Arbitrary 70+ age discrimination
I believe that it would be quite wrong to maintain lock-down for people aged 70 and above, simply on the grounds of age. As one whose 70th birthday was just a few days ago, I regard this is as potent nonsense. I am as well/unwell as I was a week ago and, therefore, as highly or as little vulnerable to infection as then.
I quite understand the statistical evidence that gives rise to the suggestion of prolongation. Would it not be far more sensible, however, to base prolongation of lock-down on a simple concept: "Have you had any medical condition requiring GP intervention or hospitalisation within the past (say) five years? If so, and you are aged (say) 70+, stay locked-down."
I quite understand the statistical evidence that gives rise to the suggestion of prolongation. Would it not be far more sensible, however, to base prolongation of lock-down on a simple concept: "Have you had any medical condition requiring GP intervention or hospitalisation within the past (say) five years? If so, and you are aged (say) 70+, stay locked-down."
Why the contribution is important
There is a clear school of thought that all people over 70 may be required to remain socially isolated for longer than is the case for younger ages. This arbitrary ageist notion takes no account of general health and fitness. A more nuanced solution is required.
by JamesB on May 05, 2020 at 02:15PM
Posted by Sue24 May 05, 2020 at 14:20
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by susansutherland May 05, 2020 at 14:21
We have a significant number of over 70s in our running club and they are fitter than many younger members.
Also a large number of over 70s continue to work and contribute to our economy; many running their own businesses.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by PaulWG May 05, 2020 at 14:23
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by JohnStewart May 05, 2020 at 14:38
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Barbaram May 05, 2020 at 14:39
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Oldskidog May 05, 2020 at 14:39
I am 77 and just returned from winter season in BC Canada skiing with the Super Seniors. Many a younger individual would be hard pushed to pass us on the slopes. Many younger people don’t keep fit throughout their lives, over eat with the wrong diet, smoke heavily and drink too much. Consequently many don’t even see 70!!!
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Louisethomson20 May 05, 2020 at 14:40
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Ann May 05, 2020 at 14:43
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by GordonF May 05, 2020 at 14:43
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Applecr0ss May 05, 2020 at 14:45
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Absport May 05, 2020 at 14:47
But demographic information is not really included, canes see more of this
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Carol May 05, 2020 at 15:02
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by william May 05, 2020 at 15:05
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by allan May 05, 2020 at 15:24
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by harviej May 05, 2020 at 16:55
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Tia444 May 05, 2020 at 17:56
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Lewis May 05, 2020 at 18:01
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by CHill May 05, 2020 at 20:12
Some media have whipped up a nonsense raft of confusion - the people who are in the 12 week Lockdown for medical reasons have received specific letter about that.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by LAM May 05, 2020 at 22:00
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by maureensmokey May 05, 2020 at 23:28
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by JenDee81 May 06, 2020 at 07:40
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Colin99 May 06, 2020 at 11:17
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by djm May 06, 2020 at 12:51
Also, like many other hillwalkers, I would also appreciate the opportunity to resume hillwalking for my own physical and mental wellbeing. After lockdown there will not be the same rush to rural spots as there was at the beginning. The low numbers of people in our Scottish hills and glens easily accommodates social distancing. Discretion amongst older people will ensure that risky expeditions are not undertaken which might result in a full mountain rescue response.
Harsh restrictions on the activities of older persons in Scotland simply on the basis of age will have unintended consequences and lead to erosion of trust and undermine the present support in tackling this dreadful pandemic.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by mthom30 May 06, 2020 at 13:11
This is because of immune response diminishes with age, as a previous post has declared, and less to do with being fit.
At the moment under lock down, it is easy for over 65's to keep pretty isolated from the population, however when lock down is over we will be forced back to the work place, I, and many other people of this age group are in full and part-time employment unable to retire, either due to financial constraints or due to rises in pension age . Many in this age group have to rely on public transport and spend a substantial proportion of our working day commuting, for myself this can be up to 3 hours each day.
I am very concerned about returning to workplace,especially as my workplace includes colleagues who commute by public transport from all over the central belt. Based on experiences at the start of the pandemic, my workplace will not be keen to make any concessions for people who are older, and/or rely on public transport. Most employer's value profit over staff well-being
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by LorraineMC May 06, 2020 at 13:41
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by The_Guru May 06, 2020 at 13:45
We must take the mental health of people of all ages into consideration, I believe people have the right to use their common sense.
it is important for people of all ages to get out and meet up with family and friends.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by harviej May 06, 2020 at 17:10
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by rst May 06, 2020 at 17:30
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by yhten May 06, 2020 at 19:01
If choosing an age at all, what is the objective evidence that identifies 70? Why not 65 or 75?
No matter the age chosen, presumably this means that anyone who crosses the threshold during the period of lock down goes from enjoying albeit limited freedoms to internment overnight, even though his/her situation hasn’t changed in terms of risk?
Discriminatory
Why are other groupings based on criteria other than age whose characteristics are suspected of incurring higher risk e.g. male obesity not also identified and targeted for lock down? (This does not include those with serious underlying heath conditions.)
‘Perfect Storm’
Both the research literature and clinical practice clearly demonstrate the severe psychological damage that can be incurred through isolation, especially if long and open ended. This can lead to PTSD, psychosis, in the limit suicide and difficulty reintegrating for those who make it through. There is also demonstrable proof that the detrimental impact on mental health results in or exacerbates physical conditions such as Cardiovascular disease and Altzheimer’s.
These effects are to be seen in all ages but will be most acute in the elderly. They will exacerbate the so called ‘Hidden Pandemic’ that could follow Covid-19 which could in turn overwhelm the NHS.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by lizann May 06, 2020 at 19:36
Older people should be allowed to make decisions,
I'm sure they would be sensible enough to self isolate if feeling unwell and wear masks going out incase they are asymptomatic
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Caledonian May 06, 2020 at 19:57
As scientific data has emerged and patterns are analysed it appears that the elderly are most at risk as immune reactions are reduced by age. This is scientific fact established over years not just with a Covid 19. Given this situation it is reasonable for Government to offer specific guidance to the elderly and adopt a risk averse strategy. As more data is gathered around the age demographic of those suffering from the disease it may well be that there is no homogenous aged population and that healthy older people do not feature highly in those seriously affected by the disease. If this proves to be the case then lift restrictions and change the guidance . Until this becomes clearer then all older people are at higher risk if they contract the disease, let’s follow the science ,this is not age discrimination but age concern
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Mk1975 May 06, 2020 at 20:14
Shield the elderly and vulnerable as they are making up the highest level of deaths and integrate the others back into a new normal. Tobacco, alcohol and obesity cause strain on the NHS and kill thousands each year but we’ve not banned them. Allow schools to go back as studies are showing children aren’t at risk and don’t transfer the disease to adults so no danger there. This will halt the future disparity in education between those children receiving virtual lessons and those not. Also those completing theirs lessons and those not. This allows the gradual introduction of people to the workplace which will stop future generations suffering tax burdens and loss of jobs. All of the above improves mental health of nation. Also stops the prioritising of elderly and infirm over people waiting with existing illnesses such as cancer and stops the future health time bomb were creating.
Basing our current plans on guesses is a hugely dangerous way to go about this.
Why the contribution is important
Stops creating a future health time bomb that could kills thousands and re starts economy which stops future inequality as well as social issues and will go some way to stopping a tax burden on future generations.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by DP May 06, 2020 at 20:41
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by WSR May 06, 2020 at 22:05
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Abdnshiremum May 07, 2020 at 07:53
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by snapier May 07, 2020 at 11:04
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by irene108 May 07, 2020 at 11:27
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by aloneinthehills May 07, 2020 at 18:21
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Ideas81 May 08, 2020 at 07:46
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by WilfredLawrieNicholasJohnson May 08, 2020 at 09:10
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by seventyplus May 08, 2020 at 11:27
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Johnlee May 08, 2020 at 12:31
I am not aware of any evidence that older people are more likely to catch or spread the infection than younger ones. I accept that even fit older people are likely to be more seriously affected as a result of a weaker immune system but want to decide for myself about taking this risk. As regards the burden on the NHS if I become ill, society does not prevent people engaging in risky activities such as motocross, horse riding or smoking because they may end up in hospital and this same civil liberty should be extended to the over 70s.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by hillsman May 08, 2020 at 17:59
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by geraldwiley May 08, 2020 at 20:50
The over 70's need to be grateful
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Crougar May 09, 2020 at 10:47
Age is a protected characteristic and yet ageism is again emerging in public discourse. It is inappropriate, and discriminatory to use an arbitrary age number as the single determinant to blanket categorise . People do not age homogenously but rather heterogeneously. The highest number of fatalities do occur over 75 but this resonates with the incidence of deaths in care homes That does not put other members of the age group at the same level of risk. Of course other comorbidities may be more prevalent and exacerbated by age but there is a need for more of a nuance of the data. Many 70 + year olds maintain good health and have no underlying condition(s). Such individuals should be given the opportunity to assess the risk and make informed choices.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by wnobrien May 09, 2020 at 21:24
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Skylark3 May 10, 2020 at 07:59
I am nearly 80 and fitter than many 20 and 30 years younger.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by bstrata May 10, 2020 at 13:25
A leading statistician just today has said that the risk for a 90+ is roughly 10,000 times that of an under 15, with the risk roughly doubling for every 5 years.
1 in 100 90+ have died, that puts your odds of 70-74 dying at 1 in 1600. So I'm sure if you are fit and healthy chances are you would land in the 1599, while the odds are likely shorter for those who are obese or have other pre-existing conditions.
But there is an undeniable age effect at play. At what odds would you be uncomfortable heading out the door?
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by activeandvibrant May 10, 2020 at 16:00
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by AngelaBenzies May 10, 2020 at 20:56
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by truescot May 11, 2020 at 11:20
https://twitter.com/[…]/1
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by Brett May 11, 2020 at 19:46
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)
Posted by WendyG May 11, 2020 at 21:52
Easing of lock-down restrictions should take this group into account, allowing them to visit family and friends, should they wish - and advising how best to do these things as safely as possible.
While we're all restricted, it's much easier to accept - but if Grandma aged 66 can visit the grandchildren, but Grandpa, who just turned 70 in lock-down can't, it will feel very unfair.
Report this Comment (Requires Log In)