Isolation or imprisonment of the elderly?
From: Paul Sherwood, South Kilvington, Thirsk.
OBVIOUSLY the Covid-19 problem needs addressing in a sensible manner, and it’s equally obvious that segregation and isolation are helpful with viral infections. But the announcement that all people over 70 need to remain isolated for four months is somewhat draconian and difficult to do, and even more difficult to enforce.
A large percentage of over70s live alone (me included), and almost as large a percentage will have no living relatives or no relatives living close (me included) to be able to carry out daily chores, such as shopping. This may be a bit of a troublesome or inconvenient situation in a large urban area, it is a totally different situation in large rural areas when shopping could be 20 miles away.
This is exacerbated as residents in villages tend to be older and therefore an entire village could be isolated – it has not been thought through, social services can’t do it!
Many people over 70 may not have computers, or if they have, may not have a clue about shopping online, and many will not be used to online payments etc, much preferring to use cash. However, these people will be astute enough to be ‘canny’ with financial information, they won’t be giving PIN details to a total stranger going to the bank for them, will they?
Apart from shopping, a visit to the bank will be needed over four months. Although the full details of the infection transmission level is somewhat vague, it clearly does pass from person to person, possibly more by contamination rather than traditional flu, that explains the handwashing suggestions.
Someone of any age, sat in a crowded urban train or bus, and then visiting a huge and crowded ‘out of town’ hypermarket, is obviously at a greater risk than someone over 70 travelling in their own car to a small rural shop/supermarket, that may have 10 or 20 shoppers wandering around. And I doubt I will contaminate a few Swaledale ewes on my journey.
From: Michael Green, Tingley.
MOST people are already behaving sensibly, and in line with Government advice. That is obvious from the number of events being cancelled, and the photographs of empty town centres.
But what the Government appears to be proposing now is entirely different. It is effectively imprisonment without trial. Imprisonment without the ability to obtain the necessities of life. Imprisonment of the less able section of the community. Imprisonment of the healthy innocent.
From: Gerald Hodgson, Leyburn.
MY wife and I, both being in our 80s, have decided to self- isolate now rather than wait until there is a high risk of us getting the virus which seems to be the Government’s policy.
But I think we all need clarification on what “selfisolation” means in practice. The implication of the publicity seems to be that you need to sit in your house staring at four walls.
What is wrong with going for a walk or a bike ride provided you keep a safe distance from other people? Is there any problem in having a chat over the garden fence, at a safe distance, with a next door neighbour?
Why not have a drive into the countryside and have a country walk and perhaps an open air picnic? I recognise that not everyone can do these things, but it seems to me that there is no need to remain incarcerated at home if one is reasonably fit.
From: Andrew Milroy, Trowbridge.
GOVERNMENT Ministers and MPs are being awarded higher pay rises, yet they expect the biggest healthcare crisis in a generation to be DIY managed by the British public!
A passenger flying in from Milan, in the midst of the Italian coronavirus outbreak, was amazed to find that the airport in Britain had no checks, no tests, not even enquiries.
Supermarkets are issuing new restrictions to ensure that shelves remain stocked during the coronavirus crisis.
Boris Johnson is totally out of his depth, expecting British families to accept the deaths of loved ones. Ordinary people will be the most at risk whilst Johnson’s rich cronies sidle off to cosy foreign billets.
Why are foreign governments being so much more proactive than Johnson & Co? Why is Britain being allowed to drift deeper and deeper into the worst health crisis for a 100 years?
From: David Algar, Rawdon.
ALTHOUGH I feel that the coronavirus outbreak is serious, and regrettably a number of lives will be sadly lost, the average Briton’s life expectancy was already being cut by 18 months and the average global citizen by nearly three years. This is caused by air pollution (arising mainly from fossil fuel burning) which contributes to a range of illnesses such as lung cancer, heart disease, asthma, strokes, high blood pressure and so on.
From: Allen Jenkinson, Milnsbridge.
PRESIDENT Trump has more or less shut down the United States over this virus. Politicians have to be seen to be doing something, especially when re-election is at stake, and I know we cannot be complacent, but common sense must come into it somewhere.
From: Peter Rickaby, Selby.
CORONAVIRUS has exposed a greed within people who don’t give a damn about anything or anyone. Were shoppers to purchase requirements at the same level as they do, week on week, supermarket shelves would not be empty of stock and supplies would be replenished as normal. If people used common sense instead of panicking, daily life during the crisis could retain a degree of normality.