30-04-2020 11:56 PM - edited 30-04-2020 11:58 PM
on 01-05-2020 11:35 PM
on 02-05-2020 12:22 AM
@Anonymous wrote:It appears that your browser is dysfunctioning and you have read some 'other' article.
I couldn't find any references to people starving in their homes.
...and has left millions without access to adequate supply of food.
...The stay-at-home orders have robbed millions of their livelihoods – and for many the ability to put food on the table for those they hold dearest.
There you go. My browser is working perfectly. How are your eyes?
02-05-2020 09:06 AM - edited 02-05-2020 09:07 AM
The article raises a lot of pertinent points though. My 80+ year old mum is self isolating at home. She rarely see's anyone to talk to in person and is not as physically active as she once was, using a walking frame to get around etc. Sure she gets a few phone calls from family etc. but it is not the same as a hug, a cuppa and good natter face to face. She,s feeling lonely.
This is being repeated in houses all across the world. Old people isolated and alone. What is the combined mental and physical toll of this going to be ? How many oldies will have falls and no-one finds them in time ? How many will have heart attacks, diabetes episodes and other medical traumas on their own, alone and unassisted ?
This wont show up in CORONA virus statistics, it will be tallied as just another old person who died of a heart attack. Write it up and move on.
Likewise how many business owners are going to lose their lives work, house etc. because of the shut downs ? How many will suffer mental trauma and possibly suicide ?
Shut downs are a necessity and have been the main reason Australia has been successful in containing the virus, but there needs to be care taken that it is not taken any further than absolutely necessary and businesses get the opportunity to return to some form of operation as quickly as possible.
Its a very fine balance and our politicians must not be distracted by the social media zealots who want everything shut down, as strict as possible, for as long as possible. These people don't understand or care about the collateral damage their ideas would cause.
on 03-05-2020 11:45 AM
Eyes not quite 20/20 but I didn't see 'starving to death' mentioned.
You are entitled to interpret 'lack of adequate food' to 'starving' I guess.
03-05-2020 12:06 PM - edited 03-05-2020 12:07 PM
Yes, the oldies would need to be looked after for sure.
A great many don't have any family support at the best of times.
Locking oldies away and letting the rest of us restart the economy still makes sense.
More sense than letting kids go back to school while not letting adults get back to work.
'Locked away' oldies would need to receive regular visits from people who would take
the utmost precautions against possible transmission.
They would also need access ( by way of home delivery ) to adequate food supplies.
Draconian lock downs will only serve to cripple or destroy economies.
We might eventually face a situation where the public health system would suffer to the extent
that our oldies would end up dying because of insufficient health resources.
The UK placard says Isolate...Save the NHS...Save Lives.
Why not Isolate...Save lives ? Kinda says it all.
on 03-05-2020 11:42 PM
@Anonymous wrote:Some fool called this a conspiracy theory. To me a lot of valid points were made.
Hi tdaks-termite-control, thanks for posting it here it was a good read and worthwhile. Good points raised and helps to put what's going on here in Aust. into better perspective.
on 04-05-2020 09:17 AM
I could take this thread seriously if only posters would be more respectful towards senior citizens and stop referring to them as just "oldies".
The labelling of that kind of categorisation, in my opinion, is disrespectful and tends to lean towards a deliberate indifference to them in general society. Senior people are as significantly important as those who are younger, and certainly as deserving if not now, at their time of life, more so.
I don't need or expect anyone to agree with me ....
04-05-2020 02:20 PM - edited 04-05-2020 02:23 PM
Yes we should use the correct term for people over a certain age.
I for one though would rather be inappropriately called an oldie than a geriatric.
04-05-2020 02:24 PM - edited 04-05-2020 02:25 PM
And what's wrong with just being called a Senior?
This whole thread is just ridiculous pointless anyway.
04-05-2020 02:47 PM - edited 04-05-2020 02:51 PM
@imastawka wrote:And what's wrong with just being called a Senior?
Sure, senior is a better term but then again, oldies is what some folks use everyday. I've often heard senior citizens referring to themselves as "Us oldies".
@imastawka wrote:
This whole thread is just
ridiculouspointless anyway.
Not at all! Sorry but I must disagree. I commend the OP for starting the thread and the article by Kathirgugan Kathirasen at the Free Malaysia Today news site makes for a good read. In actual fact, it is good and beneficial to read things like this as it gives us a greater perspective of what's happpening here.