Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[drdel]

It’s going to be several years before we’re out of the woods on these 2 matters. And by then we’ll have buggered up something else. Meanwhile we’ll be waiting patiently for the Russia Report to be released and then the Inquiry into the Brexit Farce to be started.

So, the families of those 60,000 plus people will have to wait until when? 2025? 2030?

But the scientists and medical industry will not stop. The research impetus would wide has a momentum and eye to profit. Governments across the would may agonise but its business and scientist that will drive solutions not political whinging.

 

[bluewolf]

But the scientists and medical industry will not stop. The research impetus would wide has a momentum and eye to profit. Governments across the would may agonise but its business and scientist that will drive solutions not political whinging.

I'm not sure that I'm reading this correctly, but you appear to be saying that we should be completely ignoring the possibility that poor decisions from the Government could have directly resulted in the deaths of thousands of people. That identifying and learning from possible mistakes is "Government agonising" and "Political whinging"?

Well, my wife (an NHS worker) lost a friend to this disease. A paramedic who had no underlying healthcare issues prior to contracting the virus. I'd be quite interested in finding out if everything reasonably practicable had been done prior to this.

 

[drdel]

I'm not sure that I'm reading this correctly, but you appear to be saying that we should be completely ignoring the possibility that poor decisions from the Government could have directly resulted in the deaths of thousands of people. That identifying and learning from possible mistakes is "Government agonising" and "Political whinging"?

Well, my wife (an NHS worker) lost a friend to this disease. A paramedic who had no underlying healthcare issues prior to contracting the virus. I'd be quite interested in finding out if everything reasonably practicable had been done prior to this.

No i am not saying we ignore a review of decisions. But I think the political aspects are less important than rational deductive lessons learnt by scientists and medical industry generating cures, treatments and vaccines.

 

[bluewolf]

No i am not saying we ignore a review of decisions. But I think the political aspects are less important that lessons learnt by scientist and medical industry generating cures, treatments and vaccines.

But the people holding a review are different to the people working on treatments. Both can be done at the same time.

 

[ColchesterFC]

Looks like there's a lot of pressure to reduce the social distancing measures from 2m to 1m to help businesses. Will be interesting to see if the government can find some experts to publicly back this move as the current scientific view seems to be that we need to keep it at 2m.

 

[Wolf]

Looks like there's a lot of pressure to reduce the social distancing measures from 2m to 1m to help businesses. Will be interesting to see if the government can find some experts to publicly back this move as the current scientific view seems to be that we need to keep it at 2m.

Easily done considering thats the exact advice the WHO experts have been advocating of 1m since the start..

 

[Deleted member 18645]

COMING SOON TO MAGAZINES AND TV CHANNELS NEAR YOU

"Did you lose a family member to Covid-19? Then you can sue the Government for compensation. No win no fee. Sign up today. (We only take 50% of the paid out amount).

Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Run Solicitors.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Looks like there's a lot of pressure to reduce the social distancing measures from 2m to 1m to help businesses. Will be interesting to see if the government can find some experts to publicly back this move as the current scientific view seems to be that we need to keep it at 2m.

WHO advice is 1m, most of Europe is 1m. Easy to change the distance and back it up if they want to. At 2m we are in the minority.

Economically we need to move to 1m, at this point health wise we probably need to stay ar 2m. It's a very tough decision for the govt

 

[rudebhoy]

Pretty shameful that scientists / medical experts have been dropped from the daily briefings for dating to suggest that lockdown rules apply to all.

Ruth May was asked by a SPAD in a "practice questions"' session on 3rd June whether she would support Cummings' actions if the question came up. When she said her answer would be as above, she was dropped from that day's broadcast, and Hancock had to present the slides. When asked by the press where she was, a spokesman said "she was out saving lives".

Jonathan Van-Tam has not been seen since he was asked on 30 May about Cummings and said the rules were there to benefit all and applied to all.

Separately, there does seem to be a conscious effort by the government to distance itself from the expert medical advice, pushing ahead with easing the lockdown despite the experts stating the threat level is unchanged at 4.

 

[Jimaroid]

I do wonder if something has been lost in translation, if everyone maintained a 1m personal space there would be a 2m gap. Simple radius versus diameter problem.

I’d hope it was obvious but given some of the emerging policies, patterns and people involved I’m starting to question whether something very basic has been misunderstood.

 

[rudebhoy]

WHO advice is 1m, most of Europe is 1m. Easy to change the distance and back it up if they want to. At 2m we are in the minority.

Economically we need to move to 1m, at this point health wise we probably need to stay ar 2m. It's a very tough decision for the govt

Remember when this all started, and questions were being asked why we were doing things differently? The answer was "we have the best experts in the world". Not sure that is still the view in Number 10.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Remember when this all started, and questions were being asked why we were doing things differently? The answer was "we have the best experts in the world". Not sure that is still the view in Number 10.

Number 10 just don't listen to said experts .. as per the 2016 pandemic test I believe it was where these failing were highlighted for supply of PPE etc but money rules all.

At the start of this wasn't it 1.5m we started with? Then upped to 2m. Whilst the WHO states 1m

 

[rulefan]

Judging by many people's current operation of the 2m rule I reckon that we will end up with 0.5m effective distancing with any change.

 

[rudebhoy]

Judging by many people's current operation of the 2m rule I reckon that we will end up with 0.5m effective distancing with any change.

Unfortunately I think you are right.

The main shopping street in our town has very narrow pavements. Ahead of the shops reopening next week, the council are planning on making it one way (heading south), with the northbound lane and the adjacent parking spaces being designated a pedestrianised area. I think it's a great idea, but FB is full of complaints about the loss of the parking. There is plenty free parking within 5 minutes walk. Some people just don't get it.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

I do wonder if something has been lost in translation, if everyone maintained a 1m personal space there would be a 2m gap. Simple radius versus diameter problem.

I’d hope it was obvious but given some of the emerging policies, patterns and people involved I’m starting to question whether something very basic has been misunderstood.

You have a good point, but like all reasonable explanations, they go out the window when people want to "interpret" to satisfy their wants.
Of course, publicans pressing for the 1 metre have the health of the public in mind? . But their one metre won't be the one you describe.
Jeez, surely everyone knows it's a matter of how close to people you need not to be so that you are not breathing their expelled air. ( and IMHO, it isn't the proposed 1 metre).Anything else is compromise .

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Judging by many people's current operation of the 2m rule I reckon that we will end up with 0.5m effective distancing with any change.

That's for me entirely why we brought in the 2m rule and not the 1m

Half the population can't stick to it

 

[drdel]

To heck with the Government advice, note the word is "advice" why would anyone with any common sense voluntarily want to be within 2m of strangers?

If you need or expect to be closer for more than 10-15 minutes the "advice" is to it take protective measures. Perhaps we should wait for the PM to gives us all nappy changing advice!!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Some are missing the point of the 2m - 1m discussion, it is not the public that have the issue, it is the business owners who are pushing for the change!

They are doing it to try and get the industries going again that are suffering badly!

Comments about the public and their issues with the distance is deflecting from the discussion.

 

[drdel]

Some are missing the point of the 2m - 1m discussion, it is not the public that have the issue, it is the business owners who are pushing for the change!

They are doing it to try and get the industries going again that are suffering badly!

Comments about the public and their issues with the distance is deflecting from the discussion.

There is copiuos advice on the Government website for businesses where the 2m recommendation is impossible.

For pubs and stuff it will relax when infection rate is down. Surely the 'public' may want to be careful and not add to their infection risk just because it is allowed.

 

[Jimaroid]

That's for me entirely why we brought in the 2m rule and not the 1m

Half the population can't stick to it

Exactly this. Psychologists call it the Barnard Castle effect.