Corona Virus

[Dr The Singh]

2 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We'll see when a baby arrives in 8 months time

It's not mine 

[z-layrex]

47 minutes ago, brucey said:

In case you need some humour to brighten your day:

 

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/03/misallocated-nhs-resources-fuelled-spread-of-virus-in-care-homes-say-bosses

 

 

 

I would like to personally punch in the face anyone who suggests tubing a nursing home resident. Inhumane.

[z-layrex]

3 hours ago, Beechey said:

You’re really accusing the NHS of making extra capacity a PR stunt in the middle of a global pandemic that’s killed hundreds of thousands?

 

36 minutes ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Not having places like The Nightingale available:
"THIS GOVERNMENT DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING."

 

Making places like The Nightingale available but not needing it.
"THIS GOVERNMENT DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING."

 

I dont understand why you guys arnt getting this.

 

Nightingale never had the capacity to function in any sort of the role it was supposed to fill. It couldn't recruit nearly enough nurses there because most had the sense to know what a crap place to work it would be. It couldn't take multi organ failure patients (almost all covid icu patients are multi organ failure, rarely are only the lungs involved). It had no facilities to ct scan, nurses couldn't take patients with tracheostomies, they  couldn't do any sort of dialysis until well into its opening, even then it had very limited renal filters.

 

We never 'had' Nightingale to begin with, it was a flop and we are just lucky the big London trusts managed to increase their critical care footprints so dramatically. 

Edited 4 May 2020 by z-layrex

[StanSP]

31 minutes ago, Bilo said:

Ffs.

 

 

 

Is this allowed

[SystonFox]

Nightingales a PR stunt wow. Yeah sure.

[z-layrex]

1 minute ago, SystonFox said:

Nightingales a PR stunt wow. Yeah sure.

No one said it was a PR stunt.

 

I may have called it one in the past, I dont really believe that. I think it was just a failure and a waste of money.

Edited 4 May 2020 by z-layrex

[Filbert_Ross]

2 hours ago, pds said:

Just had to nip into the office for the first time since mid-March to use the printer. Driving down Narborough Road you wouldn't know anything had changed. Groups of people standing around chatting, scores of people sitting in the bus shelter. Was surreal after being in a bubble for so long to see life seemingly going on as normal for some

yeah I noticed that the other week when driving down the Narb. The only thing different was the best bar in Leicester being shut- OASES. 
 

[SystonFox]

8 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

No one said it was a PR stunt.

 

I may have called it one in the past, I dont really believe that. I think it was just a failure and a waste of money.

They built these as a precaution. Hindsight is wonderful but would you rather they did nothing, let hospitals burst at the seams and potentially thousands more die? 
 

personally I’m glad they took the precautionary route. Maybe I’ll pay for it in taxes the rest of my life but nobody knew which way this was going

[Kopfkino]

20 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

 

I dont understand why you guys arnt getting this.

 

Nightingale never had the capacity to function in any sort of the role it was supposed to fill. It couldn't recruit nearly enough nurses there because most had the sense to know what a crap place to work it would be. It couldn't take multi organ failure patients (almost all covid icu patients are multi organ failure, rarely are only the lungs involved). It had no facilities to ct scan, nurses couldn't take patients with tracheostomies, they  couldn't do any sort of dialysis until well into its opening, even then it had very limited renal filters.

 

We never 'had' Nightingale to begin with, it was a flop and we are just lucky the big London trusts managed to increase their critical care footprints so dramatically. 

 

I always thought they should be used as 'quarantine' hospitals to keep Covid patients away from normal hospitals. But that wasn't really feasible was it? They did that in China but I think they put almost anyone and everyone with symptoms in them rather than just the more severe cases

[st albans fox]

52 minutes ago, Bilo said:

Ffs.

 

 

 

I’ve never quite understood the issue on this.  If you wanted to impose restrictions on people travelling in from n Italy or Madrid or NYC  when they locked down then maybe you have a case (anyone have the stats on just how many non U.K. residents this actually was) but the reality is we had many tens of thousands of people wandering around the U.K. already infected and a few more entering from abroad made no effective difference to our direction of travel and size of our problem.  stable door and horses. our problem came in half term .....we had no idea,... (as didn’t anywhere else in Europe).  The states and Italy  imposed restrictions on travel early on in their situations - rem8nd me how effective that was ???.

[Dahnsouff]

29 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Is this allowed

Not sure, how many snide-leftie points are you allowed per day? 

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

Not sure, how many snide-leftie points are you allowed per day? 

Although, fancy there is not official limit where PP is concerned....

[Father Ted]

27 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

No one said it was a PR stunt.

 

I may have called it one in the past, I dont really believe that. I think it was just a failure and a waste of money.

Yet if they hadn't proceeded with drastic action to build Nightingale hospitals, certain vocal people devoted to a particularly political cult would have been screaming to the rooftops that the government weren't doing anything and weren't spending vital money to deal with Coronavirus. Anyway, who knows, the Nightingale hospitals may well have a vital role to play in the coming weeks as we may encounter a second wave of the virus and if so, it would also help to ease pressures on hospitals as nightingale hospitals can be covid specific. But hey ho, anything for you to slag Boris off

[Parafox]

45 minutes ago, z-layrex said:

I would like to personally punch in the face anyone who suggests tubing a nursing home resident. Inhumane.

I'm not sure about punching someone the face, especially as a frontline health professional, but I get what you mean. They're in a nursing home for nursing care, not a care home where they get fed, cared for and looked after by some very dedicated people, but otherwise don't have any life threatening condition, they have illnesses and conditions that mean they are unable to live independently for various reasons, including sadly, no available family support.

As you know z-layrex, intubation is an invasive procedure which, in a non sterile environment, with unskilled hands, can prove fatal.

Obviously, in my role, we intubate occasionally but mostly it is supra-glottal intervention. 

On one occasion recently I refused to intubate a 100 year old man who was never going to be made better by doing it. I got a complaint from the family, but EMAS supported my decision.

[Guest Markyblue]

Can't remember much criticism of the nightingale hospitals when they were being built,  apart from not quick enough etc , now all of a sudden they were useless,  political point scoring reigns hoorah.

[Parafox]

5 hours ago, z-layrex said:

We never had it though. It was never really a functioning ICU.

You can't realistically build a proper ICU in an exhibition hall. It might have taken patients that needed oxygen support freeing up ICU capacity, but never would it have functioned as what people imagined it to be, a fully integrated ICU with Consultants, senior doctors and  highly qualified nursing staff. Where were they going to get those from? Existing ICU's, that's where.

[The whole world smiles]

4 hours ago, SystonFox said:

They built these as a precaution. Hindsight is wonderful but would you rather they did nothing, let hospitals burst at the seams and potentially thousands more die? 
 

personally I’m glad they took the precautionary route. Maybe I’ll pay for it in taxes the rest of my life but nobody knew which way this was going

I just wish that they had applied that same precautionary attitude to more meaningful things like locking down earlier, stoping travel, cancelling Cheltenham or buying more ppe.

Edited 4 May 2020 by The whole world smiles

[Leicester_Loyal]

24 minutes ago, The whole world smiles said:

I just wish that they had applied precautionary attitude to more meaningful things like locking down earlier, stoping travel, cancelling Cheltenham or buying more ppe.

Agreed with the travel and Cheltenham, but they've obviously tried to buy more PPE. Unfortunately every single Government in the world and most businesses will want it too, there's only so much available for them to buy.

[StanSP]

25 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Agreed with the travel and Cheltenham, but they've obviously tried to buy more PPE. Unfortunately every single Government in the world and most businesses will want it too, there's only so much available for them to buy.

Serious question - what about these stories you hear where genuine suppliers have contacted government about providing several items of PPE and haven't even had responses from the government to acknowledge/accept/decline? 

[Leicester_Loyal]

8 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Serious question - what about these stories you hear where genuine suppliers have contacted government about providing several items of PPE and haven't even had responses from the government to acknowledge/accept/decline? 

There needs to be actual details on it, like prices, amounts etc. That doesn't mean some haven't been ignored, they might have, but I'd imagine the Government are getting thousands of suppliers contact them, some might have not been contacted back by mistake (which is ridiculous), but others might have been ignored due to what they were charging or something.

 

The one that sticks out in my mind is the one where the company said the Government didn't want their PPE, then it turned out they were charging 23x the normal price.

[brucey]

29 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Serious question - what about these stories you hear where genuine suppliers have contacted government about providing several items of PPE and haven't even had responses from the government to acknowledge/accept/decline? 

 

15 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

There needs to be actual details on it, like prices, amounts etc. That doesn't mean some haven't been ignored, they might have, but I'd imagine the Government are getting thousands of suppliers contact them, some might have not been contacted back by mistake (which is ridiculous), but others might have been ignored due to what they were charging or something.

 

The one that sticks out in my mind is the one where the company said the Government didn't want their PPE, then it turned out they were charging 23x the normal price.

Also - it's possible that the specific PPE which was offered was not officially approved for medical use. Like builders FFP3 masks. The non-approved stuff has even found its way into the national stockpile, so there must be loads being offered around. 

 

 

Edited 4 May 2020 by brucey

[st albans fox]

32 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

There needs to be actual details on it, like prices, amounts etc. That doesn't mean some haven't been ignored, they might have, but I'd imagine the Government are getting thousands of suppliers contact them, some might have not been contacted back by mistake (which is ridiculous), but others might have been ignored due to what they were charging or something.

 

The one that sticks out in my mind is the one where the company said the Government didn't want their PPE, then it turned out they were charging 23x the normal price.

I was supplier number 1750 ish 

 

I first registered and it took two weeks for them to give me a number

 

then I uploaded all my PPe data 

 

that was over two weeks ago again  - the email did say that they were prioritising large volumes in items that were in short supply so I assume that they have masses of masks and shields ........

guess they will need them when everyone has to wear a mask on public transport and in small offices ........

 

tbh, it can’t be easy for them with the volumes of supply being offered and probable lack of clarity .... who would you trust ??

[The whole world smiles]

1 hour ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

Agreed with the travel and Cheltenham, but they've obviously tried to buy more PPE. Unfortunately every single Government in the world and most businesses will want it too, there's only so much available for them to buy.

Yeah to be honest I'm no expert and I don't really know the ins and outs of ppe since it started.

 

But I do know our stock was a lot lower than it was say 10 years ago -  https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/revealed-value-of-uk-pandemic-stockpile-fell-by-40-in-six-years

 

And in the spirit of precaution shouldn't we have been going mad buying everything available in January when news started breaking about covid, knowing our stock was low. To try and replenish our supplies just in case we needed it? It's speculation of course by January we could have been trying too and it could well have been too late.

[Innovindil]

1 hour ago, The whole world smiles said:

Yeah to be honest I'm no expert and I don't really know the ins and outs of ppe since it started.

 

But I do know our stock was a lot lower than it was say 10 years ago -  https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/revealed-value-of-uk-pandemic-stockpile-fell-by-40-in-six-years

 

And in the spirit of precaution shouldn't we have been going mad buying everything available in January when news started breaking about covid, knowing our stock was low. To try and replenish our supplies just in case we needed it? It's speculation of course by January we could have been trying too and it could well have been too late.

Genuine question, when there's a world wide shortage of PPE and some countries are absolutely desperate to get their hands on anything and everything, do you think it would have been right for us to try and take supplies away from those countries when we weren't as badly effected at the time?

[WigstonWanderer]

3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I was supplier number 1750 ish 

 

I first registered and it took two weeks for them to give me a number

 

then I uploaded all my PPe data 

 

that was over two weeks ago again  - the email did say that they were prioritising large volumes in items that were in short supply so I assume that they have masses of masks and shields ........

guess they will need them when everyone has to wear a mask on public transport and in small offices ........

 

tbh, it can’t be easy for them with the volumes of supply being offered and probable lack of clarity .... who would you trust ??

In your opinion, would it have helped to have had better plans in place? NOT trying to attack the government, before our Tory friends here dive in like mother hens, more concerned with how it might be possible to do things better in the future.

 

I’m thinking of a register of suppliers of equipment likely to be in short supply, a list of firms that would be able and willing to switch their production to such items, agreed standards and specifications, perhaps a stockpile where required of raw materials, and probably a host of other things that I could even guess at.

Edited 5 May 2020 by WigstonWanderer