Gransnet forums

Health

This 'vulnerable' label ----

(91 Posts)
ExD Fri 27-Mar-20 10:37:54

There has been so much emphasis on isolating over 70s we seem to have missed that other people are just as likely to catch this virus. The very young seem to be very caring about us staying at home and getting other people to do our shopping etc - but they're forgetting that they are not immune, just less likely to become really ill, and frankly some of them seem to carrying on as though their lives haven't changed - except that the shop shelves are empty.
I do think we should emphasise that everyone whatever their age can become ill and that everyone should be self isolating unless their work is essential. I think the over 70s have got the message now.
Otherwise it will continue to spread.

notanan2 Wed 08-Apr-20 18:06:11

There is, of course, a third possibility, which is that you know better, and should be formulating the rules for the rest of us. Good luck with that.

I didnt make the rules, I just understand that a non essential journey is still a non essential journey if you avoid doing it yourself but order someone else to do it for you instead.

So if you wouldnt consider it essential enough for you or yours to do, you shouldnt be getting others to do it for you. Its still a non essential journey because of you. It has the same consequences even if you remove those consequences from your own household!

Doodledog Wed 08-Apr-20 18:30:04

I think we all understand that, though. We are not stupid.

Where I disagree with you is over who decides what is essential, and over the idea that having lots of people making journeys is somehow preferable to having a few people, taking recommended precautions, doing it en masse.

Regarding the decision over what is essential, I believe that this should be for individuals to decide, taking into account the risks to themselves and others. If we all do this, there would be a lot less ill-feeling and people getting upset and worried about things they can't control. We can (and should) be policing ourselves, and unless someone else is putting us at direct risk, we should leave them to do the same.

notanan2 Wed 08-Apr-20 18:36:14

Where I disagree with you is over who decides what is essential

I have not stated what is/isnt essential. Quite the opposite. I have stated than companies cant make lists for you because it differs from person to person, so instead you have to ask yourself: "would I risk exposing myself or my loved ones to get it"
If the answer is yes, its probably a "need" so go ahead
If the answer is no, its a "want" so its not okay to put others through unneccesary risk and stress for it.

Doodledog Wed 08-Apr-20 19:16:55

Now I think you are arguing for the sake of it.

In your very first post you mentioned craft supplies, knowing that these would be something that make a huge difference to people on here.

Anyway, I’m sick of repeating myself, so I’ll leave it there.

Motherofmany Wed 08-Apr-20 20:53:57

notanan2 I think you are being very judgmental.
I agree with HAZBEEN Have you any idea what it is like to be in complete isolation. We 73 and 76 are shut in with 5 with special needs 3 Down's Syndrome 1 deafblind cerebral palsy and youngest 14 with a rare syndrome. Yes I have been using Amazon as they all have complex health needs and we cannot go out. Thankyou Amazon 3 jigsaws and some sensory lights today!

notanan2 Wed 08-Apr-20 21:10:04

I have never said people shouldnt get what they need whatever that means to individuals.

I said that what is ordered has consequence to someone even if you're not going out yourself. And if you wouldnt be happy for a loved one to talke that risk for you for that item, but will have some strangers' loved one do ot for you, it is a want not a need

growstuff Wed 08-Apr-20 21:10:39

I agree with your post of 16.53.35 too notanan. There are also people who do things because they can. They don't think about consequences.

People in a number of distribution depots and postal workers have complained about lack of PPE and possibility for social distancing.

notanan2 Wed 08-Apr-20 21:43:39

I think some people who have the luxury of isolating themselves are imagining that everyone who is working still is in the prime of their lives, with no co-morbidities or risk factors or vulnerable household members.

And that workplaces have been remodelled into havens of social distancing

That is not whats happening out there.
There are over 65s still working. There are asthmatics still working. There are people with immune comprimised household members still working. There are non-keyworkers who cant get childcare AND cant get forloughed, still having to work!

There has been utter fantasy described on this thread about what it is like in workplaces out there right now. All safe and no contact and social distancing... full of low risk staff only.... that is fantasy for the vast majority of workplaces right now

notanan2 Wed 08-Apr-20 22:10:42

Boots have announced that theyre going to reduce and in some cases stop shopping for non essentials in their stores.

The people who think wanting stuff = needing stuff have now got it taken away for everyone. Some people do need only one kind of soap/shampoo, or need to check all labels carefully. But because everyone thinks that their non-essentials are essential, and that put Boota staff and customers at too much risk its no longer viable for boots to allow browsing for anyone

Callistemon Wed 08-Apr-20 22:30:50

Because we are self-isolating does not mean we are cut off absolutely from the outside world or those working in it notanan
We have friends and families still working.

If you could provide links to verifiable information,
and not just anecdotes about some people, it may help us understand and make the relevant decisions.
If you think what others on here say is fantasy perhaps you could benefit us all with your knowledge.

Hearing about desperate people who have health problems, or who cannot obtain childcare leaving vulnerable children alone, being forced to work and not being furloughed is alarming indeed.
I'm sure everyone would wish to avoid using those particular firms.

You are saying, then, that many people are being forced to work against their will and that the firms who assure us that they are ensuring safe working practices for their employees and only keeping on those volunteering to keep firms going, are all lying.

GagaJo Thu 09-Apr-20 10:44:25

I totally agree notanan. Many, many of our population are not able to work in safe conditions. Hence today's news about the number of transport workers who have recently died from the virus. No 'social distancing' for them.

Callistemon Thu 09-Apr-20 10:56:18

Yes, flight attendants were very worried too, that they might contact and/or spread the virus in such confined spaces as planes.

Callistemon Thu 09-Apr-20 10:57:38

They could not self-distance of course, unlike those other firms which have been able to introduce enhanced safe working practices.

notanan2 Thu 09-Apr-20 11:07:09

How on earth do you think it is possible to properly increase social distancing in sectors where demand has increased four fold?
The warehouses arent somehow eight times bigger! The corridoors arent 8 times wider! They cant work slower to allow for more spacing because people sat at home are RAMMIMG them with orders!

You wont believe any of the links Ive posted so look at your preferred news source (its on them all) about what unions and workers are saying about warehouse/delivery worker conditions and mental health in light of all the extra ordering of non food/medicine items.

Callistemon Thu 09-Apr-20 12:04:45

Are you enjoying yourself?
I suppose if you have no hobbies it could be fun.