I fully understand where you’re coming from Mark, lots of information not being disclosed IMO. Questions need to be asked, and answered … truthfully - that’s a joke…
1 Like
I think it’s a fair question, but to me the obvious and very simple answer, as I said above, is that in previous years these measures weren’t necessary because national health service were able to cope without them.
In years when flu outbreaks have been exceptionally bad, there has been talk in the UK of the NHS being oversaturated. But I don’t recall it ever having to take over private hospitals, set up emergency hospitals in public buildings, and still be faced with having to prioritise which patients it can treat.
Whereas yours is measured & informative ?
1 Like
I can’t find any report that private hospital beds are actually being requisitioned although this was suggested by the GMB union & the Labour Party.
Health secretary Matt Hancock confirmed: “We will, next week, open a new hospital – a temporary hospital – the NHS Nightingale Hospital at the Excel centre in London. The NHS Nightingale Hospital will comprise two wards, each of 2,000 people. With the help of the military and with NHS clinicians, we will make sure that we have the capacity that we need.” Best to be prepared.
FWIW
So they are not taking over private hospitals, just sub contracting to them. They will work alongside each other. Quite often in recent years the NHS has had a shortage of beds & we are all familiar with patients being kept on trolleys for hours while beds are found, often many miles away.
If the number of people requiring treatment mushrooms then they will need all the capacity they can find.
At least with the restrictions now in place the NHS won’t have to deal with the drunks, fights & road accidents that normally fill A & E at weekends.
2 Likes
Yes I didn’t mean the NHS were “taking over” the hospitals as in, requisitioning 
but they will be taken over in the sense that NHS patients will be occuping “private” beds.
Are we agreed, now, on why exceptional measures are needed?
That’s because of their massive shutdown. This virus is at least 10 times more lethal than flu and has twice the pass-on rate. Do the math. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s a deadly illness.
Or perhaps a case where for the UK Government at least, every cloud has a silver lining.
Suspending the right of folks to peaceably assemble certainly puts paid to any climate change demonstrations, and imposing severe restrictions on people entering the country will reduce the numbers coming in from the EU before Freedom of Movement ceases at the end of the year.
No doubt we will all obtain some benefit in some way or another from the current restrictions, but whether it will be worth it in terms of the price to be paid remains to be seen.
2 Likes
Meanwhile on Planet Robert Hodge…^^^^^^^^^^^
@james as you created the Coronavirus topic area recently - could you create a new area for like minded people to discuss:
- The benefits of Brexit
- The benefit of restriction of freedom movement
- The negative impact of immigration to UK
- The denial of climate change
- The benefit of blue passports
- The countless conspiracy theories
- The benefits of Boris
So a small topic area for these subjects to be grumbled about by a small group of like minded members - to keep them away from the rest of us sane ones!
Perhaps you could name it:
Together With A Tool feel free to use the acronym if this is too long!
7 Likes
The thing is, I never said that they weren’t! I was asking why such extreme measures were put in place with this virus while in previous years no such measures were taken. The flu deaths are still large but NO precautions were made then. My question, which no-one has even got close to explaining, is why THIS virus has suddenly forced such measures.
To date it is far less deadly (in terms of numbers) than Flu but prompted quick & serious actions. Only now are we being told how it works, how serious it can become & what it affects. Was this because no-one really knew or were governments trying to hold something back? Like most secrets, whispers become rumours & then these get embellished & it is difficult to determine truth from fiction.
Unfortunately much of what has been broadcast has varied widely.
The conspiracy that I allude to is not the seriousness of the virus but the way that the characteristics, effects & behaviour patterns were not made clear to the public. This resulted in all sorts of misinformation being put about, causing confusion. Only now is this information coming to light.
Why was this info so slow to emerge?
Make no mistake, I have followed the guidelines without complaint & treat them seriously, but surely it would have been better to tell people why we need to?
Funnily enough, the FT gave quite an honest assessment - https://www.ft.com/content/ed3fb63e-41ce-11ea-bdb5-169ba7be433d
2 Likes
I’ve tried to explain what I believe is the reason, which it seems so clear to me but you don’t seem to be seeing it.
You seem to think it’s all about trying to stop people dying, but although obviously that’s part of it, it’s not the main issue.
It’s about trying to keep the health service functional.
Flu doesn’t make health services collapse.
What happened in China, made people realise that this could.
The quick and serious action by other governments was an attempt to try and stop the same happening there.
Unfortunately in most countries it wasn’t sufficiently quick and serious and health services aren’t coping.
But I suppose we have the small consolation that if action hadn’t been taken, the situation would be worse.
I think most people understood that the measures are to try and stop the disease spreading. Wash your hands, self isolate, the message has been consistent from the start, no?
Why the confusion? well I guess because unfortunately, new viruses don’t arrive complete with a tech spec, a user guide and full instructions like new phones etc do, so researchers had to start figuring it all out. (That is a feeble attempt at humour, please don’t mistake it for sarcasm.)
You have been given the answer by more than one person. Unfortunately you seem to be unable to understand what you have been told. That’s your problem, the reasons have been given very clearly.
I really hope you are playing some sort of game here.
With all the coverage and explanations available I cannot understand his position. To me, to you, to Paul the reasons are crystal clear because the logic is pretty straightforward. I’m not sure why he is fixated on flu, this is not flu.
Thank you Anna. I am not confused, I know exactly why we have to do those things & I am fully aware of the effect on our health services.
It is the characteristics of the virus itself that seemed to be slow in being explained. They knew how it spread & what the effects were from the get go, which I would guess is why most governments put the travel restrictions in place. The chinese reacted quite quickly & we could watch them build a hospital in a week. Seems THEY knew! Now, at last, we are getting information directly from those who know, rather than the confused & sanitised versions from preceeding weeks.
If the virus is allowed to run unchecked it’s will grow exponentially and the NHS will quickly run out of ICU facilities which will be required for a percentage of the patients. The low numbers are the start of the curve and they cannot be compared to flu deaths because Corona virus and flu grow in different ways. Intervention has to be made early to try to ensure that the seriously ill patients do not exceed NHS ICU capability while at the same time better testing systems and hopefully a vaccine will be developed and approved before too long. Flu kills a lot of people each year, this has the potential to kill a huge number of people very quickly. Governments all around the world have acted to control the spread of the disease at the expense of everything else, they are not spending hundreds of billions of pounds for fun, they are doing it because this threat is so much greater than the threat from flu.
The basic facts were there for all to see. Some goverments intepreted them differently/were in denial for longer than others. Macron acted quite quickly. Johnson acted slower.
As for the characteristics of the virus, nobody can explain them because they’re still unfolding. Most people thought the young were pretty safe but this afternoon a 21 year old girl with no underlying health issues died in the UK. Saying the young are safe wasn’t a sanitised or intentionally confused version, it’s what was suggested by earlier evidence.
You could be in for a huge shock Robert. Yesterday the unbelievable happened, the Olympic Games have been postponed for a year. Another major event that is also likely to be postponed is the final date for Britain being tied to the EU. The date set in stone by Mr Johnson was already deemed to be too tight to meet but with the Coronavirus chaos it is very likely to be put back by at least a year. The billions of pounds spent on funding the lockdown will have wiped out the reserves that Britain was relying on to support its weak economy while it finds its feet outside one of the biggest trading groups in the world. Happy days!
I cannot believe that anyone would have written that.
I don’t have time to read this whole thread, but the best factual account of the pandemic I’ve read to date is the following - and it does not entirely support much of the media coverage:
“Asymptomatic or mild cases combined represent up to half of all infections.”
“The overall fatality risk… after developing symptoms was 1.4%… substantially lower than previously thought.”