Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[SocketRocket]

I look forward to the answers on the re-designation. When I heard as it happened I had my doubts.

But on the photo above; is it real or staged? Why do I ask that? For the sake of argument lets assume most hospitals have 20 (main) theatres, a Day Surgery Unit - most have more. All elective surgery has been cancelled. In one theatre there'd be a surgeon, an anaesthetist, scrub nurse, theatre sister at least. 4x hats x20 theatres. A minimum of 80 hats a day not used. And how many staff take the hat, gloves etc off for lunch, especially if they're going down to the canteen. 100 hats a day not used, a 100 masks a day not used? How many extra staff to man an extra 30 beds in the hospital x2 shifts? Would that be 100 staff? Really? I'm really sceptical about that photo.

Just over a week ago I rang a Senior Sister, who was working in ITU in one of the London hospitals. I asked the question about PPE. She said she had enough. I asked for how long, and she replied we're ok, nothing to worry about. I asked her about the type of face mask they had, and she replied that they had the right ones for the job - she also said she'd gone out and bought the all-singing all-dancing version for herself because she sweated too much in the FFP3 masks.

I don't doubt there are some serious questions to be answered on PPE, and I don't doubt there's been shortages. But I do wonder what exactly the truth is in it all.

It does make you wonder at times what's going on. A week ago the press were saying we were going to run out of PPE any day now and even if the delivery turned up from Turkey it would only last three days. Now I cant say I've heard anything about PPE for three or four days. What's changed, surely by the scare stories we should have run out by the week end.

I find it rather incredible that so many are suggesting the Government are completely reckless and wanting to look after their wealthy chums rather that the NHS and seriously I'll patients. Surely Ministers dont make all these detailed decisions and control the procurement chains, logistic experts and medical + scientific professionals would also be culpable if these conspiracy theories were true.

 

[Hobbit]

Don’t you think we now live in an age where people are too easily fooled by the media and rarely change their politic opinions because they would see it as admitting a mistake?

Boris Johnson is our Prime Minister. We voted for Brexit for real once and then reinforced that with subsequent elections which became de facto votes on Brexit. We keep getting it wrong and people don’t learn. The more affluent and more highly educated in society finally became more thoughtful in general but the working class and poor inexplicably have moved towards voting for sound bites and lies, ignoring evidence and history.

We’re not quite at Trump levels yet but I wouldn’t trust the Tories not to make a self serving decision in the face of what’s best for the public if they felt they could spin it.

But which media. The one that supports a blue party or the one that supports a red party? The one that continually asks shallow, sensationalist questions? As for people changing, isn't that how different parties end up in power. Tories got in with a massive seat majority but not a massive majority in votes.

Brexit; I don't want Brexit but I respect that the majority do. Do you respect their choice? No you don't. You take the superior line of you know best. No you don't know best, you know differently. That's where we'll never agree. I respect everyone as equals, for all your hard left beliefs of what's best for society it has to be a society on your very narrow terms, not the majorities terms. And I actually think that's rather sad, to have such a dismissive attitude of the population.

Do I think the Tory's will make a self-serving decision? Yes I do. At the end of the day that decision is worth votes. Do they throw votes away or do they chose what will, in effect, buy them votes? Not a hard equation is it. All parties will put up what they think will buy votes, and then its down to the people's choice.

 

[Kellfire]

But which media. The one that supports a blue party or the one that supports a red party? The one that continually asks shallow, sensationalist questions? As for people changing, isn't that how different parties end up in power. Tories got in with a massive seat majority but not a massive majority in votes.

Brexit; I don't want Brexit but I respect that the majority do. Do you respect their choice? No you don't. You take the superior line of you know best. No you don't know best, you know differently. That's where we'll never agree. I respect everyone as equals, for all your hard left beliefs of what's best for society it has to be a society on your very narrow terms, not the majorities terms. And I actually think that's rather sad, to have such a dismissive attitude of the population.

Do I think the Tory's will make a self-serving decision? Yes I do. At the end of the day that decision is worth votes. Do they throw votes away or do they chose what will, in effect, buy them votes? Not a hard equation is it. All parties will put up what they think will buy votes, and then its down to the people's choice.

Brexit will either benefit us or make us worse off in the UK - so far it’s worse off and the overwhelming evidence is that will be the case medium to long term.

Some things ARE right and wrong and when a wrong decision is made even when the forecasters say it will be wrong, then that’s fairy damning.

 

[Hobbit]

Brexit will either benefit us or make us worse off in the UK - so far it’s worse off and the overwhelming evidence is that will be the case medium to long term.

Some things ARE right and wrong and when a wrong decision is made even when the forecasters say it will be wrong, then that’s fairy damning.

And some people knew there'd be a hit to the economy but chose to do so for political reasons. That doesn't make them wrong, just different. I might not agree with their politics but I won't damn them for it. As for forecasters... we'll see.

 

[MegaSteve]

When the media is in 'normal' mode and attacking the red team those to the right lap it up... BIG thumbs up all round ?... Now, unusually, the media is putting the Tories under close scrutiny... Team blue, to coin a phrase, are not liking it up 'em!

 

[Deleted member 18588]

When the media is in 'normal' mode and attacking the red team those to the right lap it up... BIG thumbs up all round ?... Now, unusually, the media is putting the Tories under close scrutiny... Team blue, to coin a phrase, are not liking it up 'em!

That may be your perception.

However, if we compare this national crisis with Blair's handling of the Iraq war we can see that the MSM remained supportive throughout the actual conflict.

It was only subsequent to the action that a more critical eye was turned.

 

[MegaSteve]

That may be your perception.

However, if we compare this national crisis with Blair's handling of the Iraq war we can see that the MSM remained supportive throughout the actual conflict.

It was only subsequent to the action that a more critical eye was turned.

Bottom line is that all anyone is posting is their perception/opinion... In general, printed media is not known for being left friendly... Yes, I acknowledge there are a couple of exceptions to that...

 

[Deleted member 16999]

That may be your perception.

However, if we compare this national crisis with Blair's handling of the Iraq war we can see that the MSM remained supportive throughout the actual conflict.

It was only subsequent to the action that a more critical eye was turned.

Sorry, that’s you with the selective memory, blair and his Government were (rightly) dragged through the mire in the build up to the invasion and the dossier saga, then during it over the sh!te kit the Troops were being issued.

During the conflict the MSM got behind the Troops and rightly supported them, no different to the MSM getting behind the NHS Staff and Key Workers now.

I work in the offshore industry, where currently my main focus is windfarms and identifying (mainly WWII) unexploded ordinance (UXO) before installation of wind turbines, to avoid any potential risks. I would probably be considered to be an expert in my field, in the same way that those on the SAGE committee are. If the survey identifies what I consider to be a potential UXO risk then that is what I put in my report. It doesn't matter what the contractor thinks should be in there, what the client thinks should be in there, or what anyone else who might be attending the meetings thinks should be in there, if I consider there to be a risk then I will go through the data and explain my reasoning to my office and that is what will be reported.

If the scientists on the SAGE committee are not strong enough, or are too insecure, to stand up to outside influence (whether from Cummings or the Government) then that is the real scandal that needs to be investigated.

As much as I agree with the sentiment and your principles, it’s a bit naive to think nobody in a position of responsibility like you mention can’t be influenced.
Some people are weak or easily influenced or simply out of their depth, how many admit that to themselves would be another question though.

Sadly some on here are taking every question about what’s going on as an anti-tory dig, that’s ridiculous, some questions need asking regardless of who is in charge and what colour rosette they wear.

 

[Hobbit]

Sorry, that’s you with the selective memory, blair and his Government were (rightly) dragged through the mire in the build up to the invasion and the dossier saga, then during it over the sh!te kit the Troops were being issued.

During the conflict the MSM got behind the Troops and rightly supported them, no different to the MSM getting behind the NHS Staff and Key Workers now.



As much as I agree with the sentiment and your principles, it’s a bit naive to think nobody in a position of responsibility like you mention can’t be influenced.
Some people are weak or easily influenced or simply out of their depth, how many admit that to themselves would be another question though.

Sadly some on here are taking every question about what’s going on as an anti-tory dig, that’s ridiculous, some questions need asking regardless of who is in charge and what colour rosette they wear.

Good points, although I would ask would every member of a full technical committee be influenced. Equally, we're not there. There may be scenarios where the scientific evidence says one thing but logistically its impossible to achieve, e.g. every COVID patient should be in single rooms.

 

[AmandaJR]

It's as if the BBC get stuck on a subject and keep going despite what else might be happening. Mind you if anyone ever watches Points of View then basically the answer to every criticism is "we're right, you're wrong".

So they keep banging on about the plan to come out of lockdown and seem to have left PPE for now despite one of their own programmes highlighting decisions that require serious questioning. Panorama "understands" doesn't mean it's fact but ministers need to be questioned and pushed. This morning they had a minister on (can't recall her name/title but something to do with social care I think) and asked her about this allegation and she talked about the current situation, avoided the question, and wasn't really pushed. For the first time I'm thinking Louise was justified to interrupt and get at her but she didn't.

I've really lost faith in our public service broadcaster to be balanced, informative and factual.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Good points, although I would ask would every member of a full technical committee be influenced. Equally, we're not there. There may be scenarios where the scientific evidence says one thing but logistically its impossible to achieve, e.g. every COVID patient should be in single rooms.

Sounds weird Bri (coming from me) but my only interest in this SAGE make-up is to why it needs to be secret and identities protected, ie, are they the “right” experts? Sadly the term experts is banded around and everyone is simply meant to nod their head and accept it.
Experts have been wrong in the past and have caused Governments problems.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Sorry, that’s you with the selective memory, blair and his Government were (rightly) dragged through the mire in the build up to the invasion and the dossier saga, then during it over the sh!te kit the Troops were being issued.

During the conflict the MSM got behind the Troops and rightly supported them, no different to the MSM getting behind the NHS Staff and Key Workers now.



As much as I agree with the sentiment and your principles, it’s a bit naive to think nobody in a position of responsibility like you mention can’t be influenced.
Some people are weak or easily influenced or simply out of their depth, how many admit that to themselves would be another question though.

Sadly some on here are taking every question about what’s going on as an anti-tory dig, that’s ridiculous, some questions need asking regardless of who is in charge and what colour rosette they wear.

Prior to the conflict the media was mixed in supporting or not the conflict until the dodgy dossier.

The contents of which were accepted both by the media and the majority in Parliament.

Only afterwards did that support wane once it became clear that we as a nation had gone to war on a false premise.

Aside from a very few journalists there were not any questioning the Govt's day to day handling of the war.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

Sounds weird Bri (coming from me) but my only interest in this SAGE make-up is to why it needs to be secret and identities protected, ie, are they the “right” experts? Sadly the term experts is banded around and everyone is simply meant to nod their head and accept it.
Experts have been wrong in the past and have caused Governments problems.

But who, other than more "experts", decides who are the right "experts"?

Is this something that can only be assessed after the event with the benefit of hindsight and a full independent review?

My point is that the media seem to be trying to lay traps with their constant pressure for targets on deaths, R factor and end to lockdown rather than being constructive.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Prior to the conflict the media was mixed in supporting or not the conflict until the dodgy dossier.

The contents of which were accepted both by the media and the majority in Parliament.

Only afterwards did that support wane once it became clear that we as a nation had gone to war on a false premise.

Aside from a very few journalists there were not any questioning the Govt's day to day handling of the war.

That’s reality though, once we put Troops on the ground, in any scenario, the Country backs them, maybe, just maybe though, the MSM have learnt not to take everything a Government says without question and by stepping up and asking awkward questions during a crisis lives maybe saved on the front line.

 

[Hacker Khan]

It's as if the BBC get stuck on a subject and keep going despite what else might be happening. Mind you if anyone ever watches Points of View then basically the answer to every criticism is "we're right, you're wrong".

So they keep banging on about the plan to come out of lockdown and seem to have left PPE for now despite one of their own programmes highlighting decisions that require serious questioning. Panorama "understands" doesn't mean it's fact but ministers need to be questioned and pushed. This morning they had a minister on (can't recall her name/title but something to do with social care I think) and asked her about this allegation and she talked about the current situation, avoided the question, and wasn't really pushed. For the first time I'm thinking Louise was justified to interrupt and get at her but she didn't.

I've really lost faith in our public service broadcaster to be balanced, informative and factual.

Just about every paper is covering the lockdown or PPE at the moment. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-52450126

 

[Deleted member 16999]

But who, other than more "experts", decides who are the right "experts"?

Is this something that can only be assessed after the event with the benefit of hindsight and a full independent review?

My point is that the media seem to be trying to lay traps with their constant pressure for targets on deaths, R factor and end to lockdown rather than being constructive.

Is that because questions are being ignored? ie, “we’re following the science” that’s it, sound bytes.

Surely in a crisis such as this that affects everyone they should have nothing to hide.

https://amp.theguardian.com/comment...-scientists-medical?__twitter_impression=true

The above is from The Guardian, which some will write off as leftist etc, but what if if just for a minute it’s correct.
How long before the “right” experts are brought in?

 

[ColchesterFC]

As much as I agree with the sentiment and your principles, it’s a bit naive to think nobody in a position of responsibility like you mention can’t be influenced.
Some people are weak or easily influenced or simply out of their depth, how many admit that to themselves would be another question though.

Yes it's possible for a person to be influenced. But it's not just a single person that needs to be influenced, it's the entire advisory group of how ever many that is. I can't see how Cummings can be influencing the advisory group without at least one of them making it public or quitting the group.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Easily researched... For starters..
Overall rise in population
Aging population, more people needing treatment for longer.
Better medical care for more people, wider issues and complexity,
Cancer care extending life with expensive drugs and equipment
Raising level of expectation of 'free' care
Medical tourism
Etc

Under funding from 1960s, see data reports, easy researched!

Get that, but that must be balanced out by savings due to advanced keyhole surgery and much quicker recovery periods.
Things like knee and hip reconstruction used to take months of recovery. My Missus had two major operations three years ago and in both cases was out of hospital in a few days.
Childbirth is sometimes a one day hospital visit, as we were surprised to hear from my niece

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Yes it's possible for a person to be influenced. But it's not just a single person that needs to be influenced, it's the entire advisory group of how ever many that is. I can't see how Cummings can be influencing the advisory group without at least one of them making it public or quitting the group.

Maybe by his sheer presence because of the way he’s portrayed in the media.

Maybe none what so whatever, but if it’s not an issue, then the Government should come out and put the record straight, ie, prevent it from becoming a story.

It’s ok blaming the media on this, but the Government do have the ability to stop these stories dead in their tracks or a cynic could say while the media are distracted by a non-story they are missing the real stories.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

Good points, although I would ask would every member of a full technical committee be influenced. Equally, we're not there. There may be scenarios where the scientific evidence says one thing but logistically its impossible to achieve, e.g. every COVID patient should be in single rooms.

Exactly right re the committee. It is an overwhelming argument. - would more than a dozen scientific people, at the top of their profession, all, without one dissension, be influenced by Cummings, a PR man, whom nearly all journalists want to "bring down". Any one of the committee threatened or upset by him could go to the Media, and bring him down, big time.
Yet the anti - government here see him as some sort of Caligula or Rasputin.!