Corona Virus

[String fellow]

One difficult issue I've had to try to resolve is whether or not to continue receiving weekly home care visits for my elderly mother. Continuing with them would break our strict no visitors rule. So last week, I rang the care company and cancelled the arrangement until further notice. But stopping the invoices coming from Glenfield wasn't quite as straightforward as I'd hoped.

[Finnaldo]

5 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Somewhere in the middle. Economically the response has been good but ultimately we originally had the view ‘it could never happen here’. The herd immunity plan also cost us a bit of time and ultimately lives. However according to polls the public feel boris is handling things well, I don’t think the WHO agree. We’re lucky that we’ve appeared to have more time to prepare than Italy and Spain. If a good response is Singapore/South Korea/Germany and a bad response is USA/Brazil/Italy (to an extent) then we’re firmly in the middle. 

This really. One thing I’ll add is if you compare us to Germany, the closest you can compare us to in terms of time to prepare, but with an older population (second eldest in the EU behind Italy), then they’ve handled it much better compared to us. They formulated a plan early and stuck to it. Now they have a better of idea of infections than us and around 200 less deaths compared to us despite land borders with Northern Italy, the worst affected area in Europe. 
 

If you judge us by that, then we’ve been much poorer in response. But we won’t be torn apart in the same way Italy or Spain has I think. Middle of the pack is about right.

[EastAnglianFox]

Anybody still struggling for essentials from the usual supermarkets then give Home Bargains a go if you have one close by.

 

We pretty much had the place to ourselves last night around 6pm and had row after row of things like baked beans, tuna, pasta, toilet roll, meats, cheese's, beers etc. Good brands and damn good prices.

 

 

Edited 26 March 2020 by EastAnglianFox

[Guest MattP]

34 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

Despite my criticisms, I think we’ll get off much better than Spain or Italy ultimately. But I think the initial laissez-fairs attitude to this may have cost more lives than necessary.

 

We can only use the evidence in front of us. This hasn’t been a complete disaster, but it’s been rather irresponsibly handled with extremely poor communication along the way. Boris has also proven himself a very weak leader.

Personally think he's done as well as possible in a crisis. I've also been impressed by having him flanked by Vallance and Whitty explaining the science behind the decisions.

 

We've always had the intention of staggering the illness to avoid a crisis in the NHS and preparations are now starting to get into place to hope it cope through the worst. I'm glad he didnt bow to those demanding total lockdown and im glad he isn't now - that's what a weak leader would have done imo.

 

I'm just glad we got a majority in December - the chaos of a hung parliament through this would have been disturbing. I presume we would be having to cobble some form of unity government in having votes on everything.

[String fellow]

The last time I looked at my atlas, Germany didn't have a land border with Italy!

[Guest MattP]

10 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

This really. One thing I’ll add is if you compare us to Germany, the closest you can compare us to in terms of time to prepare, but with an older population (second eldest in the EU behind Italy), then they’ve handled it much better compared to us. They formulated a plan early and stuck to it. Now they have a better of idea of infections than us and around 200 less deaths compared to us despite land borders with Northern Italy, the worst affected area in Europe. 

Germany doesn't border Italy

[Finnaldo]

2 minutes ago, MattP said:

Personally think he's done as well as possible in a crisis. I've also been impressed by having him flanked by Vallance and Whitty explaining the science behind the decisions.

 

We've always had the intention of staggering the illness to avoid a crisis in the NHS and preparations are now starting to get into place to hope it cope through the worst. I'm glad he didnt bow to those demanding total lockdown and im glad he isn't now - that's what a weak leader would have done imo.

 

I'm just glad we got a majority in December - the chaos of a hung parliament through this would have been disturbing. I presume we would be having to cobble some form of unity government in having votes on everything.

Realistically Matt, it would be preferable to have a Government of National Unity now regardless, if just for a month once they come back. It would be nice to see all politicians on the same page, if not asking the serious or pressing issues government have overlooked where necessary. 
 

The initial reaction wasn’t enough in my opinion, hate to sound like a broken record but he waited between the 31st January and 3rd March to have a COBRA meeting wasn’t fast enough a reaction, and the fact there’s so many non-essential workers working through the lockdown, some travelling cross country and coming into contact with numerous folks, smacks of poor leadership. A strong leader doesn’t have to immediately change the guidelines an hour after making the announcement.

 

Perhaps if he’d used that month seriously, he may have been more confident in the steps he takes, but it feels too much like we’re making up for wasted time at the minute. I’m glad we’ve finally got things at least partially in order.

[Finnaldo]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

Germany doesn't border Italy

I’m thinking of Austria  

 

The point stands if slightly modified, they’re in a much closer proximity to the hotspot and coping much better.

Edited 26 March 2020 by Finnaldo

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

Realistically Matt, it would be preferable to have a Government of National Unity now regardless, if just for a month once they come back. It would be nice to see all politicians on the same page, if not asking the serious or pressing issues government have overlooked where necessary. 
 

The initial reaction wasn’t enough in my opinion, hate to sound like a broken record but he waited between the 31st January and 3rd March to have a COBRA meeting wasn’t fast enough a reaction, and the fact there’s so many non-essential workers working through the lockdown, some travelling cross country and coming into contact with numerous folks, smacks of poor leadership. A strong leader doesn’t have to immediately change the guidelines an hour after making the announcement.

 

Perhaps if he’d used that month seriously, he may have been more confident in the steps he takes, but it feels too much like we’re making up for wasted time at the minute. I’m glad we’ve finally got things at least partially in order.

The public made clear who it wanted to be in government just three months ago and the winning party has extended its lead since then comfortably - no moral case for it. The majority of the population quite rightly decided people like Corbyn and Abbott should be nowhere near critical decision making and they aren't going to squeeze in on the back of a pandemic.

 

They have brought certain members of the opposition parties into information meetings and that's more than enough.

 

The original advice from the science and Imperial college was no lockdown and to keep schools open to try and follow the orange line on the original graph they produced.

 

Had Boris ignored the scientists to go the way you wanted he would have been crucified. Everything is so easy in hindsight.

[Finnaldo]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

The public made clear who it wanted to be in government just three months ago and the winning party has extended its lead since then comfortably - no moral case for it. The majority of the population quite rightly decided people like Corbyn and Abbott should be nowhere near critical decision making and they aren't going to squeeze in on the back of a pandemic.

 

They have brought certain members of the opposition parties into information meetings and that's more than enough.

 

The original advice from the science and Imperial college was no lockdown and to keep schools open to try and follow the orange line on the original graph they produced.

 

Had Boris ignored the scientists to go the way you wanted he would have been crucified. Everything is so easy in hindsight.

I was talking in terms of symbolic gesture of togetherness, no changes of cabinet or decision makers. To prove how serious this is. I don’t even want Corbyn or Abbott leading the Labour Paty. 

 

Everything is easier in hindsight. Once again things are also easier when you don’t wait an entire month to have your first COBRA meeting and make the decisions at the last possible moment. 
 

If he had been consulting this in February and asked key questions regarding estimated deaths and scenarios with regards to herd immunity, do you think it would have left the meeting committee? We reacted day by day and paid the price for that. Germany reacted immediately and have managed to control their deaths thus far despite a much older population.

Edited 26 March 2020 by Finnaldo

[Lionator]

19 minutes ago, MattP said:

Personally think he's done as well as possible in a crisis. I've also been impressed by having him flanked by Vallance and Whitty explaining the science behind the decisions.

 

We've always had the intention of staggering the illness to avoid a crisis in the NHS and preparations are now starting to get into place to hope it cope through the worst. I'm glad he didnt bow to those demanding total lockdown and im glad he isn't now - that's what a weak leader would have done imo.

 

I'm just glad we got a majority in December - the chaos of a hung parliament through this would have been disturbing. I presume we would be having to cobble some form of unity government in having votes on everything.

I’ve been pleasantly surprised how well the two main parties have worked together on this. Hancock and Ashworth in particular have appeared to be working closely with the government listening to the opposition in some respects. It’s clear that in a time of a real crisis (this makes Brexit look like a walk in the park) that national unity is the best way forward. 
 

Boris and Jezza were particularly civil with each other in PMQ’s yesterday for all of their limitations. Hopefully with Starmer coming in, we can lose this tribal nonsense and actually all work together for the good of the country moving forward on environmental, social and domestic issues as I believe Boris is a lot more to the left of the right than people think. 

[reynard]

8 minutes ago, MattP said:

The public made clear who it wanted to be in government just three months ago and the winning party has extended its lead since then comfortably - no moral case for it. The majority of the population quite rightly decided people like Corbyn and Abbott should be nowhere near critical decision making and they aren't going to squeeze in on the back of a pandemic.

 

They have brought certain members of the opposition parties into information meetings and that's more than enough.

 

The original advice from the science and Imperial college was no lockdown and to keep schools open to try and follow the orange line on the original graph they produced.

 

Had Boris ignored the scientists to go the way you wanted he would have been crucified. Everything is so easy in hindsight.

Probably the time to all stay together rather than some cheap political point scoring.

In fairness to Johnson I'd say he'd rate about a 5 out of 10 so far. In many ways events and the reaction of private organisations has overtaken the government policy. The main failure, if you want to call it that, is on the communication front. It hasn't been clear at times and it should be. I'd also say he was largely invisible at times in the early stages.

 

As to unity cross party governments at times of national crisis, then history shows they work quite well. There is evey moral case for it as it draws the country more together and at times of crisis the governement must take its people with it. A country that sees its parliament and government acting in unison tends to get behind it.

The truth is we don't have hindsight on this yet. Only when it is over and the number of dead counted will we know whether our strategy has worked or not.

It is also a time when valid interrogation of what the government does is crucial. There are very important issues going on which for whatever reason are not being handled at 100% efficiency, eg the provision of PPE to all health workers.

[Guest MattP]

13 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Boris and Jezza were particularly civil with each other in PMQ’s yesterday for all of their limitations. Hopefully with Starmer coming in, we can lose this tribal nonsense and actually all work together for the good of the country moving forward on environmental, social and domestic issues as I believe Boris is a lot more to the left of the right than people think. 

Boris has always been a liberal, obviously his opponents had to try and portray him as hard right and bizarrely even "far right" during an election campaign but it's so far from his actual beliefs.

 

One of the reasons he will be so opposed to the infringement on liberties. I'm with him on that as well - we've never been on lockdown, we aren't that sort of country and we shouldn't start now. It's one of the reasons we are so different to countries like Italy and Spain who have lived under authoritarianism.

 

I feel sorry for Kier tbh - imagine the manifesto he will have produce, rescuing a dire financial situation and committing to be carbon neutral by the end of the parliament he intends to win.

 

That's probably enough politics though and we should get back to Covid.

 

Some positivity in the Times today......

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nhs-now-likely-to-cope-with-coronavirus-says-key-scientist-rn5m6nggk

Edited 26 March 2020 by MattP

[martyn]

Seems like the way deaths in the UK are being reported has changed. It now requires permission from the family of the deceased to be counted (note, the healthy 21 year old girl who died recently does not appear in official statistics as yet). 

 

Will explain the bizarrely low number reported yesterday compared to the trajectory the UK was on previously. 

 

Wonder why the government have decided to take this approach. 

 

Edited 26 March 2020 by martyn

[String fellow]

Imo, the government regard the daily deaths total as a barometer of the emergency. By obscuring the true number i.e. making it lower than the reality, they think that that will help reduce the overall levels of public anxiety. It's a dangerous ploy which could give people a false sense of security.

[bovril]

19 minutes ago, martyn said:

Seems like the way deaths in the UK are being reported has changed. It now requires permission from the family of the deceased to be counted (note, the healthy 21 year old girl who died recently does not appear in official statistics as yet). 

 

Will explain the bizarrely low number reported yesterday compared to the trajectory the UK was on previously. 

 

Wonder why the government have decided to take this approach. 

 

The numbers in Italy are lower the reality, people are dying in their homes from 'probable' corona-related illnesses. We'll never know the real numbers. 

[lgfualol]

49 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

I’m thinking of Austria  

 

The point stands if slightly modified, they’re in a much closer proximity to the hotspot and coping much better.

The majority of cases here last time I looked was youngish people, but healthcare over here is insanely good which helps and the elderly usually live quite remote or in their own flats/houses, rather than with their families like the Italians so less chance of spread. 

[TamworthFoxes]

22 minutes ago, martyn said:

Seems like the way deaths in the UK are being reported has changed. It now requires permission from the family of the deceased to be counted (note, the healthy 21 year old girl who died recently does not appear in official statistics as yet). 

 

Will explain the bizarrely low number reported yesterday compared to the trajectory the UK was on previously. 

 

Wonder why the government have decided to take this approach. 

 

No chance this is true. The Government does not need family’s permission to include a death in official stats.

 

[Finnaldo]

1 minute ago, lgfualol said:

The majority of cases here last time I looked was youngish people, but healthcare over here is insanely good which helps and the elderly usually live quite remote or in their own flats/houses, rather than with their families like the Italians so less chance of spread. 

Cheers for the info, so in terms of elderly they’re more set out like the UK? 

[Strokes]

40 minutes ago, martyn said:

Seems like the way deaths in the UK are being reported has changed. It now requires permission from the family of the deceased to be counted (note, the healthy 21 year old girl who died recently does not appear in official statistics as yet). 

 

Will explain the bizarrely low number reported yesterday compared to the trajectory the UK was on previously. 

 

Wonder why the government have decided to take this approach. 

 

Have you got a source for this, it doesn’t seem right somehow.

[joachim1965]

22 minutes ago, TamworthFoxes said:

No chance this is true. The Government does not need family’s permission to include a death in official stats.

 

100% this, would make no sense at all other than to give people false hope.

[Guest Markyblue]

Surely the last thing the government would do is play down the figures, they will want the sense of urgency to continue to stop people becoming complacent and laxity settling in. 

[fuchsntf]

2 hours ago, Izzy said:

Made me smile among all the doom and gloom. No i-phone, Skype or FaceTime for old Queenie. She's still using her 1970's rotary dial, corded telephone 

 

Buckingham Palace releases a photograph of the Queen speaking to the prime minister from Windsor Castle

 

It  is a sort of Comfort  for the  winklies seeing Queenie Keeping to the easy ways of communicating...

Fk..These complicated Mobiles,and Whatsapp.    I thought my kids were asking ' Whats up' Papa.??

[TamworthFoxes]

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Have you got a source for this, it doesn’t seem right somehow.

It’s not correct.

The Government doesn’t,  and never will,  need permission of family to report deaths. He might be getting mixed up with press reporting specific details but in terms purely of a statistic the Government needs no permission.
How would it even work?!?

Government official: Morning Mrs Smith, just ringing about the sad passing of your husband yesterday. 
Mrs Smith: Oh ok.

Government official: Yes sorry for your sad loss, the hospital rang and told us it was due to the Corona Virus. Now in terms of the death you have got a few options, it either goes down as a corona virus death like it is, you choose a cause of death, I know tickled to death is popular or we just class him as still alive in our numbers. It’s your choice completely.

Mrs Smith: oh ok, well he loved the water can he be a drowning please?

Government official: of course no problem, while i’ve got you on the phone Mrs Smith, obviously your two sons are in prison do you still want them classed as working abroad or can they go on the Prison population?

Mrs Smith: no keep them as working away please.

Government official: will do, Joeys doing well on B Wing by the way.

 

Give me strength.

[urban.spaceman]