptable.”

I have been hearing children and visiting adults 2 gardens away, every weekend since lockdown. Today all I hear is an adult coughing constantly. Consequences and at what cost