Covid - it’s all over.

[serrac]

https://thepostmillennial.com/cdc-quietly-lowers-early-childhood-speech-standards

[Rewulf]

15 minutes ago, Mice! said:

That certainly is a big number, far too high,  unfortunately it was probably high before covid.

From the BBC in the last fortnight: 

‘Some 409,347 under-18s were referred to the NHS in England for specialist care for issues such as suicidal thoughts and self harm between April and October 2021.’

Thats not what its saying is it ?
I cant understand why you are in some sort of denial about this, its a problem that Ive seen , teachers are seeing, but because you havent seen it first hand , its not a big deal ?

[Mice!]

18 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

cant understand why you are in some sort of denial about this, its a problem that Ive seen , teachers are seeing, but because you havent seen it first hand , its not a big deal ?

I'm not in denial,  I'm saying the kids I know are fine, fellas at work kids are fine.

Like I said my wife works in a school and hasn't mentioned much, and while she would never name kids she would talk about issues going on. 

So that's only two schools we're directly involved with but there will be several others through colleagues.

Quick look says 8.9million kids in UK schools so 400,000 is definitely far too high.

[amateur]

I too can only report on what I know.

Our youngest grandchildren, then 5 and 7 were home taught.

Both parents serving police officers so no furlough or home working, just a careful arrangement of shifts.

The younger girl went back to school (she had only previously done one term) with a higher reading age than her actual age and the elder girl now is rated well above average.

Our elder granchildren, then 8 and 13 did schoolwork online, helped by their furloughed mother and kept in touch with their friends online too.

They too seem unscathed, well, the now 15 year old girl is a typical bolshie 15 year old. 😂

So, I think it depends on how much input the parents gave.

 

[Lloyd90]

So as of April no more free tests. 
 

How many people who develop a sniffle are going to go out and pay £30-50 just to see? 
 

Not many I would bet! 

[shalfordninja33]

My 2 kids are 8 and 12. From the first lockdown when no homework was set we ordered KS learning books for them to complete at home. We got them to do an hour or so a day, along with reading and a fun based practical task, I.e cooking or something outside and mimimised screen time. My work slowed down and my wife was furloughed.

for the second lockdown we both had to pick up online learning with them at a moments notice and whilst we had a shaky start we made a point of not projecting the situation is on them too much, answering any questions they asked and making very clear that the situation wasn’t normal but it wouldn’t be forever.

We got them to write lists of things they wanted to do once restriction allowed and kept reinforcing the try not to worry message. If they really didn’t want to home learn for a morning or afternoon we didn’t force them.

we’re now ticking off list of activities they made during the restrictions and hopefully they feel like normality is returning and they have stuff to look forward to. 

If they need more help and support in the coming years we’ll be here for them. 
 

 

 

1 minute ago, Lloyd90 said:

So as of April no more free tests. 
 

How many people who develop a sniffle are going to go out and pay £30-50 just to see? 
 

Not many I would bet! 

I think it’s safe to say that from April demand for tests will be much lower! 

[JohnfromUK]

My family were largely unaffected as my nieces and nephew are older - only my nephew (the youngest) was in school at the start.  He did his A levels, a few 'challenges', but all OK - and got the University place he wanted, worked between school and University to make some pocket money.  He had to be adaptable - and I think he has developed in character from that.

Life is made of challenges, and learning to cope and take the 'downs' with the 'ups', the unexpected and get through OK is a lesson we all need to learn.  Most peoples lives have their ups and downs and those who learn to cope with that early will possibly have had learning experience that will serve them well through life.

Edited February 21, 2022 by JohnfromUK

[ordnance]

34 minutes ago, Lloyd90 said:

So as of April no more free tests. 
 

How many people who develop a sniffle are going to go out and pay £30-50 just to see? 
 

Not many I would bet! 

That would depend on peoples circumstance's. Most would want to know before they visited their elderly parents, put at risk their clinically vulnerable, friends children etc. Not everyone is tight and puts money above peoples health.

[Newbie to this]

58 minutes ago, shalfordninja33 said:

I think it’s safe to say that from April demand for tests will be much lower! 

I think it is safe to say, that in the run up to the end of free tests the demand will be much higher.

 

22 minutes ago, ordnance said:

That would depend on peoples circumstance's. Most would want to know before they visited their elderly parents, put at risk their clinically vulnerable, friends children etc. Not everyone is tight and puts money above peoples health.

Most will just wait until they are no longer ill.

[ordnance]

Quote

Most will just wait until they are no longer ill.

What if they are living in a house with elderly parents, or clinically vulnerable, children etc. 

• Quote

  The total number of clinically extremely vulnerable (CEV) people in England is 3.7 million.

   

Edited February 21, 2022 by ordnance

[Newbie to this]

Just now, ordnance said:

What if they are living in a house with elderly parents, or clinically vulnerable, children etc. 

•  

Then testing would make no difference.

[Scully]

11 minutes ago, ordnance said:

What if they are living in a house with elderly parents, or clinically vulnerable, children etc. 

•  

Then they will surely do just what they were doing prior to the pandemic. 

[ordnance]

6 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

Then testing would make no difference.

Rubbish, if someone is living in a house and tests positive and isolates from the rest of the family, they are less likely to infect them. I know people that have tested positive isolated and no one else in the family were infected.  Its not rocket science the less time you spend with a infected person less chance of being infected. 

[ordnance]

3 minutes ago, Scully said:

Then they will surely do just what they were doing prior to the pandemic. 

You are talking like its gone away, that's the only way that question makes any sense. So if you had a child in your house and knew there was a good chance Covid would kill them, you would just pretend it had gone away and take no precautions to try and protect your child from Covid  

[Mungler]

8 minutes ago, ordnance said:

Rubbish, if someone is living in a house and tests positive and isolates from the rest of the family, they are less likely to infect them. I know people that have tested positive isolated and no one else in the family were infected.  Its not rocket science the less time you spend with a infected person less chance of being infected. 

£2 billion a month on tests? To find out someone has a cold? 

It’s over. Time for everyone to get on with their own lives and no one is stoping anyone from wearing masks, nailing their front door shut or living in a surgically sterile oxygen tent, not much of a life that may be. 

4 minutes ago, ordnance said:

You are talking like its gone away, that's the only way that question makes any sense. So if you had a child in your house and knew there was a good chance Covid would kill them, you would just pretend it had gone away and take no precautions to try and protect your child from Covid  

Oh give over.

The Queen has it. Let’s see how she gets on at her age eh?

[Scully]

43 minutes ago, ordnance said:

You are talking like its gone away, that's the only way that question makes any sense. So if you had a child in your house and knew there was a good chance Covid would kill them, you would just pretend it had gone away and take no precautions to try and protect your child from Covid  

Oh please! If covid could kill that theoretical child then a cold would, so you would take exactly the same precautions now as you did pre-pandemic. 
Just what is it exactly you expect people to do? 

[ordnance]

13 minutes ago, Scully said:

Oh please! If covid could kill that theoretical child then a cold would, so you would take exactly the same precautions now as you did pre-pandemic. 
Just what is it exactly you expect people to do? 

So you would not take any extra precautions to protect a vulnerable child in your house from Covid, fine that's a induvial decision. To compare the common cold and its possible effects to a vulnerable person the same as Covid is just nonsense. 

[ordnance]

.

Quote

£2 billion a month on tests? To find out someone has a cold? It’s over. Time for everyone to get on with their own lives and no one is stoping anyone from wearing masks, nailing their front door shut or living in a surgically sterile oxygen tent, not much of a life that may be. 

I will have to check, but i don't think i said free tests should or shouldn't be stopped. My reply was to the question if people would be willing to pay for them  Its over, wishfully thinking and factually not true unless i missed the news that Covid had disappeared.  

Quote

As of February 15, 2022, 12,092 confirmed COVID-19 patients were in hospital in the United Kingdom.

 

 

[ordnance]

Quote

 

Oh give over.

The Queen has it. Let’s see how she gets on at her age eh?

 

What's the Queen got to do with anything ?  You obviously don't know what i am talking about when posting about clinically extremely vulnerable people, not age.  PS Don't tell me to give over, feel free to ignore my posts, or put me on your ignore i promise i won't lose any sleep over it. 

 

Edited February 21, 2022 by ordnance

[Scully]

24 minutes ago, ordnance said:

So you would not take any extra precautions to protect a vulnerable child in your house from Covid, fine that's a induvial decision. To compare the common cold and its possible effects to a vulnerable person the same as Covid is just nonsense. 

No, it isn't nonsense at all. If a vulnerable person is at risk from covid then they are at risk from a cold, and vice versa. 
Just what extra precautions could anyone take short of living in a quarantine bubble?
What would you do? Go on, rather than simply criticising others for their apparent lack of compassion, tell us what we should do. 

[ordnance]

Quote

No, it isn't nonsense at all. If a vulnerable person is at risk from covid then they are at risk from a cold, and vice versa. 
Just what extra precautions could anyone take short of living in a quarantine bubble?
What would you do? Go on, rather than simply criticising others for their apparent lack of compassion, tell us what we should do. 

If you think the common cold poses the same risk to a vulnerable person as Covid fine. I don't think you will get many doctors to agree with, you but then what would they know.

The way i would look at it is I have every right to take my chances with Covid my health and carry on as normal before Covid, I do not have to the right to take that decision / risk for someone else who i live with and who is being careful because they are extremely clinically vulnerable and bring Covid into the house and infect them.   So i would continue to take the recommended precautions ( that are still in place ) there are no grantees but i would do my best to avoid infection.  For example in work there is a small unventilated are where around 10 employees squashed in together take their lunch, Its no big deal for me to avoid that and take my lunch in the van. 

Edited February 21, 2022 by ordnance

[enfieldspares]

Covid. Bronchial pneumonia for the 21st Century. The new "old man's friend". Horrible to say but likely true.

[Mungler]

How many million vulnerable people were claimed to be present in the UK?

Bearing in mind we’ve not been in lockdown for a while and daily case rates are high and reflective of a heavy cold doing the rounds, today’s death stat was 69 people out of a population of 70,000,000 and of those 69 how many were over 81 years of age (being the average age of mortality).

You can quote vulnerable people in the millions and however many hundreds of thousands of infections or how many people are in hospital with covid but the magic number today is 69 or 0.00009% of the population.

You may understand why 99% of the population think enough is enough, no?

15 minutes ago, enfieldspares said:

Covid. Bronchial pneumonia for the 21st Century. The new "old man's friend". Horrible to say but likely true.

That’s what my mum said only last week - and she’s in her late 70’s, cancer survivor and got over a nasty case of Delta in lockdown 1.

[Lloyd90]

3 hours ago, ordnance said:

So you would not take any extra precautions to protect a vulnerable child in your house from Covid, fine that's a induvial decision. To compare the common cold and its possible effects to a vulnerable person the same as Covid is just nonsense. 

What is your solution? surely the current situation cannot continue? 
 

At some point, no matter what, we must go back to normal. Or what it left of normal. 

Your proposed vulnerable child reminds me of the movie “bubble boy”. 

 

 

Certain people have always and will always be vulnerable. It’s a generic lottery. 

If it wasn’t covid it would be something else. 
 

An old work colleague had a son with severe asthma. He kept having really bad episodes and having to go to hospital. 

A short stay and he would be back home. 
 

One day in he went, and he never came back. He was about 5 years old. 

He was just genetically cursed with bad lungs and that was the hand he was dealt! 
 

 

A significant number of elderly people in this country are kept almost artificially alive, pumped full of medications and tablets keeping them going long after they would live naturally. 
 

I’ve seen people 90+ years old basically in a coma being tube fed and watered just for the sake of keeping them alive. 
 

 

 

An illness that only effects those of greatly advanced age, or those with pre-existing health conditions. 

It’s almost an economists perfect virus. 

[JohnfromUK]

11 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

How many people who develop a sniffle are going to go out and pay £30-50 just to see?

It is expected to be about £3 to 5 per test, not £30 - 50

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10535837/Time-Covid-Boris-unveils-new-strategy.html