FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Exit strategy?
Exit strategy?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
To control the severity of this wave, thus not overwhelming the NHS as much as it would if Covid ran rampant.
Managed waves, that's what they are, until 60-80% of the population has been infected, or a vaccine arrives. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the use of controlling numbers with a lockdown if as soon as you unlock the numbers go back up again? "
There isn’t one.
Europe let the ship sail by not trace testing and screening arrivals. We are now stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Lockdown will realistically have to last 6-12 months for it to be long term effective. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Hopefully by then, they can test over a 100,000 people per day, which surges the numbers together of the UK population.. We are currently testing 13,000 per day, and not even reaching capacity of that  Which is probably why our numbers are lower than other countries.. We can test 100K people by the end of this month according to the health secretary.. Which will protect the NHS a lot more, and will give everyone a better idea what areas in the UK are affected.. But fully maximising those testing numbers by the end of April/Start of May will definitely benefit the exit strategy, obviously keeping lockdown in place and probably creating a stricter lockdown than what we are in now, as I see daily people not abiding by the lockdown and more police patrolling streets as from what I see the public are still social distancing which drags this on.. Just my take  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abs..Woman
over a year ago
.. |
I’m interested in why flights are returning from countries without any quarantine measures. Surely it’s dodgy flying back from Italy and many other places? Particularly London airports given the high numbers there.
I’m not sure why people are still travelling. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I’m interested in why flights are returning from countries without any quarantine measures. Surely it’s dodgy flying back from Italy and many other places? Particularly London airports given the high numbers there.
I’m not sure why people are still travelling. "
To late the virus is here now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’m interested in why flights are returning from countries without any quarantine measures. Surely it’s dodgy flying back from Italy and many other places? Particularly London airports given the high numbers there.
I’m not sure why people are still travelling. "
it could possibly be, Britons flying back from designated countries where they're stranded in other countries, as the number of those are high.. But.. I am hearing also.. That flights are still open from contaminated places and still flying into England and the U.K., which is concerning that the they're putting economy before health.. Too many loopholes in this lockdown in my opinion, not strict enough and not fully direct either |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option."
That would be my assessment
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *emmabTV/TS
over a year ago
Brentford |
"They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option."
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"What's the use of controlling numbers with a lockdown if as soon as you unlock the numbers go back up again? "
When numbers are small enough then it is possible to track and trace a virus to keep it contained. This, together with continued limited restrictions can be used to fight the virus.
A pretext to this is that you have plenty of test capabilities and lots of people on the ground.
Without getting into politics we were simply in no condition to handle a pandemic even though it has always been a case of WHEN not IF. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asIsaCouple
over a year ago
harrow |
"What's the use of controlling numbers with a lockdown if as soon as you unlock the numbers go back up again?
There isn’t one.
Europe let the ship sail by not trace testing and screening arrivals. We are now stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Lockdown will realistically have to last 6-12 months for it to be long term effective. "
Yes and there are some deluded half wits who think lockdown will be lifted in May/June! Lockdown may sporadically be slightly lifted but expect that type of action to last until at least spring 2021 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *asIsaCouple
over a year ago
harrow |
"They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option."
18-24 months? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eordiesCouple
over a year ago
newcastle |
"They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option."
Agreed, but the Gov. will have to relax lockdown then re-impose it as a balancing act between getting herd immunity and keeping numbers infected below what the NHS can handle. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the use of controlling numbers with a lockdown if as soon as you unlock the numbers go back up again? "
This is clearly happening in China. More recorded cases since they have started relaxing their lockdown measures |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the use of controlling numbers with a lockdown if as soon as you unlock the numbers go back up again?
This is clearly happening in China. More recorded cases since they have started relaxing their lockdown measures "
This information could validate the approach the UK government has taken in not locking down from day one...
Controlling the infections in smaller waves to avoid overloading the NHS with one almighty tsunami.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The restrictions could be tightened or slackened depending on infection rates and hospital requirements. It’s like turning a tap on and off to control the flow of infected patients that require treatment. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The restrictions could be tightened or slackened depending on infection rates and hospital requirements. It’s like turning a tap on and off to control the flow of infected patients that require treatment."
I read an article that questioned why Italy had such a high death toll despite having quarantine in place. The answer was that people weren't adhering to the quarantine rules.
So much like here.
You might find there is no need to turn the tap back on. Quarantine needs to be full measure, not half hearted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The restrictions could be tightened or slackened depending on infection rates and hospital requirements. It’s like turning a tap on and off to control the flow of infected patients that require treatment.
I read an article that questioned why Italy had such a high death toll despite having quarantine in place. The answer was that people weren't adhering to the quarantine rules.
So much like here.
You might find there is no need to turn the tap back on. Quarantine needs to be full measure, not half hearted."
Italy also has an older population than ours. Hopefully whatever measures are in place here if enough of us adhere to them it will be enough to control the flow effectively enough. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sweden is running at about the same rate as us with no lockdown? Go figure. "
Sweden have 6,000 confirmed cases and 300 deaths, which is the very start faze for them.. When we were at 300 deaths, things were starting to warm up.. Each country are in different places with the pandemic, Sweden with those figures are in the early stages of it, or.. Possibly might not even see the bad end of it and will only have small activity with C19 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sweden is running at about the same rate as us with no lockdown? Go figure.
Sweden have 6,000 confirmed cases and 300 deaths, which is the very start faze for them.. When we were at 300 deaths, things were starting to warm up.. Each country are in different places with the pandemic, Sweden with those figures are in the early stages of it, or.. Possibly might not even see the bad end of it and will only have small activity with C19 "
Sweden started to see people dying before us . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The restrictions could be tightened or slackened depending on infection rates and hospital requirements. It’s like turning a tap on and off to control the flow of infected patients that require treatment.
I read an article that questioned why Italy had such a high death toll despite having quarantine in place. The answer was that people weren't adhering to the quarantine rules.
So much like here.
You might find there is no need to turn the tap back on. Quarantine needs to be full measure, not half hearted.
Italy also has an older population than ours. Hopefully whatever measures are in place here if enough of us adhere to them it will be enough to control the flow effectively enough."
Italy has a much older population, much higher incidence of multi generational households (impossible to isolate elderly people properly) and a huge rate of smoking among men and women of all ages. These things are all contributing to their death rate, unfortunately. Similarly in Spain. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Sweden is running at about the same rate as us with no lockdown? Go figure.
Sweden have 6,000 confirmed cases and 300 deaths, which is the very start faze for them.. When we were at 300 deaths, things were starting to warm up.. Each country are in different places with the pandemic, Sweden with those figures are in the early stages of it, or.. Possibly might not even see the bad end of it and will only have small activity with C19 "
Sweden is roughly 3 times larger than the UK and only has a population of 10 million. A completely different kettle of fish. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Sweden is running at about the same rate as us with no lockdown? Go figure.
Sweden have 6,000 confirmed cases and 300 deaths, which is the very start faze for them.. When we were at 300 deaths, things were starting to warm up.. Each country are in different places with the pandemic, Sweden with those figures are in the early stages of it, or.. Possibly might not even see the bad end of it and will only have small activity with C19
Sweden is roughly 3 times larger than the UK and only has a population of 10 million. A completely different kettle of fish."
Its population is fairly concentrated in a few small urban zones though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"When numbers are small enough then it is possible to track and trace a virus to keep it contained. This, together with continued limited restrictions can be used to fight the virus.
A pretext to this is that you have plenty of test capabilities and lots of people on the ground."
The digging I have done would suggest that this is the best strategy in the absence of a vaccine. And a vaccine is still some time away - those timeframes the papers are all touting are the most optimistic ones. They assume that we will successfully create a new vaccine faster than we have ever done before.
There are quite a lot of people saying "track, trace and isolate" is the best strategy, including the WHO. I found a video by 3blue1brown to be extremely good at illustrating that track, trace, isolate is so effective as well as a few other easy takeaway messages, including the fact that quarantine or social distancing with even just 10% of people breaking the rules isn't as much better than no quarantine as you would hope.
I won't post a link but if you are interested then search for 3blue1brown simulating an epidemic and you should find it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"When numbers are small enough then it is possible to track and trace a virus to keep it contained. This, together with continued limited restrictions can be used to fight the virus.
A pretext to this is that you have plenty of test capabilities and lots of people on the ground.
The digging I have done would suggest that this is the best strategy in the absence of a vaccine. And a vaccine is still some time away - those timeframes the papers are all touting are the most optimistic ones. They assume that we will successfully create a new vaccine faster than we have ever done before.
There are quite a lot of people saying "track, trace and isolate" is the best strategy, including the WHO. I found a video by 3blue1brown to be extremely good at illustrating that track, trace, isolate is so effective as well as a few other easy takeaway messages, including the fact that quarantine or social distancing with even just 10% of people breaking the rules isn't as much better than no quarantine as you would hope.
I won't post a link but if you are interested then search for 3blue1brown simulating an epidemic and you should find it."
Nice post |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life."
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes."
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes.
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this."
I started posting about this pandemic in late January. When did the government take its first step?
At the time I remember very heated arguments that the NHS had needlessly overstocked for the swine flu and any expense preparing for this pandemic was money wasted.
Judging from reports it seems that everything this government has done has been reactionary no evidence of anything proactive. I was suggesting the setting up of volunteer groups in February.
I am not alone in thinking this.
https://youtu.be/aKTwBbge4lQ
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30727-3/fulltext
I asked NHS workers to contact me with their experiences. Their messages have been as distressing as they have been horrifying. “It's terrifying for staff at the moment. Still no access to personal protective equipment [PPE] or testing.” “Rigid command structures make decision making impossible.” “There's been no guidelines, it's chaos.” “I don't feel safe. I don't feel protected.” “We are literally making it up as we go along.” “It feels as if we are actively harming patients.” “We need protection and prevention.” “Total carnage.” “NHS Trusts continue to fail miserably.” “Humanitarian crisis.” “Forget lockdown—we are going into meltdown.” “When I was country director in many conflict zones, we had better preparedness.” “The hospitals in London are overwhelmed.” “The public and media are not aware that today we no longer live in a city with a properly functioning western health-care system.” “How will we protect our patients and staff…I am speechless. It is utterly unconscionable. How can we do this? It is criminal…NHS England was not prepared…We feel completely helpless.” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
As I said, no health care service in the world would be prepared for this pandemic. It’s a case of trying to control the influx into the hospitals at a steady rate. Nobody in the world is anywhere near creating a vaccine yet and at this moment in time we as a country are probably coping better than any other with the way we are trying to control the infection rate. Ultimately none of us know yet, all we can do is trust the leading scientists and try to adhere to the instructions given to us. Bedtime for me, wash your hands and keep safe. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"As I said, no health care service in the world would be prepared for this pandemic. It’s a case of trying to control the influx into the hospitals at a steady rate. Nobody in the world is anywhere near creating a vaccine yet and at this moment in time we as a country are probably coping better than any other with the way we are trying to control the infection rate. Ultimately none of us know yet, all we can do is trust the leading scientists and try to adhere to the instructions given to us. Bedtime for me, wash your hands and keep safe. "
You too. Keep safe and tell Mrs that she's a hero twice over. For doing the nightshift and for doing what she does. I salute her! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes.
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this."
We are at the back of the queues for testing components, medical protective wear etc. Meanwhile Germany has been testing 70,000 per day. We've still hardly any NHS staff tested. In January we should have been ordering appropriate volumes of essential materials and planning. We now have other countries such as the USA commandeering ventilators, PPE etc that were ordered and in transit to other countries and this could easily happen to our orders. Avoidable infections and deaths because Johnson didnt plan and order from January. It's now April! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes.
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this.
We are at the back of the queues for testing components, medical protective wear etc. Meanwhile Germany has been testing 70,000 per day. We've still hardly any NHS staff tested. In January we should have been ordering appropriate volumes of essential materials and planning. We now have other countries such as the USA commandeering ventilators, PPE etc that were ordered and in transit to other countries and this could easily happen to our orders. Avoidable infections and deaths because Johnson didnt plan and order from January. It's now April! "
Well said, I have no confidence in this government at all, the only one that has stood out is the chancellor for me, the rest seem like they're trying to save their own skin due to lacking in every area and being exposed for it, can't see a good end for some of these cabinet members |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes.
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this.
We are at the back of the queues for testing components, medical protective wear etc. Meanwhile Germany has been testing 70,000 per day. We've still hardly any NHS staff tested. In January we should have been ordering appropriate volumes of essential materials and planning. We now have other countries such as the USA commandeering ventilators, PPE etc that were ordered and in transit to other countries and this could easily happen to our orders. Avoidable infections and deaths because Johnson didnt plan and order from January. It's now April! "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"What's the use of controlling numbers with a lockdown if as soon as you unlock the numbers go back up again?
When numbers are small enough then it is possible to track and trace a virus to keep it contained. This, together with continued limited restrictions can be used to fight the virus.
A pretext to this is that you have plenty of test capabilities and lots of people on the ground.
Without getting into politics we were simply in no condition to handle a pandemic even though it has always been a case of WHEN not IF."
No country was ready for this, even those in Asia that experienced SARS |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes.
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this.
We are at the back of the queues for testing components, medical protective wear etc. Meanwhile Germany has been testing 70,000 per day. We've still hardly any NHS staff tested. In January we should have been ordering appropriate volumes of essential materials and planning. We now have other countries such as the USA commandeering ventilators, PPE etc that were ordered and in transit to other countries and this could easily happen to our orders. Avoidable infections and deaths because Johnson didnt plan and order from January. It's now April!
Well said, I have no confidence in this government at all, the only one that has stood out is the chancellor for me, the rest seem like they're trying to save their own skin due to lacking in every area and being exposed for it, can't see a good end for some of these cabinet members "
Apparently the vast majority do have confidence in BoJo. What a bunch of cocks they are. There has been enough examples of such a shit job that they are doing but some people simply dont want to listen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Population of Sweden is just over 10 million compared to over 66 million in the uk. It also has a lack of major built up areas which effectively lessens the spread. Nobody knows which is the right or wrong way of controlling the infection rate categorically but the uk is obviously taking a less risky route at a greater financial cost. Personally I’m happier that the UK are gambling to lose more financially than take the gamble on a greater loss of life.
Considering we had a two month notice period, how does one account for the state of unpreparedness of our NHS if not for penny pinching?
Yes the government has thrown money at this, but only after they turned a crisis into a catastrophe with their initial herd immunity strategy. Now they are heroes.
Did we have a two month notice period? I don’t know of any country that could have predicted probable timings for infection. Was there an initial policy that opted for herd immunity? From everything I’ve heard ( which is probably more than most considering where Mrs Absolutebeginner works ) and everything I’ve read the plan has always been to control the flow of the infection to enable the nhs to cope. As for the nhs being unprepared, we now have a new hospital in London, a new one almost ready by the nec in Birmingham and two others planned in Bristol and Harrogate. I don’t think that any health service anywhere in the world could really adequately prepare for a pandemic such as this.
We are at the back of the queues for testing components, medical protective wear etc. Meanwhile Germany has been testing 70,000 per day. We've still hardly any NHS staff tested. In January we should have been ordering appropriate volumes of essential materials and planning. We now have other countries such as the USA commandeering ventilators, PPE etc that were ordered and in transit to other countries and this could easily happen to our orders. Avoidable infections and deaths because Johnson didnt plan and order from January. It's now April!
Well said, I have no confidence in this government at all, the only one that has stood out is the chancellor for me, the rest seem like they're trying to save their own skin due to lacking in every area and being exposed for it, can't see a good end for some of these cabinet members
Apparently the vast majority do have confidence in BoJo. What a bunch of cocks they are. There has been enough examples of such a shit job that they are doing but some people simply dont want to listen."
If people are happy with the handling of this in the UK, then they have very low standards.. Not sure what happened to patriotism and wanting the very best for your country, some people are blinded by politics rather than actual reality and my vote is based on the person not the party so I'm a open minded voter.. But it's been exposure after exposure on this government pretty much daily, the writing is on the wall |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option.
Agreed, but the Gov. will have to relax lockdown then re-impose it as a balancing act between getting herd immunity and keeping numbers infected below what the NHS can handle."
That's what I've said above. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They will gradually ease restrictions on and off for the next six months to a year, so as not to overwhelm the nhs, watching what happens and acting accordingly. Eventually the virus will start to spread less due to more being infected and it’ll struggle to find new hosts. As we drag it out we potentially get nearer to a vaccine. Those are your only two exit strategies.
It’s gonna be a long one this. There seems to be no other option.
18-24 months?"
Perfectly plausible these restrictions could be eased on and off for this duration. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Strategy? That's really not something the UK does well.
More often, due to an unwillingness to invest in prevention, the UK Government sequence is as follows:
Crisis
Inadequate initial response
Finally recognising the scale of the problem, too late
Expecting the public to bear the brunt without adequate help (because WWII)
Recovery (often only partial)
Inquiry and avoidance of blame
Failure to learn from mistakes by not implementing the recommendations of the Inquiry
Refusal to fund preparations for any similar such possible future crisis
This template can be applied to a lot of crises, from flooding to war - but it particularly applies to disease because we really can see it coming.
Well, the scientists can - but government only ever listens to them when it's already neck deep in the shit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
