How would you rate the UK's handling of this pandemic?

[Rorschach]

Apparantly 94% of us believe we are acting more in accordance to the rules than most other people.

Yes I just heard on the news that compliance matches that of lockdown 1. The media don't like that though.

 

[Misterdog]

Your move.

So you see it as only one or the other and that there is no balance possible.

If we all go back to living in caves in isolation, then there would be far less viral transmission.
Government will of course be expected to supply us with wooly mammoths and firewood.

We will of course complain bitterly that the wood has not been dried correctly and that the mammoth is er too wooly.

 

[doctor Bob]

I actually think the distancing is better.

 

[rafezetter]

He'll be one of the unaffected though, as most are on this forum. Go to a forum where the members are affected and you will see a different story.

Um "unaffected?" I invite you to look at my finances for the last year. Guess how much money has come through my accounts for the last 12 months - go on have a guess.... I'll tell you, LESS THAN £4,500 - the majority of which was the three self employed bailouts from the Govt. £1215, £1063 and £1063.

How do I know this? I've just submitted last years taxes.

Still feeling smug?

I'm a HANDYMAN (as I've mentioned before). How much work do you think I've been doing in other peoples house in the last 12 months as a handyman?

A lot, A little or ZERO?

Dr Bob and others have been lucky enough to keep working because it's "essential" in so far as a new Kitchen is essential - but the kind of work a "Handyman" does is the kind of work that has often already been put off and put off - and isn't so "essential" that people are happy to have me enter thier home.

I HAVE stated this before on this forum, multiple times with phrases like "I've lost a LOT of money, but I STILL put life before money", but by all means don't let inconvenient things like that get in the way of your agenda.

I also made a post whereby I said, openly, that were it a choice between myself and a person with a family, or younger person who needed a ventilator and only 1 was available, I would refuse it - In the scheme of the planet, I have no value - no dependants, no significant other, and no meaningful family.

So if you insist on trying to villify ME (especially in light of my above post exposing you for all to see) you're going to lose, badly - and if you persist, I'll dig out and link my post.

The game is over rorschach - you've been exposed and are trying to cast doubt and villify the one person you cannot.

 

[Jacob]

I actually think the distancing is better.

Yes I get a sense of everybody taking it more seriously. Hardly been out myself but each time I do it seems a bigger issue. Quite right too.

 

[rafezetter]

So you see it as only one or the other and that there is no balance possible.

If we all go back to living in caves in isolation, then there would be far less viral transmission.
Government will of course be expected to supply us with wooly mammoths and firewood.

It's hard to see it any other way - covid travels by contact (interpersonal or surfaces an infected has touched) - remove that, remove transmission, ask any medical professional, I shouldn't even have to state that, every human over the age of about 4 should know that instinctually by now.

My viewpoint is we should have had a hard lockdown from the start - as close to a 100% quarantine for a SHORTER duration. If the UK and other countries did that from February, we might already have been out of it by June, where the numbers of new cases could well have been in low double digits - some countries came VERY close to that.

You have to think of it the same way Surgeons treat Gangrene - they DO NOT WAIT to see how far it goes up the leg before amputation - they take it off with a good margin to ensure no recurrence.

I absolutely fail to see how there is any other option, and as I also said elswhere, if Covid had been a more virulent pathogen like Ebola - a hard lockdown, with enforced curfew etc etc would have been the ONLY viable option and people would have been HAPPY ABOUT IT - even the morons.

I cannot understand why people are so obtuse - sorry wait - yes I can; "greed is good".

Why you** and other misguided souls continue to cling to the notion that human beings as a species can be trusted to make the smart choice, even in the face of overwhelming worldwide evidence to the contrary, in pretty much EVERY FACET of our "civilized" human lives, and EVEN after 12 months of misery and death, largely caused by "the stupid" is baffling beyond any comprehension I can muster.

**so it seems anyway

There is no viable argument for a "limited" lockdown - that trainwreck has already happened when they eased it - there is only either acceptance and resignation we've lost control, OR harsher measures in one last attempt to eradicate Covid before it becomes a more deadly perennial event like the flu.

There's no "yeah but maybe" option here, and if you think there is, you're part of the problem.

If there really was a deity watching over humanity - they would take away our trainset and put us back in the corner doing fingerpainting as about the only bloody thing we can be trusted with.

Or have another flood and start again, and honestly I wouldn't blame it.

Please - I do not want to end the BS with rorschach only to start again with someone else.

If you really want to read peoples views on covid and "shoulda, woulda, coulda" Read the entirety of the Hancocks half hour thread I've quoted parts of - do that before replying, it's all there.

 

[Cozzer]

Maybe you should move to the Lebanon? Sounds delightful.

What a charmer you are.
(By the way, it's Lebanon. Not "the" Lebanon.

 

[Rorschach]

@rafezetter I know you think you have "outed" me but those statements were all still clearly visible for everyone to see. By implying they were screenshots it made it seem like you had some super secret I was trying to hide but you had the evidence. Not the case at all.
I stand by the statements I made, not aware of any backtracking there, just some clarification as some people read what they want to read as opposed to what is actually written. The evidence has been born out, the people who I said would die, have died and that is true all across the world. Thanks for continuing to entertain though.

 

[Misterdog]

How far would total lockdown go ?

Food production facilities ?
Hospitals ?
Supermarkets ?
Electricity power generating plants ?
Refuse collection ?

Etc...Etc.

Sounds like the 1970's.

 

[Wrongfoot]

I think the UK governments are handling this poorly, with more of an eye on political ratings and managing party divisions than statecraft. I think this is particularly so in Westminster.

As a recent example I can't imagine a business which was proactively handling things well having to make announcements at 8pm for people to enact the following day. I can imagine a shambles of a national government reacting politically to announcements from devolved governments (which I think surprised them only because they aren't talking to them) deciding they'd better follow suit quickly or they might look bad.

I can't properly judge the UK people as they have to work within the rules of their government and were/are on the receiving end of mixed messages all year. Obviously there are some bad actors ignoring everything how that compares with the people of other nations is difficult to to say. I don't see much evidence of more complacency in this latest lockdown, but I live where there's a low population density so it's harder to see a change.

 

[Rorschach]

What a charmer you are.
(By the way, it's Lebanon. Not "the" Lebanon.

My apologies for not checking my predictive text.

 

[julianf]

Interesting quiz on lockdown rules here -

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55639456

 

[Spectric]

Yet it still got away from us - with approximately TWO MILLION dead and rising, because of "the stupid" - and I DO NOT MEAN those in charge, I place the blame for it's continued spread, last year and this, on the "common man" - the information was there to know, but as I said as the end of the day - even the most ignorant fool knows that infections are spread via contact with people and where they have been. I find it impossible to beleive anyone whom has had a cold at any point in their lives does not know this.

Yes I do believe that the overall quality of society has degenerated over the years and we are now in a period of devolution and many people really do not have the inteligence to ascertain a situation and make rational decisions that may involve some self sacrifice. Watching a program the other day on a USAF airbase in Norfolk used in the last war, the bomber crews were mostly kids, twenty one was old and survival rates were low yet they made the sacrifice and as men tower over that same age group today.

So if you know that the worst effect of the virus is death yet we cannot control it and people won't change or do things differently to stop the spread and the leaders seem to always want the economy protected at all cost then what hope have we on doing anything about global warming because that will require far greater changes to all our lives.

 

[doctor Bob]

Yes I get a sense of everybody taking it more seriously. Hardly been out myself but each time I do it seems a bigger issue. Quite right too.

This is a trick, Jacob agreeing with me, haven't worked out the plan yet but I'm not falling for it

 

[rafezetter]

@rafezetter I know you think you have "outed" me but those statements were all still clearly visible for everyone to see. By implying they were screenshots it made it seem like you had some super secret I was trying to hide but you had the evidence. Not the case at all.
I stand by the statements I made, not aware of any backtracking there, just some clarification as some people read what they want to read as opposed to what is actually written. The evidence has been born out, the people who I said would die, have died and that is true all across the world. Thanks for continuing to entertain though.

You claimed - repeatedly that you had not said "let the old and infirm die" whenever I mentioned it - but my links prove it's right there (including the link where you eventually admit it after it was quoted back to you by Lons), you've also continually claimed that the lockdown was a pointless exercise that saved no-one from an unnecessary covid death.

Exibit A): "I am not heartless or selfish, I might be a cad. I want the vast majority of people in country to be safe, happy, healthy and comfortable. I am willing to let a tiny fraction of very elderly people die a little bit early for that to happen. 10% of over 80's die every year regardless and we don't blink at that. " (linked from my post above)

Once you got called on that multiple times by several members....

Exhibit B): "Not true at all, please find where I said that?
I want to see the elderly protected as much as possible, I have stated this numerous times. If you are old or vulnerable, stay at home (if you want to). What I think is madness is that the rest of the country was forced into lockdown. " (linked from my post above)

So YES you DID try to cover up what you said and you did try to spin what you said into something less callous - you can try saying "oh I've got nothing to hide" but your own posts show different.

As you're now seemingly doubling down on those statements, above - are you certain, in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence that this is still the case?

Has Covid so far only killed "the old and those who will die soon anyway" - and despite the lockdown has Covid managed to kill a significant portion of people who have been taking strong isolation measures?

Admitting "the old etc" have died, while wholly ignoring many hundreds of thousands worldwide who WERE NOT part of the prescribed category, is to my mind, on a par with the holocaust deniers. A great deal of people OUTSIDE your parameters are dead, yet you still continue to claim you "were right".

 

[rafezetter]

How far would total lockdown go ?

Food production facilities ?
Hospitals ?
Supermarkets ?
Electricity power generating plants ?
Refuse collection ?

Etc...Etc.

Sounds like the 1970's.

oh come on - now you're reaching and you bloody know it.

 

[Deadeye]

Ok, I'll bite this time.

There's a lot of blame to go around - and not all of it belongs to the Government. "The UK" has done better than many but worse than several...and spotting some of the errors doesn't/didn't require hindsight.

There are some good points:
- the often-vilified pharma industry has achieved something approaching a scientific miracle in the speed with which they have understood the viral proteins, created effective vaccines, and run large scale (tens of thousands of people) properly managed (trials to bring them safely to market.
- the NHS crisis response in secondary care (hospitals) has been innovative, swift and largely effective. The majority of staff have, and continue to, plug gaps in effective process by hard work.
- many members of the public have borne sacrifices - both financial and of personal liberty - with diginity in favour of the greater good. People living on their own that shielded have been extraordinary in their patience. There has been a large cohort willing to volunteer to help.
- the Job Retention Scheme was swiftly implemented and helped a great many firms and people

On the other side of the equation:
- Lockdown policy has been incoherent, indecisive and chaotic. A medly of events like sending schools back for a single day, U-turn on masks, not clarifying a set distance for stay-at-home-exercise. However, the biggest and most unforgiveable has been the serial delay in doing necessary but uncomfortable things. The first lockdown was shockingly late, as was the second, as was the Christmas guidance, as is the current escalation. The lack of early, firm action has allowed a second wave, killed many people and caused exacerbated economic harm.
- Many (the majority?) of GPs really have not risen to the challenge, abdicating to hospitals. The funding model for these private contractors needs to change to one based on health status of their population.
- In the lull after the first wave largely came under control (Jluy to September) the NHS sighed with relief but did not use the time well to addreess the growing burden of harm accruing in the waiting lists. Screening, cancer waits, elective procedures, even ophthalmology appointments did not restart. The various Royal Colleges carry a lot of blame for this. Their responses varied from transformational innovation to flat-earth obstructiveness.
- The vaccine roll out is underperforming and it is no consolation that others are doing even worse. Think about how many people vote in a day; or receive a delivery; or fill up with petrol. There are many ways in which this could have been accellerated but the logistics and planning are woeful. The same level of woeful as seen in test and trace and PPE supply.
- A significant proportion of the population have either disregarded guidance or actively sought out loopholes to justify continuing as they are. These people have my lasting contempt, along with those that spread misinformation regarding the disease or the vaccine. Those refusing the vaccine are leeching on the protection provided by the rest of society; if there are too many of them it won't exist.
- Support for businesses and the self-employed was both too much and too little. It missed many needy and worthy people, but was subject to very significant fraud. Poorly controlled and badly executed.

I carry some bias: my son is rota-ed to do 70 hours this week as an A&E doctor and I still do a few days in the hospital each month.
But, hey, you asked my opinion, right?

 

[doctor Bob]

How far would total lockdown go ?

Food production facilities ?
Hospitals ?
Supermarkets ?
Electricity power generating plants ?
Refuse collection ?

Etc...Etc.

Sounds like the 1970's.

Do you think flares and crimpolene cardigans would be made compulsory.

 

[Misterdog]

U-turn on masks

Though to be fair that was merely following The World Health Organisation recommendations. (Who have also made mistakes)

Apart from one or two points, you are mostly correct with your assessment in my opinion.

Maybe we will learn lessons for next time.

 

[rafezetter]

Ok, I'll bite this time.

There's a lot of blame to go around - and not all of it belongs to the Government. "The UK" has done better than many but worse than several...and spotting some of the errors doesn't/didn't require hindsight.

There are some good points:
- the often-vilified pharma industry has achieved something approaching a scientific miracle in the speed with which they have understood the viral proteins, created effective vaccines, and run large scale (tens of thousands of people) properly managed (trials to bring them safely to market.
- the NHS crisis response in secondary care (hospitals) has been innovative, swift and largely effective. The majority of staff have, and continue to, plug gaps in effective process by hard work.
- many members of the public have borne sacrifices - both financial and of personal liberty - with diginity in favour of the greater good. People living on their own that shielded have been extraordinary in their patience. There has been a large cohort willing to volunteer to help.
- the Job Retention Scheme was swiftly implemented and helped a great many firms and people

On the other side of the equation:
- Lockdown policy has been incoherent, indecisive and chaotic. A medly of events like sending schools back for a single day, U-turn on masks, not clarifying a set distance for stay-at-home-exercise. However, the biggest and most unforgiveable has been the serial delay in doing necessary but uncomfortable things. The first lockdown was shockingly late, as was the second, as was the Christmas guidance, as is the current escalation. The lack of early, firm action has allowed a second wave, killed many people and caused exacerbated economic harm.
- Many (the majority?) of GPs really have not risen to the challenge, abdicating to hospitals. The funding model for these private contractors needs to change to one based on health status of their population.
- In the lull after the first wave largely came under control (Jluy to September) the NHS sighed with relief but did not use the time well to addreess the growing burden of harm accruing in the waiting lists. Screening, cancer waits, elective procedures, even ophthalmology appointments did not restart. The various Royal Colleges carry a lot of blame for this. Their responses varied from transformational innovation to flat-earth obstructiveness.
- The vaccine roll out is underperforming and it is no consolation that others are doing even worse. Think about how many people vote in a day; or receive a delivery; or fill up with petrol. There are many ways in which this could have been accellerated but the logistics and planning are woeful. The same level of woeful as seen in test and trace and PPE supply.
- A significant proportion of the population have either disregarded guidance or actively sought out loopholes to justify continuing as they are. These people have my lasting contempt, along with those that spread misinformation regarding the disease or the vaccine. Those refusing the vaccine are leeching on the protection provided by the rest of society; if there are too many of them it won't exist.
- Support for businesses and the self-employed was both too much and too little. It missed many needy and worthy people, but was subject to very significant fraud. Poorly controlled and badly executed.

I carry some bias: my son is rota-ed to do 70 hours this week as an A&E doctor and I still do a few days in the hospital each month.
But, hey, you asked my opinion, right?

The line about the GP's is wholly unfair and is clearly based on your bias, if this were true, even fractionally, it would be headline news. If you think GP's even BEFORE the pandemic weren't REGULARLY pulling 60 hour weeks you're monumentally ill informed. This information is coming direct from a 40+ year serving GP who CANNOT RETIRE YET because there is no-one to take her place and she's got a conscience, she's been of retirement age for 2 years now, desperate to retire before the workload drags her under, but as I said, feels she cannot.

Oh and thier funding got MASSIVELY cut to the point she stopped being a director - because they couldn't afford a directors salary, so she took a demotion and a PAY CUT - this IS FACT.

Couch your words more carefully in the future please.