Please ensure that your children and grandchildren follow the guidelines.

I mean that there have been very serious diseases that have evolved that show all the signs of quickly spreading worldwide, were it not for inposition of social controls on victims and their contacts and even limits on what happens to the bodies of victims after death as distinct from any medical treatments developed to treat the disease. I would place Ebola SARS and MERS in that category.

So with respect M0nica what do you mean by we are already having pandemics every few years ?

No, I am not dismissing Ebola, on the contrary, that is the disease that frightens me most and the fact that on every occasion, even in war-torn countries it has nor spread because of the control methods introduced even in countries with a very poor health system is also our greatest reason for believing that potential pandemic diseases can and will be stopped in their tracks. COVID will be the exception to the rule. For me the difference between an illness and what effectively would be a pandemic is where the spread of the disease is curtailed by social control rather than just medication. There were real fears that SARS, MERS and Ebola could become pandemics.

I should have made it clear I am reading a book on the Paston papers and it is 8 members of that family that died in 1479.

Oops - foretelling the future!
2013-2016!

M0nica Only 8 people died in 1479? Really?

You say
We are already having a pandemic every few years. The difference between a pandemic and other new diseases, is what it looks like and how quickly it can be brought under control
And then you say
. Ebola, SARS and MERS were all potentially pandemic diseases

So what do you consider were the pandemics we have every few years ?
I think you have dismissed rather lightly the concentrated campaign against Ebola - which has actually recurred several times in the last 40years and at least once since the epidemic we all remember between 2013-3016. Only as it was in the countries around equatorial Africa, such as Uganda, the Congo, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea, Sudan etc it did not make front page news here.

We are already having a pandemic every few years. The difference between a pandemic and other new diseases, is what it looks like and how quickly it can be brought under control. Ebola, SARS and MERS were all potentially pandemic diseases.

I was really worried by Ebola, so infectious, so fatal and having its base in the heartlands of Africa, where one country was in an almost permanent state of war and where limited health facilities meant it could very easily run out of control. But control it we did, a rush to develop a vaccine - as with COVID, effective containment and effective communication that changed the way people changed their cultural norms to protect themselves.

SARS and MERS were also brought under control as the result of high intensity reearch and medical responses across international boundaries.

I know COVID has caused particular problems for medical reasons I do not fully understand, that is why the pandemic has occurred, but that is only one in 4 that has been difficult to control. I am sure potential pandemic diseases will appear, but I expect that in general they will be contained before they spread.

There is nothing unusual in this. We remember 1918, because that was the last pandemic disease to run out of control but flu is still with us in various forms andwith our school history the dates of the Great Plague events; 1348/9, 1664/5 but plague was a regular visitor in this country ad others. In a history book I am currently reading, 8 people died in 1479, it was a plague year and the correspondence I am reading makes it clear that mini epidemics of disease, not just plague, but others as well were just accepted as part of life.

Franbern Whilst recorded deaths at the moment may be around 9 per day, between mid March and 7 August (about 5 months) the covid-19 registered deaths was 51,879. That averages out at 345 per day over a 5 month period.

The total number of recorded deaths in 2019 was 530,841. No recorded covid deaths in the UK that year.

It seems likely that the numbers will increase again over the winter and we are obviously aware of the way in which it can spread through care homes and the elderly living at home, particularly those with underlying illnesses.

I am not interesting in applying blame to anybody; as others have said this is divisive. But, pointing out the age range of those currently affected is not pointing fingers at anyone. The numbers are out there for anyone to see.

The older generation know what to do, in order to keep themselves healthy, something we didn't know 6 or 7 months ago. Most of us have been self isolating for much of that time. But it seems that the younger generations aren't all quite so aware, partly because until recently we were told that the young won't catch it, and if they do, it won't be serious.

As the numbers tested increases it is likely that the percentages of people affected will change, with the percentage of younger people increasing. After all, it is the younger ones, of working age who are most likely to be tested because of their need to work. They might not know that a colleague is carrying the disease until someone in their work place shows symptoms and their colleagues have had to self isolate/get a test. An example of this is the Banham poultry factory in Norfolk where 127 workers tested positive.

All that I was, and still am saying, is that younger people should be made aware about catching the illness in the first place and also that the illness can sometimes have longer lasting effects than anticipated. The young man that I referred to says that he is aware of the day on which he caught the virus, what he doing and wishing he hadn't done whatever it was.

One more thought. Because we are talking about the younger generation perhaps the percentage of those reading left wing papers is much higher than the percentage of GNers. In which case they will have read the above mentioned article and others and so are already more aware.

Grandad
I'm afraid it is as simple as that.

MerylStreep

So what are 'we' going to do when the next pandemic comes along? Because its going to happen.
According to one of the scientists on the Extinction program last night we can expect one every decade.
The world can't sustain the lockdowns over and over.

Then the human race will as a species be eliminated along with all the other species the human race is by its actions is eliminating.

Simple as that.

So what are 'we' going to do when the next pandemic comes along? Because its going to happen.
According to one of the scientists on the Extinction program last night we can expect one every decade.
The world can't sustain the lockdowns over and over.

Totally agree with you Franbern our children have lost out far too much already.

I do agree with you Monica, in that you are taking the best care in your particular circumstances. I just thought you would be interested in the view of a medic. Since you have reactive skin it is probably the best idea to use gloves, just be careful as you remove them. I’m sure you are being very careful anyway.
I know about the reactive skin, my daughter used to suffer when she was training, but she seems to use the gel now without problems, although it may be that she uses the double gloving instead. To be honest, she was a bit over the top with us when the pandemic first started, but I put that down to the training she had received. Every medic, in this area at least, was told that they would all lose someone in their family, and there was unlikely to be room in ITU for people over sixty and certainly no ventilators for older people (remember the mad rush to produce ventilators?) She was determined to protect us and consequently I did not leave my house for over a month, but then started to walk around the local area a bit. I never went shopping at all for over three months. DH was using gloves when he popped to deliver my mother’s shopping to her, which we had included as part of our order. Our daughter really told him off, saying he was more at risk with gloves than without, as he didn’t know the protocols with gloves. He had been trying to reassure her that he took the greatest care.
Anyway Monica, it sounds as though you are being very careful. So I’ll eat my lunch and have a and mind my own business.

Thanks Bluebelle - you have put how I think so well.
I am concerned at the increasing attitude of people desperately trying to find someone else to blame. People reporting on neighbours if they think they have more than six people there (not talking about holding parties,m jut general meeting up).
Whilst nine death a day from Covid, so very many more from illnesses that have largely been ignored over the last six months, cancers, etc. and, the usual increasing number which will start the usual winter deaths from flu and pneumonia, as well as the big increase in suicides and this will get far worse as furlough schemes cease and evictions rates get going again.
If many older people feel unsafe in mixing out and about, then they often have the advantage of being able to stay in their nice homes. Nothing should stop the children and young people being able to get on with their lives in their educational establishments.

I am not a doctor in a medical situation. I am on ordinary woman in the street with sensitive skin that becomes red and cracked when subject to constant washing and slathering in alcoholic sanitising jell. Such cracked raw skin is far more likely to be affected by any virus or bacteria it comes in contact with than unaffected skin.

I keep a box of gloves in the hall, take pairs out when I leave the house and put them in my handbag, where nobody but I dare go. Put them on as I reach the shop and I take them off afterwards by the approved method, pulling the top down over the glove, effectively turning it inside out. I put it in the designated receptacle an throw it out when I reach home. Presented with sanitiser when out I slather the gloves with it.

No, this would not reach the standards acceptable in hospital, but the people I see masked everywhere are not masked up to hospital standards either. it is horses for courses. What we are doing is reducing risk by protection, not seeking to remove it totally, which a hospital must. To do that we would all have to be locked in our houses totally self sufficient in everything.

I live in an area that has a very low incidence of COVID, my chances of getting it are low, my protective stance eliminates part of the remaining risk.

As I keep saying it is a question of understanding the real risk. I cannot eliminate all risk, but given where I live. I am currently more likely to be injured or killed in a traffic incident than catch COVID.

Monica
You may be interested to know, but my daughter is a doctor, and has told us that on no account should we use gloves in an attempt to protect ourselves. She has told me that the medical protocols regarding the use of PPE, which includes gloves, are not followed by members of the public, which makes using gloves a greater hazard. For example, she spoke of double gloving, and particular protocols for removal which ensure no cross contamination. She said use sanitiser, it is safer for non medics.
I use sanitiser as I go into a shop and as I come out again, and liberally whilst unpacking the shopping.
Just thought you might like to know the views of a medic. After she told us this, we stopped using gloves.

Growstuff
I’m glad you agree with me that children should go to school. When I mention children I particularly mean primary children because I realise secondary children are a different dynamic and need different arrangements. Possibly, as you mention, they could attend school half time. Of course that will still radically affect their life chances if it has to continue for more than this academic year.
Older people are capable of making decisions for themselves. Children are not. I’m surprised that some people don’t recognise this simple fact. Older people can completely isolate if they so desire, or they can take all reasonable precautions to protect themselves. But we cannot get away from the fact that older people are at the end of their lives, I’m 67 and am taking precautions in order to try to stay alive to see my grandchildren grow up (my oldest grandchild is eight years old, and the youngest is two!) However my grandchildren have barely started their lives and deserve special consideration, along with all other young children, and that means going to school. The United Nations actually mentions that one of the rights of a child is the right to education. And yes, although I think what has happened in our care homes is reprehensible, I do think very young children should have greater rights to a normal life than people who are extremely old and at the end of their lives anyway. I realise that this is a controversial view, but as an ex primary teacher, I’m afraid it is my view. I totally agreed with the complete lockdown initially, including the closing of schools, but now we must balance the needs of different sections of society, and therefore schools must remain open wherever possible.
I have already mentioned that my elderly mother is 92 years old and I have done everything possible to ensure that she did not contract Covid19. She lives in a sheltered apartment quite close to me. If necessary she may need to go back into a personal lockdown this winter, but I do not think either she, or myself, should have greater rights than our youngest, and most easily damaged, members of society.

M0nica in regard to your post @09:54 today the real risk of this Covid-19 crisis is now the respect for the authority of the law of Britain.

That Covid-19 legislation is now very clear in stating no gatherings of more than six persons, and face masks having to be worn in enclosed spaces etc.

However, you state that each person should carry out a risk assessment in regard to their own vulnerabilities and live by that. Therefore, in your analysis, a person who feels they are at low risk from the infection seriously damaging their health can decide to associate in groups far larger than six and not wear a mask in an enclosed space.

In carrying out the above he or she are possibly correct in their assessment of the hazard to their own health. That stated they are at much higher risk of incurring and carrying the infection and therefore each time they come into contact with others who may well be at much higher risk of serious illness should they incur the infection the person who has not followed the legislation carries a much greater likelihood of passing on Covid-19 to the person with much higher vulnerability.

In the above, I would call those who flout the regulations totally and utterly selfish and the full weight of the law should be brought against them at every opportunity.

Dinahmo To address the issues you raise directly. '12% have symptoms lasting more than 30 days'. What is so exceptional about that? Get any bug or virus from the common cold to flu and I would say that considerably more than 12% take at least a month to fully get over it - at any age.

Half a percent (1 in 200) have symptoms lasting more than 90 days. Again I would say this is par for the course with any illness. looking back to my 30s and 40s, I can remember occasionally getting a winter bug in the run up to Christmas that seemed to hang me so that I never felt entirely better until the Spring.

Any illness, mild or serious will hit some people unexpectedly badly and COVID is no exception, but there is little evidence to suggest that this is happens more often with COVID than any other illness.

The real threat of COVID is still to older people, so possibly the sensible thing to do is for older people to be more cautious in their contact with people in the 20 - 40 age group. As I keep saying, whatever the rules, it is sensible for people to make realistic assumptions about their risks in the area and family/social milieu they live in.

growstuff, I am neither adding to the risks, nor dismissing them. Like others I have been wearing a mask and gloves when shopping right from day one, long before they were compulsory, based on my assessment of where the risks really lay for me, and also my risk to other people

But at a time when the rules are so confusing and contradictory, we all need to learn to assess and understand the risks we face and neither blindly obey them - going in to a restaurant for a meal, which is legal, even though you are concerned about how close the tables, nor over protect. There was a mother on the radio who said she wasn't sending her children back to school until she could be 100% certain they would not pick up COVID. A clearly ludicrous condition that it will be impossible ever to meet.

The only option if this epidemic is not to change everyone's lives in Britain for many years to come is to ensure that everyone complies with regulations as they are redrawn and announced.

For England, the regulation is now straightforward, with no gathering of more than six persons with the exception of a larger single household. However, without doubt, we will all witness that regulation being flouted by large numbers of people in public houses, cafes, restaurants and in illegal raves and other gatherings.

To restore respect for the Covid-19 regulations the police must react strongly wherever they witness such flouting of those regulations by way of closing down pubs restaurants etc who's owners are not enforcing the legislation and breaking up raves and other legal gatherings with whatever strong action is required.

The problem is at this point that many now believe, quite rightly so, that the police will not enforce the legislation or are incapable of doing so. Here in North Somerset which falls under the Avon and Somerset Constabulary, the force in recent months have stood by inactive while two well-publicised very large illegal raves have taken place and a public statue in Bristol city centre was pulled down, rolled through the streets and dumped in the harbour all in full view of the police and media. No one, as far as I am aware, has been arrested or prosecuted for any of the above acts.

Therefore if the Covid-19 pandemic in Britain is to be once more brought back under control, respect for the emergency legislation and the authorities that enforce it has to be brought about, and in that the police must be supported in whatever it takes to achieve that end.

Then perhaps we will all get to see our families once again.

have been wearing a mask in public (and limiting my trips) since March when this whole thing went down.
I’m not sure how being considerate to others for the common good is now being mocked by some who are calling it “living in fear,” but it needs to stop....
When I wear a mask over my nose and mouth in public and in the stores/Supermarkets/Pharmacies/Offices - I want you to know the following:
? I'm educated enough to know that I could be asymptomatic and still give you the virus.
? No, I don't "live in fear" of the virus; I just want to be part of the solution, not the problem.
? I don't feel like the "government controls me.” I feel like I'm an adult contributing to the security in our society and I want to teach others the same.
? If we could all live with the consideration of others in mind, the whole world would be a much better place.
? Wearing a mask doesn't make me weak, scared, stupid or even "controlled.” It makes me caring and responsible and altruistic.
? When you think about your appearance, discomfort, or other people's opinion of you, imagine a loved one - a child, father, mother, grandparent, aunt, uncle or even a stranger - placed on a ventilator, alone without you or any family member allowed at their bedside.....Ask yourself if you could have helped them a little by wearing a mask.

The same goes for trying to observe the very muddled rules. set by this government. And for this we get called Covid fascists.

growstuff

Furret

What is nasty is calling those who are trying to do their bit ‘Covid fascists’.

Who's calling anybody that?

Read the thread lovey and see.

I think you will find that those who think children are more important than granny, are referring to their children, and not refugee children fleeing bombs, terrorists or famine. Those children and their families are to be left to rot in refugees camps while the privileged few must fully enjoy their university experience.

What a world we have created.

Furret

What is nasty is calling those who are trying to do their bit ‘Covid fascists’.

Who's calling anybody that?

Furret

No not nasty. That is just because you disagree with it.

I disagree. I think it's very nasty. Maybe you'd be happier if a few of them died, just because young people in the past did. It's all part of the "blame game" people are being encouraged to play.