The nightingale hospital in London now closed?
The generation who like to bring up the 2nd World War but were quite old enough to have been there.
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
On the face of it yes it is a good thing. If its purely that we created extra capacity in case it was needed and shut it down when it wasn't then job done.People kicking off about the nightingale hospital barely being used. Surely that’s a good thing? Or did we want it rammed? Can’t win.
People kicking off about the nightingale hospital barely being used. Surely that’s a good thing? Or did we want it rammed? Can’t win.
I guess it could mean those who grew up with it but too young to serve?That statement makes no sense if they were old enough they’d have been there?
Bollocks. It has been spoken about all my life. It wasn't just noticed at the end of the last Labour government.You said this despite Labour not being in power at any point between when the problem was highlighted and now. The only reason they even did a 'stress test' for pandemic was Labour put in in motion and Tories psuhed it back two years as it was.
As I said I reckon we wouldn't have got all the necessary equipment in even if they had been and decided to spend any funding increases they may have given on what would have seemed more pressing issues at the time.
However I also don't think Labour would have dicked about trying to get the scientific community to endorse a herd immunity strategy losing us valuable time. But at the same time Laboour would have probably had even more problems convincing of shutting borders. With lockdown I can't say either way but probably they'd have been slightly more willing to push ahead with it sooner and probably harder.
As for no pandemics, there were flu pandemics in the 1950's and 60's. 2009 swine flu was classed as a pandemic. Aids is a pandemic that is still occurring today. Just because we were only mildly affected by the flu's and Aids is more of a slow burn killer than the others and isnt airborne (but has killed loads more people than coronavirus has) doesn't mean we haven't had pandemics. We've just been rather fortunate as to the limited effect they've had here, possibly due to better health and safety, standards etc.
But this is all speculation on my part and the main take from it is we can never know what difference a different administration would have had, for better or worse.
Here’s my question that I haven’t seen asked or answered:
Clearly we stayed home as intended, stories abound that the government were surprised by how strictly people followed lockdown orders.
Clearly we protected the NHS as we haven’t had Italy style stories of ICUs overrun and places like the Nightingales were empty.
So why didn’t we save lives? Why are we looking at double the “good result” we expected? Why are we looking like having the second highest death rate in the world from this? What went wrong?
Because 'protecting the NHS' and 'saving lives' are probably opposing statements in some respects. Protecting the NHS meant sacrificing people in care homes, who had DNAR notices served en masse (contrary to regulatory guidance)/
Wait till they pedal that as a narrative for not funding properly in the future....Maybe the nhs was fine all along
We had deaths from old people's homes added to the number. What about other countries we are being compared with.I think there’s something in this, but even on hospital deaths alone we are way ahead of where we should be looking at comparable countries.
Chuck it on the pile for the inevitable enquiry I guess.
Why on earth are you worried?Following the Cambridge Analytica nonsense I’d be very wary of downloading an app from this government.
Why on earth are you worried?
Its not like this will be run by Faculty (previously ASI Data Science who were linked to SCL Group in the Cambridge Analytica scandal).
And its not like Faculty is run by Marc Warner. The same Marc Warner whose brother, Ben, was recruited by Cummings after working on the leave campaign and who controversially attends SAGE meetings.
Sure its all just coincidence.
I think we did better than intended in spite of the advice .Here’s my question that I haven’t seen asked or answered:
Clearly we stayed home as intended, stories abound that the government were surprised by how strictly people followed lockdown orders.
Clearly we protected the NHS as we haven’t had Italy style stories of ICUs overrun and places like the Nightingales were empty.
So why didn’t we save lives? Why are we looking at double the “good result” we expected? Why are we looking like having the second highest death rate in the world from this? What went wrong?
Oh dear .Why on earth are you worried?
Its not like this will be run by Faculty (previously ASI Data Science who were linked to SCL Group in the Cambridge Analytica scandal).
And its not like Faculty is run by Marc Warner. The same Marc Warner whose brother, Ben, was recruited by Cummings after working on the leave campaign and who controversially attends SAGE meetings.
Sure its all just coincidence.
That’s yet to come under any real scrutiny from either parliament or the press. Pretty shocking.Because 'protecting the NHS' and 'saving lives' are probably opposing statements in some respects. Protecting the NHS meant sacrificing people in care homes, who had DNAR notices served en masse (contrary to regulatory guidance)/
Why on earth are you worried?
Its not like this will be run by Faculty (previously ASI Data Science who were linked to SCL Group in the Cambridge Analytica scandal).
And its not like Faculty is run by Marc Warner. The same Marc Warner whose brother, Ben, was recruited by Cummings after working on the leave campaign and who controversially attends SAGE meetings.
Sure its all just coincidence.
My issue is the patients they turned away due to lack of staffYeah. Can't moan about not building redundancy into the NHS to cope and then moan about these nightingale hospitals not getting much use.
Glad they've not really been used and hopefully they won't be.
It may have featured on the occasional C4 bulletin or panorama .My issue is the patients they turned away due to lack of staff
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
he needs to.
I missed out the word not, sorry but I like how grenners tries to talk to me even though I have him on ignore.I guess it could mean those who grew up with it but too young to serve?
No you are Dom, you come here crying that we won't pretend failure is a good thing and then you lie and try to pretend you didn'tYou really are a prick ain’t ya
I missed out the word not, sorry but I like how grenners tries to talk to me even though I have him on ignore.
Anyway meant to say the people who like to bring up ww2 and the blitz spirit are those not quite old enough to have been there and as brrm said too old for the Falklands
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
On the face of it yes it is a good thing. If its purely that we created extra capacity in case it was needed and shut it down when it wasn't then job done.
However if it has been shut down as other hospitals have stopped referring patients there due to them being turned away as there't no staff thats not so positive.
Nightingale hospital 'turned away more coronavirus patients than it treated'
Agree, but worth kicking off about it when contrasted with the thousands being left to die in care homes. It all feels a bit like a massive PR stunt.
Empty it out and play our matches in there to win the league!People kicking off about the nightingale hospital barely being used. Surely that’s a good thing? Or did we want it rammed? Can’t win.
There's a huge difference in those numbers. One is 6% of the population and the other is 50%. If its 50%, and re-infection isn't possible, you're getting to the point of herd immunity being a viable way forward. Going to need a lot more certainly on the numbers before they can be used to formulate the strategy going forward.Extrapolating from these figures suggest that between 4.2 and 33.5million Britons have been infected with COVID-19
New cases down for a 3rd day in a row....bet none of you will mention that good news though will ya, will just moan about us doing 85k tests
It's the weekend results.New cases down for a 3rd day in a row....bet none of you will mention that good news though will ya, will just moan about us doing 85k tests
New cases down for a 3rd day in a row....bet none of you will mention that good news though will ya, will just moan about us doing 85k tests
There's a huge difference in those numbers. One is 6% of the population and the other is 50%. If its 50%, and re-infection isn't possible, you're getting to the point of herd immunity being a viable way forward. Going to need a lot more certainly on the numbers before they can be used to formulate the strategy going forward.
New cases down for a 3rd day in a row....bet none of you will mention that good news though will ya, will just moan about us doing 85k tests
It's the weekend results.
Any yes we were promised 100k a day
Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?