mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
Minister Sharma on Marr Show, trying to make the Home Minister look good by comparison but not quite being as awful.
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Politicians got us into this mess, the current situation is way out side of normal political process. MP's wont fix it owning up and saying we need help will. We have experts in logistics and supply which with the backing of the army can get things moving. Two things the Army are good at planning that's joined up and shifting stuff fast. The current line of with help of .... is top down thinking we need to invert the power.
As for misusing PPE my earlier post set out how Hancock could have handled it.
But no publicly he moved the blame on to staff the very staff. Who cover his ass everyday of the week long before this all kicked off.
Many staff are now expected to use kit they are not trained to use. That's not the fault of them it's down to training which is both fit for purpose and delivered by qualified staff. But that means shifting the blame up the tree which politicians and management don't like.
The other thing is the quality of some this kit is just not good enough which is not helping with supply again deal with it and fit it.
Stopping pepole squirreling away PPE can be sorted but then again it's management. I'd love to see anyone try and walk off with anything if theatre Sister was over seeing supply.
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
It's the old "OMG, it's snowing, where are the snow ploughs?" argument.
mjr
Comfy armchair to one person & a plank to the next
- Location
- mostly Norfolk, sometimes Somerset
Belgian (rtbf) news: army into another care home, supermarkets using UV disinfectors that trollies pass through before each use, is Portugal an exception and why?, mask discussion: trained ffp3 user 99% protected, surgical mask 89%, artisanal mask 70%, simple scarf 49%; infected care home workers being told to keep working if asymptomatic
Attachments
Inertia
I feel like I could... TAKE ON THE WORLD!!
A little but in general snow isn’t likely to have as big an impact, but with climate change, who knows?
The first time you have the excuse of surprise but we need to work out how to get equipment or even make it when it’s needed. It’s not easy but that’s the job of a gov. And we need to plan for how we cope next time, levels of response that would kick in to the threat. In hindsight it looks like we had a response but didn’t respond at the appropriate time.
Joey Shabadoo
My pronouns are "He", "Him" and "buggerlugs"
Quite possibly, but wasn't there a lot of discussion about when to apply the lockdown, not if?
I honestly think it will be years before we properly understand what has gone on over the last few months. I'm sure mistakes have been made but as you say, it's what happens next time.
I don't think anyone can ever really expect the unexpected and have perfect plans for every eventuality.
Inertia
I feel like I could... TAKE ON THE WORLD!!
I don’t think anyone is expecting perfect plans but you have to plan for the unexpected too. The vent situation worries me, why the companies were chosen? Why didn’t we try to expand existing suppliers? Can this planning be unpolitised? Is that even a word?
Although a pandemic is not unexpected, it’s a likely scenario. It’s a case of when will the next one be, not if there will be one.
Inertia
I feel like I could... TAKE ON THE WORLD!!
nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
When and how to lift the lockdown will be a nuanced political decision
There will be the input from the health professionals about controlling the pandemic.
But as @marinyork says, there are major health issues created by extending lockdowns
Finally, every day of lockdown is another huge amount of debt that we, the public, will have to pay back over the coming years
The fallout on national finances isn't even being discussed here. This is the elephant in the room. We will increase NHS funding (political suicide to do otherwise) and we will have to manage a much higher debt burden. The only way to do this is to tax us more or reduce other public services or both. Government will have to do this because whilst interest rates are at historic lows, if they start to move up over next few years you and I will be repaying this additional debt for ever
AuroraSaab
Veteran
Agreed. There is no great clamouring amongst the general public for an end to the lockdown, as far as I can see. There will always be folk who won't stick to it, but it wouldn't matter to them if it was two weeks or two years. Most people I know would support more restrictions. I also think most people will support tax increases to pay for it too.
Mo1959
Legendary Member
- Location
- Perthshire,Scotland
It’s strange, but it’s almost starting to feel normal to live like this!
matticus
Guru
There are 2 main aspects here: Predicting How HMGov's Lockdown Restrictions will evolve over the months, and what are the best ways to reduce COVID infections.
(I'll put this in 2 posts for tidiness, although they're obviously closely related)
1) Predicting HM Gov restrictions:
There is a lot of talk about the HMGov monitoring social distancing and basing policy on this. (and as a result, lots of people get upset at those NOT distancing, resulting in considerable debate in social media. And the papers have run front-page photos of those they see as guilty for letting the side down). Gov have somewhat fuelled this by issuing strong demands for us to behave.
(incidentally, there has so far been no hint from Gov about *tightening* the lockdown - only about maintaining it for longer.)
But in reality, it's pretty clear that HMGov are only looking at the numbers; the number of infections, and deaths:
- If we flout the guidance, but the epidemic starts to tail off, they will start to look at tapering off the lockdown - because the economy is a big priority (right or wrong), so they want as little lockdown as possible.
- Conversely, if we social distance like crazy (even if we self-impose French-style rules), and the numbers *still* go up, Gov will likely maintain lockdown until they come down.
So when the Daily Mail runs corona-shaming front pages, don't worry about it; they won't affect the lockdown one bit. Only the numbers will.
I can assure you, we will keep these restrictions under constant review. We will look again in three weeks, and relax them if the evidence shows we are able to. Boris - 23rd March
(I'll put this in 2 posts for tidiness, although they're obviously closely related)
1) Predicting HM Gov restrictions:
There is a lot of talk about the HMGov monitoring social distancing and basing policy on this. (and as a result, lots of people get upset at those NOT distancing, resulting in considerable debate in social media. And the papers have run front-page photos of those they see as guilty for letting the side down). Gov have somewhat fuelled this by issuing strong demands for us to behave.
(incidentally, there has so far been no hint from Gov about *tightening* the lockdown - only about maintaining it for longer.)
But in reality, it's pretty clear that HMGov are only looking at the numbers; the number of infections, and deaths:
- If we flout the guidance, but the epidemic starts to tail off, they will start to look at tapering off the lockdown - because the economy is a big priority (right or wrong), so they want as little lockdown as possible.
- Conversely, if we social distance like crazy (even if we self-impose French-style rules), and the numbers *still* go up, Gov will likely maintain lockdown until they come down.
So when the Daily Mail runs corona-shaming front pages, don't worry about it; they won't affect the lockdown one bit. Only the numbers will.
I can assure you, we will keep these restrictions under constant review. We will look again in three weeks, and relax them if the evidence shows we are able to. Boris - 23rd March
matticus
Guru
2) Reducing COVID Infection
There is a pretty consistent message from experts and the government about how to control this pandemic. It's all about transmission, measured by R0 values, and here is a good basic guide: https://www.healthline.com/health/r-nought-reproduction-number#rsubsubvalues
COVID will infect far more people than normal winter flu without control measures: this boils down to R0 being much higher. It's been calculated as around 2.5*, vs normal Flu at 1.3. If we can get the R number down below 1, infection will slowly fizzle out (the lower the better).
The R0 is “a combination of the properties of the virus, and the way that humans interact.”(1).
So let's think about the social distancing most of us are doing; if we stay home from work, avoid everyday social interactions, keep that 2m gap on our public trips, AND KEEP WASHING OUR HANDS I reckon we will cut out 90% of transmission opportunities.
That gets the R factor down to 0.3ish. If we're pessimistic, 0.5. So that's a win; the pandemic WILL fizzle out in time if most people are doing this.
Now: here is where I think we're tending to get things wrong. We're still panicking about individual instances, like you might with something that was fatal to touch, or like a poisonous spider to avoid at all cost. If you're in a vulnerable group i.e those are advised to self-isolate, then this approach makes some sense - every contact is a threat to you. But for the average citizen we need to focus on *overall* transmission rates:
- focus on the easy wins,
- do those things that cut-out 90% of contact with people not in your household,
- wash your hands before/after every trip.
If some oblivious runner tears past you 1m away, don't stress it - unless that's happening 20 times a day. Worrying about whether your walk should be 60 minutes or 90 minutes? If you're in a quiet area, DON'T worry!
/end
*or possibly as high as 3.5 in some assessments.
(1)Dominique Heinke, an epidemiologist https://www.vox.com/science-and-hea...sion-risk-factors-lockdowns-social-distancing
There is a pretty consistent message from experts and the government about how to control this pandemic. It's all about transmission, measured by R0 values, and here is a good basic guide: https://www.healthline.com/health/r-nought-reproduction-number#rsubsubvalues
COVID will infect far more people than normal winter flu without control measures: this boils down to R0 being much higher. It's been calculated as around 2.5*, vs normal Flu at 1.3. If we can get the R number down below 1, infection will slowly fizzle out (the lower the better).
The R0 is “a combination of the properties of the virus, and the way that humans interact.”(1).
So let's think about the social distancing most of us are doing; if we stay home from work, avoid everyday social interactions, keep that 2m gap on our public trips, AND KEEP WASHING OUR HANDS I reckon we will cut out 90% of transmission opportunities.
That gets the R factor down to 0.3ish. If we're pessimistic, 0.5. So that's a win; the pandemic WILL fizzle out in time if most people are doing this.
Now: here is where I think we're tending to get things wrong. We're still panicking about individual instances, like you might with something that was fatal to touch, or like a poisonous spider to avoid at all cost. If you're in a vulnerable group i.e those are advised to self-isolate, then this approach makes some sense - every contact is a threat to you. But for the average citizen we need to focus on *overall* transmission rates:
- focus on the easy wins,
- do those things that cut-out 90% of contact with people not in your household,
- wash your hands before/after every trip.
If some oblivious runner tears past you 1m away, don't stress it - unless that's happening 20 times a day. Worrying about whether your walk should be 60 minutes or 90 minutes? If you're in a quiet area, DON'T worry!
/end
*or possibly as high as 3.5 in some assessments.
(1)Dominique Heinke, an epidemiologist https://www.vox.com/science-and-hea...sion-risk-factors-lockdowns-social-distancing
Boris Johnson has gone to his second home to continue his recovery from Covid-19.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52259683
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52259683
