Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 62 replies
  • Subscribers 26 subscribers
  • Views 1855 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

S'fix Visit Today.

Zoomup
The famous supplier of plumbing, electrical and D.I.Y. stuff has removed all of its laminated catalogues that were previously on display, and some staff are wearing those sweaty black plastic gloves. Also the short pencils are no more. Also there is a one metre distance rule being enforced.


Z.
Parents
  • 0
     
    I'm glad you said that. I've been quietly pondering if things might not have been a lot easier if we'd just isolated all those who were particularly at risk and let everyone else go about as normal (a bit like the old measles parties) then hopefully within a few weeks we'd have immunity across the bulk of the population so the virus would find it a lot harder to spread and then could 'release' the vulnerable bit by bit as intensive care spaces were available. Not an easy decision of course and that approach could back-fire badly if isolation of the vulnerable couldn't be made effective. But on the other hand with no vaccine on the horizon it's likely that everyone will be exposed it eventually so perhaps the perceived emphasis should be more on managing those who will need extra help rather than trying to "stop" its spread.


       - Andy.


     



    There are an awful lot of people in the UK who have chronic health conditions, that are not normally life-threatening.  For instance, there are about 5.4 million people in the UK who receive regular treatment for asthma  https://www.asthma.org.uk/about/media/facts-and-statistics/.  If you add up all of the people who could end up in hospital with complications to conditions that are normally well managed, that gives an huge number who would be in the isolation category.

     

Reply
  • 0
     
    I'm glad you said that. I've been quietly pondering if things might not have been a lot easier if we'd just isolated all those who were particularly at risk and let everyone else go about as normal (a bit like the old measles parties) then hopefully within a few weeks we'd have immunity across the bulk of the population so the virus would find it a lot harder to spread and then could 'release' the vulnerable bit by bit as intensive care spaces were available. Not an easy decision of course and that approach could back-fire badly if isolation of the vulnerable couldn't be made effective. But on the other hand with no vaccine on the horizon it's likely that everyone will be exposed it eventually so perhaps the perceived emphasis should be more on managing those who will need extra help rather than trying to "stop" its spread.


       - Andy.


     



    There are an awful lot of people in the UK who have chronic health conditions, that are not normally life-threatening.  For instance, there are about 5.4 million people in the UK who receive regular treatment for asthma  https://www.asthma.org.uk/about/media/facts-and-statistics/.  If you add up all of the people who could end up in hospital with complications to conditions that are normally well managed, that gives an huge number who would be in the isolation category.

     

Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines