Kitchen Garden Forum

Well, what do we think of this prospect?

"Banning older people from leaving their homes as the rest of the country surfaces from lockdown would be ‘age discrimination’, a former minster has claimed. Baroness Ros Altmann, 64, said using age-based criteria to lift restrictions would send a message that older people’s lives ‘don’t count in the same way as others’. Comedian Sir Michael Palin, 76, agreed in a separate interview that age restrictions would be ‘very difficult and very wrong and very unfair’."


Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2020/05/03/keeping- ... to=cbshare

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

But the older you are the more likely the virus will take you away from this world.

Logic escapes some folk sometimes.

Difficult subject I am 70, and have recently climbed Munro mountains and most days cycle over 10 miles, my younger brother might be allowed out and he can do none of these things as he is not fit enough(he will readily admit to this). How do you choose? Then you take into account my brother is living alone and I live with a wife who is on immune depressing drugs because of Arthritis, so it is safer for my unfit brother who is at more risk than me to go out, how would you make a list? We shall stay isolated for as long as we think, until it is showed to be safe to go out and mix with people. If that is for the rest of the year, then so be it.

I'm an antisocial git of 73 and don't find social distancing or isolation much of a problem, easy up here (refer to my weather link). The difficulty is the shopping, we always used to shop monthly so with a little pre-lockdown hoarding we have been well placed but as things start to run out we can't replace them. We make all our own bread but flour is running down and every time we try and create an online Tesco order they let us add it then a day or two later take it off again; that's the wholemeal, never had a chance at strong white. I don't think the shops are much better, though we haven't been since March 18th. May have to crack and have a day out visiting numerous shops then hide away again. We are fit enough, 12 years since my wife's breast cancer op so presumably her immune system has recovered as she hasn't had a letter, but what about the untested people we are likely to meet? They can't establish a sensible system without testing and tracing, it's not us that need to be kept at home but the carriers. I've quite enjoyed the Zoom village quizzes and the virtual 80th birthday party for my sister, it was better than visiting the relatives! There's no good solution apart from stopping anybody crossing the M25 and letting the rest of the country get on with life but that will never happen.

If I recall correctly, some fit people have suffered quite badly from the virus; being fit is no guarantee of being safe.

Personally think talk of an age related phased end to lockdown being "ageist" is ridiculous. It's like saying prostate cancer should be banned for being sexist ! Nature does not listen to our whims.

Two points both of which are purely opinion and not "based on science" (not that government policy has been in the least consistent about science).
- I don't think enforcement by age is in the least practical - it would be back to "nudge theory" - which is the failed policy proposed before the lockdown. At best it would be stated as a rule but actually be about self-enforcement.
- As Tony says, your fitness and age are neither a guarantee of resistance nor of catching the disease. It is the case that if you catch the virus, it has a more devastating effect on the older population, as Peter points out, and those with (examples) lung problems (such as COPD), heart disease, lowered immunity (after surgery or cancer treatment for example), diabetes.

At 63, I'm not sure which of the goverment's categories I fall into but now I am retired it is very easy to minimise contact and interaction. (and I am fairly fatalistic - I don't court danger but I accept it is there).

I think the article was a poor piece of sensationalist journalism, designed to outrage.
The primary purpose of lockdown wasn't reducing covid related deaths, but preventing the NHS from being catastrophically overwhelmed and all that would ensue from that.
Until a vaccine is found and available in sufficient quantity to treat the most vulnerable as we do with the current flu vaccine, we will all have to exercise our judgement of what we believe is an acceptable level of risk for whatever it is we wish to do. The current situation is that the elderly and those with more risk factors than average are advised to be extra cautious, but if they choose to ignore that advice and accept the risk of doing otherwise, then they are free to do so, or at least as much as any other member of the population. Personally, I'm getying my tin hat on for the day that lockdown is relaxed because my elderly mother in law will be up here faster than a rat up a drainpipe the instant she gets the chance, advice or no advice.
I should add that if she does that, I will be delighted to see her!

I may look 69 but I'm only 40. I AM honest look at my picture

Well, I am well over 80 but walk miles (no car, no driving licence), garden, do rather strenuous exercises and pilates and have certainly not stayed indoors because we need food (once a week) and newspapers (every day). Whilst walking into our nearest market town recently up the hill, I overtook a young lass, perhaps a quarter of my age but rather well endowed and she was clearly struggling. So, who should be in lockdown?

Might be a radical thought, but this year (well end of last actually), was the worse uptake of the flu vaccine ever? Would be interesting to see if the victims of COVID-19 had that vaccination? Even the hospital staff believed the fake crap on the net was real about the side affects! Yep you all get the sniffles as you have the damped down vaccine - it's about immunity not a snotty nose & no there is no egg in it anymore dear vegans! Will you go for the COVID vaccine? Could be an egg based compound as that is the easy start to creating a cure! Wait if you want, but I don't have an egg allergy & pretty sure if an allergy is the reason there will be a limited supply of allergy free. Not a life style option - a right proper allergy!

I have had flu jabs ever since I was eligible and not had flu, only side effects were some aching the years I had to double up with pneumonia and shingles jabs. I was hoping covid would be rolled into this Autumn's cocktail but that is looking optimistic. Must get to understand how they can be saying you can get it twice but a vaccine works, thought infection and vaccination were almost the same thing.

Even though we're below the 'at risk' age threshold, hubby and I will certainly have the jab. About 18 months ago, hubby caught bronchitis which then developed into pneumonia. He was horribly ill with it and the whole thing was very concerning. Given that cofid is more virulent than flu, I'd rather have the jab any day.

Will you go for the COVID vaccine?

Almost certainly, it depends a little on what I read about its testing.
At 63 I don't yet qualify for an NHS influenza vaccine but should have paid for one, I will next year.

Curiously, this winter I have felt the cold far more than I used to. This may be psychosomatic but my Reynauds is noticeably worse this year. This was a day or two ago and my fingers should not look like this at the end of April.

We have always had the flu jab since we were eligible, also against shingles and pneumonia, and have never had a reaction. So, bring the coronavirus jab on, I say.

'At 63 I don't yet qualify for an NHS influenza vaccine but should have paid for one, I will next year'.

The flu jab is available to young or old & free stephen! Even the chemist will jab you if you book a slot!