Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah whatever

Re: Coronavirus
 

So what distorted garbage was in it?


1) Which heavily affected country had enough PPE? Not even South Korea did.
2) John Hopkins University(USA) stated that the UK was 2nd best prepared for a pandemic.
3) Plans have been forged since the Civil Contingency Act(2004).
4) Have the devolved governments done any better?
National Risk Register report for 2008.
2016 report
Pandemic preparedness report from 2015 on face masks.
As it mentions a previous HPA review, the policy before then was the same.

Re: Coronavirus
 

2nd best prepared country? Given how unprepared we were that’s like being the second best sexually transmitted infection.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Let me guess, you have just listened to a ranting session from Dr. John Ashton, venomously Anti-Tory, Anti-Brexit and it's all their fault?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Are yes, Panarama, well know for its fair, unbiased, non sensationist reporting.

I would trust it about as much as I trust the Sun.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's not a perceived difference it's an actual difference.

Child care, nurseries or clubs will be smaller numbers in each location. Additionally take up of these services is much lower than state mandated education.

If there was an outbreak this would be easier to manage, contact trace, test and isolate.

Adapt, hire temporary staff, arrange childcare for their key staff or remain closed along with the pubs.

It's not up to the Government to find a workable solution for every single scenario that this forum can invent on the journey to 'normal'. It's simply not practical.

It's already accepted by Government there will be no going back to 'normal' until into next year.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So remind me again, who exactly was prepared?

Re: Coronavirus
 

South Korea. Simply because we would balk at the idea of surrendering privacy is simply Darwinism in action - being too stupid to survive.

They may well not have had enough masks but I'd rather have their body count, and closer return to a normal economy than ours.

Some in this thread want to surrender 200,000 souls to get the economy going, l'd say a short term invasion of privacy seems a small price to pay.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wrong Mick, guess whatever the hell you like.

---------- Post added at 21:12 ---------- Previous post was at 21:12 ----------

Remind me again, which is your preferred STI?

---------- Post added at 21:14 ---------- Previous post was at 21:12 ----------

If all the points it raised get to be proven wrong I'll happily post that my opinion has changed.

But i wouldn't hold your breath.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, if you hadn’t just posted a one liner, I wouldn’t have to guess.

You’ve made a claim, back it up, posting you’ve just watched a BBC Propaganda hit piece, with chatter from Dr John Ashton, doesn’t cut it for me.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So the South Korean rules on testing didn't work. They were disregarded by that medical officer.
When 61% of your cases can be traced back to just one person, it makes it a lot easier.
If there are more points of introduction of the virus spread around the country, it leads to more cases and more difficultly tracing anybody. IT DOES NOT SPONTANEOUSLY ARISE. It has to be introduced somewhere. It should be blatantly obvious that the more points of introduction means more cases. There is no simple way of comparing number of cases between countries. Just as you can't compare Northern Italy with Southern Italy. Southern Italy didn't magically do better.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yes, and our lack of lockdown and airport screening contributed to more points of introduction. Our lack of any meaningful contact tracing mean we probably have no idea the original cases in all the strains in the UK.

We haven't got 10% of the global deaths by pure bad luck as you seem to be portraying. These are lessons that need to be learned soon, or else we will face more restrictions for longer.

You raise an interesting point though about the privacy angle. I wonder if the US, UK and billionaire owned media would have done a better job selling the idea had they understood the economic impact sooner. As it stands a tracing app appears to be part of our way out.

I wonder if the elderly, the furloughed or even just those dying for a pint in a pub before 2021 would have readily conceded had they fully understood the seriousness of the pandemic.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Of course there will be a smaller number if kids that attend these venues, however the numbers of children actually in contact with each would be around the same as a normal class size ( anywhere between 15-30) and many many smaller but numerous < 15 operating all over.

It’s as much a risk as a school and vice versa.

so would a school? The pupils are all known, easily traced and isolated?

my point was about specific skills, what if known are available? what if, as discussed, there is non-available as it is closed but they’ve been told they can operate, and therefore will no longer be able to claim government assistance.....just go out of business then?

Wow, at last.........an admission from you that government cannot do all or be responsible for all.

You’re on the right path now, keep walking.

Re: Coronavirus
 

When you start to do the homework, it all hits home - Panorama Editor is Rachel Jupp, who just happens to be the sister-in-law of Labour MP, Helen Hayes.

Dr John Ashton, Labour Member said back in March that he feared the NHS will be unable to manage the large numbers of people who will become seriously sick, he bitterly suggested by saying:

“It’s a joke when they put up people to say they are really on top of it and if it spreads at a community level the NHS will cope, it’s always coped. The hospitals are full at the moment, A&Es are full, beds are full, intensive care is full.”

Every single person that has got Covid-19 and landed in hospital has been treated and not been turned away because beds were "full". So how wrong was he?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Link