Tukaram (Tim) Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 2 hours ago, hk blues said: Anyone any thoughts on keeping the under 21s at home? Purely an economic decision? I have heard them say that kids, while not more likely to catch it, are more likely to get it worse if they catch it. With the lack of medical care here... they are just trying to keep people out of the hospital. If you read the rules, the funny part is not only over 60/under 21 not allowed out (as well as numerous illness prone people) BUT anyone that lives with one of those people are not allowed out, except for essentials. Um... anyone living with an over 60 or an under 21... that is like 90% of the country ha ha. So pretty much my and I are the only ones allowed out? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterfe Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 I read that some other country had a rule that children under 12 should stay at home. That sounds more sensible - you can explain to a 12-and-above-year-old about hygiene, etc. and they will probably remember and do the right things. But small children run about, touch surfaces that many other people have touched and then put their fingers in their mouths or noses before the parents have even noticed it (especially these days when the parents are probably looking at their mobiles instead of their children). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJReyes Posted June 20, 2020 Author Posted June 20, 2020 19 hours ago, Dave Hounddriver said: Where I live the Covid has slowed to a (currently) manageable pace. The current cases are of elderly residents of care homes. They do not go out. They are not allowed visitors. But somehow they still get it. Probably from staff, caterers, cleaners or attending physicians. The "keep seniors at home and let everyone else out" strategy fails miserably. May as well shoot them. The analysis of data found more than 50% of the Covid-19 cases were from assisted living and nursing care homes in some counties. When required to report the number of fatalities, many facilities came back with zero or near zero. Reason? The deaths were occurring at hospitals although the patients came from these facilities. The virus arrived through visiting family members and staff. Families were banned and they could only see their loved ones through a window. On the other hand, seniors at home were contracting the virus at approximately the same rate as the general population. The number of deaths were higher because it is a more vulnerable group. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJReyes Posted June 20, 2020 Author Posted June 20, 2020 14 hours ago, Tukaram (Tim) said: The "targeted quarantine" sounds pretty close to what we are doing in Iloilo. Most businesses are back (with limitations). They are encouraging parents to send their kids to school, but will not force them, for now. And the over 60s are supposed to stay home, so they are less likely to catch it. Not sure how this is being implemented around the country, but that is basically where Iloilo is. Targeted Quarantine is a way to discuss alternatives after experiencing three months of staying at home. As the virus rapidly spread, the initial reaction and recommendation was to shut the entire country down. I tried to follow what was happening in the Philippines by reading vlogs posted on YouTube by foreign nationals stuck in the provinces. Looking back, it appears that many islands did not have a single coronavirus among locals and the few remaining visitors. Rather than "one size fits all" as policy, communities should discuss what solutions what may work for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forum Support Tommy T. Posted June 20, 2020 Forum Support Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) On 6/20/2020 at 7:25 AM, Joey G said: I see no reason to make a law saying those over 65 have to stay at home. If someone, anyone, wants to stay home... no problem, stay. I haven't seen any data that people over 65 are infecting anyone more than anyone else. I can make my own decisions on how to live... and have done just fine staying away from people who are sick. I also know how to cross the street the without getting run over, I don't smoke, drink little, and eat healthy. Point being... being 65 doesn't make me any more of a threat to the medical system capacity than a vast majority of the population. I do agree they should be stricter on keeping folks in nursing home better protected, but lumping everyone 65 and over in one basket... not right in my book. Joey... I see every reason to suggest seniors stay at home. I agree with other posters who say that it is because we are greater risk. If we are exposed and become infected, we carry a much higher chance of developing serious complications. These, in turn, will require more chance of hospitalizations, higher costs for treatments (whether born by us or the "system"). So I can understand what I hope and presume is the reasoning here. It is not because we may infect others so much, but rather that we can become more easily infected. So, L and I just stay home most of the time and, when out, exercise maximum and (maybe considered extreme) precautions with hand washing, clothes washing, alcohol disinfecting, mask wearing... To us they are simply survival tactics... We hope they work for us and whoever else applies them... Edited June 20, 2020 by Tommy T. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts