Draconian measures

[DustyBin]

It's in essence very much like the "points problem" - do you allow the train to carry on and kill the person on one track, or do you change the points and allow it to kill someone else. Which of those is better is the subject of very, very difficult debate.

But the current strategy is akin to derailing the train, killing or injuring all on board, at which point the debate isn’t so difficult....

And so is dying of COVID-19.

Obviously, but as a society we need to accept that very elderly and very ill people die of many causes, COVID-19 being only one of them. And yes, a number of seemingly young, healthy people also die from it, but the number is too small to justify the damage being caused to society as a whole. We don’t do it for other causes of death so why this virus?

 

[kristiang85]

And so is dying of COVID-19.

Well I know someone in her 40s who had chest pains early in the year but couldn't get them checked out due to COVID 19, and then in the summer was diagnosed with throat cancer. It's incurable as it was discovered too late. She's a single mother with a young daughter who's life is about get seriously screwed up.

Without covid restrictions she probably would have been able to get it treated early and been OK.

Now that is just someone I know. I've seen many other similar stories online. And yet in september covid was only the 19th biggest cause of death in the UK (ONS data released yesterday). It is absolutely criminal what is going on, all for a disease with a 0.2% IFR according to WHO and an average age of death higher than the average life expectancy in the UK.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well I know someone in her 40s who had chest pains early in the year but couldn't get them checked out due to COVID 19, and then in the summer was diagnosed with throat cancer. It's incurable as it was discovered too late. She's a single mother with a young daughter who's life is about get seriously screwed up.

Without covid restrictions she probably would have been able to get it treated early and been OK.

That's really sad.

Of course, the NHS being unable to deal with things other than COVID is much more likely if we don't impose measures to keep the caseload (and thus NHS load) down. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier in March, that near-overwhelming may not have happened. Therefore this is an argument for measures, not against them.

 

[kristiang85]

That's really sad.

Of course, the NHS being unable to deal with things other than COVID is much more likely if we don't impose measures to keep the caseload (and thus NHS load) down. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier in March, that near-overwhelming may not have happened. Therefore this is an argument for measures, not against them.

Personally, as I've said before on here, I think if we used even half the money spent on lockdown costs on the NHS, the outcomes would have been the same and we would have a vastly improved and more appreciated service. But I really fear for the future of it now.

The NHS has been overrun every winter; so much of this investment could have helped stop that. This year has been no different, yet there is going to be a non covid health crisis in 2021 onwards that was completely unnecessary.

 

[DustyBin]

That's really sad.

Of course, the NHS being unable to deal with things other than COVID is much more likely if we don't impose measures to keep the caseload (and thus NHS load) down. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier in March, that near-overwhelming may not have happened. Therefore this is an argument for measures, not against them.

The question is, is the NHS actually unable to cope with things other than COVID, or has it crippled itself through bad management and policy making? When I hear first hand from nurses who tell me their hospitals are empty, one of which is a new-build state of the art facility, it certainly begs the question.

 

[Bantamzen]

Well I know someone in her 40s who had chest pains early in the year but couldn't get them checked out due to COVID 19, and then in the summer was diagnosed with throat cancer. It's incurable as it was discovered too late. She's a single mother with a young daughter who's life is about get seriously screwed up.

Without covid restrictions she probably would have been able to get it treated early and been OK.

Now that is just someone I know. I've seen many other similar stories online. And yet in september covid was only the 19th biggest cause of death in the UK. It is absolutely criminal what is going on.

That's terrible to read, my wholehearted sympathies go out to her and her family. Sadly this is happening all over, but because it is not covid nobody cares.

 

[big_rig]

I read that as: “I note the upcoming death of your friend, but I think you’ll find this situation actually demonstrates I am even more right about everything to do with lockdowns than previously stated.”

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally, as I've said before on here, I think if we used even half the money spent on lockdown costs on the NHS, the outcomes would have been the same and we would have a vastly improved and more appreciated service. But I really fear for the future of it now.

I'm certainly strongly in favour of increased NHS spending and would support tax increases to do so. There are many aspects of it that need more funding - at the base level, it should be possible to get a GP appointment for tomorrow in every case, or at worst the day after if it's particularly busy. I think it's a bit of a fallacy to suggest using the lockdown money for it, as the basis and funding for that is different - I wouldn't support use of quantitative easing and borrowing to upgrade NHS funding on an ongoing basis, that needs to be through an increase to Income Tax, NI or both.

I think the argument you're making is a bit like "we should can HS2 and build tram systems with the money", as that disregards the source of the money for HS2 largely requiring it to be built to exist.

 

[bramling]

Well, I certainly think that the current Government will be forever tainted by this authoritarianism and will need to seek alternative careers once this crisis is over.

I think the “worst death rate in Europe” tag probably does it for more people. However those not angry about that may well be angry about the authoritarianism, so BJ is screwed either way! As is Hancock. Sunak will likely be tainted by “I wrecked the public finances” in due course as well.

Drakeford doesn’t really care as he will be going soon anyway, and who knows what the impact will be on Sturgeon!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think the “worst death rate in Europe” tag probably does it for more people. However those not angry about that may well be angry about the authoritarianism, so BJ is screwed either way! As is Hancock. Sunak will likely be tainted by “I wrecked the public finances” in due course as well.

Drakeford doesn’t really care as he will be going soon anyway, and who knows what the impact will be on Sturgeon!

Bozza will probably have a career in after dinner speaking ahead of him, I suspect.

 

[Domh245]

Bozza will probably have a career in after dinner speaking ahead of him, I suspect.

He had that career anyway, just now he can charge higher fees

 

[Yew]

That's really sad.

Of course, the NHS being unable to deal with things other than COVID is much more likely if we don't impose measures to keep the caseload (and thus NHS load) down. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier in March, that near-overwhelming may not have happened. Therefore this is an argument for measures, not against them.

We can delay by a few weeks or months in many cases; but now we're dragging it on through half a year, the number of illnesses that need examination is constantly increasing.

It seems a lot of your argument is 'we needed a lockdown in March, so we need it again now' which simply doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

 

[bramling]

Bozza will probably have a career in after dinner speaking ahead of him, I suspect.

Absolutely, and I’m sure there’s truth in the rumours that he’s already thinking longingly ahead to this.

I suppose he will have a unique selling point, as there aren’t really any other ex PMs who can be booked to do a “I totally wrecked Britain in less than a year” speech. Even John Major could only do “I wrecked the Conservative party”!

 

[C J Snarzell]

Absolutely, and I’m sure there’s truth in the rumours that he’s already thinking longingly ahead to this.

I suppose he will have a unique selling point, as there aren’t really any other ex PMs who can be booked to do a “I totally wrecked Britain in less than a year” speech. Even John Major could only do “I wrecked the Conservative party”!

I very much doubt BJ will be doing any media appearances once he vacates number 10. My guess is he will simply slip into obscurity once he goes.

CJ

 

[yorkie]

can we try not to stray too far off topic please? thanks

 

[AM9]

Still not the point though. Today it is laws against people partying & socialising, tomorrow it could be laws that impact you.

It is laws against people coming into close contact during a health emergency. The law for that was passed in 1984 and the specific provisions for this pandwemic were in the Coronavirus Act in March 2020. Specific measures are designed to counter the behaviour that might represent a threat to the health of others.
Some of the laws currently in force do affect me but that doesn't mean that I should expect a penalty to not apply to me just because I might not agree with them. Nobody has an absolute need to gather in a large social group.

 

[Richard Scott]

Nobody has an absolute need to gather in a large social group.

What about a funeral, that is your last chance to pay your respects and only get one chance so I disagree, there are occasions where large groups are necessary.

 

[kez19]

You've missed something along the way. The 4 organisers were fined £10,000 each for a total of £40k.

I did I misread thinking it was the whole party being fined but still 10 grand each... let’s forward this to a politician

 

[brad465]

I very much doubt BJ will be doing any media appearances once he vacates number 10. My guess is he will simply slip into obscurity once he goes.

CJ

Following in the footsteps of his Eton/Bullingdon "mate" no doubt by doing that. It would certainly scupper his likely hopes of joining the "post-PM gravy train" that is probably the only reason he wanted to be PM, but wouldn't rule out him still trying to do that.

On the subject of draconian measures, look who's come out demanding what should be deemed more draconian, the apparent need to close school for some year groups:

Covid-19: Schools may need to close to some year groups, scientist warns

Sending some children home may be the only way to control infection rates, Prof Neil Ferguson says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Schools may need to close to some year groups in order to get control over the coronavirus infection rate, a former government adviser has warned.

Prof Neil Ferguson, whose advice led to the lockdown in March, said the current restrictions on household mixing "should have a significant effect".

But he said beyond that there was a "limit to what we can do" without sending some school year groups home.

Mr Ferguson also said if rules were relaxed, deaths would increase.

...

Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Prof Ferguson - who quit his role from the government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies in May after breaking lockdown rules - said the situation was "worrying".

"We now have 8,000 people in hospital with Covid. That is about a third of the level we were at at the peak of the pandemic in March," he said.

"If the rate of growth continues as it is, it means that in a month's time we'll be above that peak level in March and that is probably unsustainable.

"We are in a critical time right now. The health system will not be able to cope with this rate of growth for much longer."

 

[duncanp]

Following in the footsteps of his Eton/Bullingdon "mate" no doubt by doing that. It would certainly scupper his likely hopes of joining the "post-PM gravy train" that is probably the only reason he wanted to be PM, but wouldn't rule out him still trying to do that.

On the subject of draconian measures, look who's come out demanding what should be deemed more draconian, the apparent need to close school for some year groups:

Covid-19: Schools may need to close to some year groups, scientist warns

Sending some children home may be the only way to control infection rates, Prof Neil Ferguson says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why doesn't Professor Pantsdown just shut the f*** up?

As far as I am concerned, he lost all credibility when he broke the rules of the lockdown that he advocated, so that he could visit his partner for a quick s**g.

I get really cheesed off when the BBC give him all this publicity, which he manifestly does not deserve.

 

[yorkie]

I have zero respect for shameless Ferguson and his ilk.

 

[Richard Scott]

Why doesn't Professor Pantsdown just shut the f*** up?

As far as I am concerned, he lost all credibility when he broke the rules of the lockdown that he advocated, so that he could visit his partner for a quick s**g.

I get really cheesed off when the BBC give him all this publicity, which he manifestly does not deserve.

Agree, schools closing is last thing that needs to happen. He obviously doesn't care about the well-being of pupils let alone their education. Does he realise how down some kids are feeling now? Oh, I forgot that isn't a virus issue do doesn't count. Glad I'm not a teenager at the moment.

 

[Yew]

It is laws against people coming into close contact during a health emergency. The law for that was passed in 1984 and the specific provisions for this pandwemic were in the Coronavirus Act in March 2020. Specific measures are designed to counter the behaviour that might represent a threat to the health of others.
Some of the laws currently in force do affect me but that doesn't mean that I should expect a penalty to not apply to me just because I might not agree with them. Nobody has an absolute need to gather in a large social group.

I don't think we can consider blanket measures that change the fundamental behaviour of the entire population as 'specific'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely, and I’m sure there’s truth in the rumours that he’s already thinking longingly ahead to this.

It would do us all a favour if he'd just consider doing it sooner. He could always start by giving speeches via Zoom.

I suppose he will have a unique selling point, as there aren’t really any other ex PMs who can be booked to do a “I totally wrecked Britain in less than a year” speech. Even John Major could only do “I wrecked the Conservative party”!

"I was the worst Prime Minister in living British history" is certainly something groundbreaking to start your speech with!

Cameron did one very stupid thing (albeit a very serious one indeed), but every time Boris opens his gob, stupid comes out in some form.

 

[cactustwirly]

Of course, the NHS being unable to deal with things other than COVID is much more likely if we don't impose measures to keep the caseload (and thus NHS load) down. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier in March, that near-overwhelming may not have happened. Therefore this is an argument for measures, not against them.

That's pure speculation, who knows what would've happened.
The NHS coped fine in April and May, and they have extra capacity in the form of knightingale hospitals.
A lot of this is actually due to poor planning and incompetence in the NHS. If they had separate Covid and non Covid hospitals then there would be more capacity for cancer and heart disease treatments.

 

[HSTEd]

Boris Johnson is not the worst Prime Minister in history, to claim so is hyperbole.

He certainly loses to Lord North, and I am sure others.

 

[bramling]

Boris Johnson is not the worst Prime Minister in history, to claim so is hyperbole.

Worst prime minister in my lifetime is still nothing to shout about!

 

[C J Snarzell]

What I do find odd is that around May/June time it was stated one of the Nightingale hospitals had not been used. I think it may have been the Harrogate one - I could be wrong about that, so please correct me.

Even Kier Starmer was critical during the summer about the time and effort put into planning the Nightingales which were not used and no planning was made for the education in schools.

I think Starmer even suggested at one point that the Nightingale floor space should be used for education 'overspill' to adequately control pupil numbers and keep school buildings segregated.

What I do find quite bizarre now, is this talk about hospitals now being completely over run by rising Covid patients. The deaths are still not at the levels we saw around Easter and I'm seriously starting to disbelieve certain comments being made that hospitals cannot cope. What about the Nightingales then?

I thought the whole point of the Nightingales was to provide the buffer for the NHS so at least the vast majority of us could get on with our lives again.

CJ

 

[Domh245]

The limiting factor for healthcare & hospitals won't be physical bedframes and ventilators, but staff. All well and good having a nightingale full of shiny new beds, but if there's no nurses or doctors to staff it it's a glorified hospice.

I also wonder if the issue around hospitals nearing capacity now is that they'd filled beds with people who've had (postponed) elective surgery and have then been caught out by sharp rises in cases. It's also worth pointing out that these capacity issues seem to be on a very local basis, there's nationally plenty of capacity still, but hospitals in the North West may be running out of space

 

[C J Snarzell]

Boris Johnson is not the worst Prime Minister in history, to claim so is hyperbole.

He certainly loses to Lord North, and I am sure others.

Being an ex-cop I'd say Theresa May is my worst PM - but she did most of her damage to the police and other emergency services when she was Home Secretary. I did have a little cheer when she resigned, but I don't think her successor has been an improvement.

CJ