But no worse than yours
Pebble wrote:And just wondered if you could be malnourished and over-weight at the same time.
Jdsk wrote:Today's letter on hunger and malnutrition from a lot of paediatricians.
https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/news-events/new ... xtend-free
"Every day, we see the impact of hunger and malnutrition in our work as paediatricians. It is not unusual for us to care for children who don’t have enough to eat or who don’t have access to a substantial meal outside of what is provided in school. Good nutrition is at the heart of health, wellbeing and development for children and young people. Without it, children’s health outcomes worsen, and with that, so do their life chances"
Tangled Metal wrote:What's your general approach as what I assume is a medical professional? In my position would you follow restriction boundaries based on actual infection rates in other areas or would you take the advisory wording as a get out to allow a more commonsense personal approach of sticking to areas with similar infection rates irrespective of government imposed tiers?
rmurphy195 wrote:Eacxh day I find people who are simply not keeping theier distance/breaching the rules etc, from people in supermarkets not using the spacing markers and refusing to distance when asked, to people on the pavement.
Case(s) in point - visited Stratford a few days ago (on Avon). Local coubcil has effectivley widened footpaths by imposing traffic restrictions, using barriers and adding tarmac to widen the pavements and putting markers down. Even so
A queue of people outside an in-cream shop were all bunched up together, even those that were clearly from different groups
While my wife went into a shop I waited outside on a very wide stretch of widened footpath, standing against a building - groups of people walked past 3 or 4 abreast almost brushing shoulders with me as they went
People in a hurry or messing with mobiles instead of "staying alert" simply ignoring people walking in the opposite direction
Whatever various reports say about distance/outdoors blah blah blah this creeping complacency does seem to coincide with a rise in infection rates
Jdsk wrote:Tangled Metal wrote:What's your general approach as what I assume is a medical professional? In my position would you follow restriction boundaries based on actual infection rates in other areas or would you take the advisory wording as a get out to allow a more commonsense personal approach of sticking to areas with similar infection rates irrespective of government imposed tiers?
I think that you're putting too much emphasis on areas with lower or higher rates and the boundaries between them.
My personal approach is to get my volume and closeness and nature of contacts way below the guidance, let alone the law. The lower the better.
Jdsk wrote:If you're criticising advice from SAGE how about citing which piece of advice and when it was produced? Rather than a paywalled article in a politically motivated magazine?
Then we can all check whether they were predictions of what would actually happen or what-if outputs from models. The two are quite different.