Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some points from today’s new polling

24

Comments

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The Belgians are awesome, might be the best things the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.
    One even invented the question mark. Mind you, those lazy chestnuts...
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,401

    Chiwetel Ejiofor in "Serenity" (2005):

    "You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords."

    Said the guy defending the indefensible.

    "Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
    "When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,401

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The Belgians are awesome, might be the best things the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.
    One even invented the question mark. Mind you, those lazy chestnuts...
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJj4wbmAhk
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,941

    Sandpit said:

    Hancock pointing out that some companies asking to supply PPE had only been established in the previous few days and came to the government asking for cash. Key is to get directly from factories, rather than middle men.

    Then these shady middlemen go moaning to the press that the government isn't taking them seriously, when they've shown no evidence that they actually have the equipment and aren't just trying to scam the government out of cash.
    Imagine the outcry if the government bought millions of fake N95 masks from a shady middle man and then a whole load of NHS workers got CV because they thought they were protected but weren't....
    Indeed. There's plenty of bureaucracy that can be removed to speed things up, but checking that safety equipment exists and is of merchantable quality before agreeing to the purchase still needs to happen.

    The PPE issue is international, it's every country fighting for themselves and a lot of people trying to get a slice of the deals with no history of PPE supply.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.

    Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?

    Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
    We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.

    So we had no plan B

    It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
    The French copied the Americans:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52161995

    "The US has been accused of redirecting 200,000 Germany-bound masks for its own use, in a move condemned as "modern piracy".
    "The local government in Berlin said the shipment of US-made masks was "confiscated" in Bangkok.
    "The FFP2 masks, which were ordered by Berlin's police force, did not reach their destination, it said."
    Sunil, I believe that story has been totally debunked, although the Germans, taking a leaf from Trump's own book, continue to peddle it regardless of it being based on false 'facts'
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT @ MrMeeks "I have two virtual leaving drinks next week and I'm being entirely serious when I say that I don't know what to wear."

    I thought the new smart casual was boxer shorts, socks and a dress shirt.

    No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.

    But on the vaccine trial starting this week -

    Would this be that "Phase 2" you were referring to in your note to me the other day? The crux main trial of two large groups divided into vaccine and placebo?
    Yes
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    Andy_JS said:

    isam said:

    Saw this on Facebook today via BBC London. Fancied being told it was wrong so thought I’d post it here! Apparently I live 1/4 mile from London’s oldest tree... here it is


    Totteridge?
    Oak trees take 400 years to reach maturity, 400 years as mature trees, 400 years to die. I'm assuming there is at least one very mature oak tree left in London?

    And that's before we start looking for yew trees...
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TimT said:

    Till now I've been told:

    1) face masks don't work
    2) face masks are needed for medical professionals, not you
    3) most people don't know how to fit a face mask
    4) you can't get one for love nor money

    Give me a face mask and I'll wear one. Tell me the specifications you expect of a face mask that I'm to buy and I'll buy one.

    But don't guilt trip me if you're not going to give me useful information.

    In South Korea, the government send a "ration" of two masks per person each week, I think.

    I don't see HMG doing that for us!
    Part of the problem with moving/changing advice is that we are dealing with a novel situation with sparse information and also we don't always know what confidence to have in the information we have. All this, in a changing health security environment.

    The initial advice to the public on masks was based on a number of considerations:
    1. anything other than an N95 will not protect the wearer from the virus and there was a shortage of these, so priority access had to be given to healthcare workers, and within that category, healthcare workers performing tasks on COVID-suspected cases that could generate droplets.
    2. N95 masks have to be fit-tested to be effective against viruses
    3. The early 'facts' indicated that the main mode of transmission was droplets, not aerosols.
    4. If you wear surgical-type masks too long, the humidity in your breath wets them to the extent that they become aerosol generators with each exhalation.

    Since then, 'knowledge' (in inverted commas as everything is subject to change in the face of new evidence) and circumstances have changed.

    1. The supply of N95 masks has improved, and multiple groups have developed safe methods for their re-use in healthcare settings provided they are not heavily soiled
    2. Evidence is increasing that aerosols are indeed a factor in transmission, particularly in indoor settings with smaller exposures over prolonged periods.
    3. Simple cloth or surgical face masks can cut to just about zero aerosol generation from the mere act of talking. So while these masks may confer no protection to the wearer, they do contribute to a very large reduction of aerosol generation if everyone wears them when out in public spaces.
    4. The stay at home orders have reduced the hours that people are outside, and hence the hours and single period duration that they will be wearing face masks, reducing to close to zero the likelihood that they will be worn to the point of saturation per point 4 above.

    In novel, uncertain situations, risk responses have to adapt as new evidence comes in and as the situation evolves. We should expect many of the early 'facts', responses, and decisions to be wrong. We should not criticize public health authorities for changing advice, nor for getting things wrong if those errors were based on the best available information at the time and good intentions. Indeed, failure to adapt and change would be a bigger and more valid cause for condemnation.

    You are absolutely right, Alastair, that one of the main planks of public health communications should be to give the public useful, practical information on what they can be doing to contribute to tackling this pandemic.

    This is woefully absent from the White House. I am not in the UK, but if it is absent from HMG, they deserve criticism for that.
    I have been critical of the UK government about some aspects of its handling of the pandemic (one of which is catching fire today, it seems), but I have to say I generally give them very high marks for communication. They have drummed home a simple message repeatedly and the British public have got it very firmly in their heads.

    I agree that the authorities should not be criticised if changing information means that advice needs to change. The problem at present is that you get the distinct sense that they know the advice needs to change but they haven't yet worked out how to backtrack, so there's an information vacuum at present. If they are going to backtrack, they need to do so quickly. The public will understand, if they don't try to bullshit too much.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,792
    edited April 2020

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?

    This was also interesting from the link...
    But UK-based manufacturers are struggling to access blood samples of infected patients to trial their devices on. Essex-based Biosure said there was 'a national shortage' of samples.It is now calling for blood donations from members of the public who were either diagnosed with, or were suspected of having, the virus.
    A spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We have discovered there is no current UK based bio-bank for confirmed positive COVID-19 blood samples.'...
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,891
    malcolmg said:

    FPT
    Carnyx said:

    » show previous quotes
    It is indeed surprising. I noticed one tweeter couldn't believe it and assumed it was the National - which has a quite different URL.

    They must have looked at the circulation numbers and bank balance and thought Crikey, we need to do something.

    Indeed, though i'll believe it when they merge the Herald and National and go back to being a middle of the road broadsheet with a range of columnists. Luckyguy did suggest FPT the chap was just being a shock jock. I suppose it would certainly epater le Unioniste bourgeoisie who still buy the Herald.

    I haven't seen much discussion of the basic political fact that the SNP administration is a minority government. I find it difficult to see also what the Unionistds would do if the Scottish Gmt diverged from the English policies. In particular whether the Scottish Tories could stop going on abouyt independence, and whether SLAB could break out of its permanent Bain Principle of always voting against the SNP for long - though both parties have supported the SNP on covid-19 of late. I am also aware the average Green voter is rather younger than most other parties!
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    Chiwetel Ejiofor in "Serenity" (2005):

    "You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords."

    Said the guy defending the indefensible.

    "Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
    "When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"
    "If you can't do something smart... do something right"

    There's a funny story I think of, to go with that quote. But I am too sober.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    TimT said:

    Till now I've been told:

    1) face masks don't work
    2) face masks are needed for medical professionals, not you
    3) most people don't know how to fit a face mask
    4) you can't get one for love nor money

    Give me a face mask and I'll wear one. Tell me the specifications you expect of a face mask that I'm to buy and I'll buy one.

    But don't guilt trip me if you're not going to give me useful information.

    In South Korea, the government send a "ration" of two masks per person each week, I think.

    I don't see HMG doing that for us!
    Part of the problem with moving/changing advice is that we are dealing with a novel situation with sparse information and also we don't always know what confidence to have in the information we have. All this, in a changing health security environment.

    The initial advice to the public on masks was based on a number of considerations:
    1. anything other than an N95 will not protect the wearer from the virus and there was a shortage of these, so priority access had to be given to healthcare workers, and within that category, healthcare workers performing tasks on COVID-suspected cases that could generate droplets.
    2. N95 masks have to be fit-tested to be effective against viruses
    3. The early 'facts' indicated that the main mode of transmission was droplets, not aerosols.
    4. If you wear surgical-type masks too long, the humidity in your breath wets them to the extent that they become aerosol generators with each exhalation.

    Since then, 'knowledge' (in inverted commas as everything is subject to change in the face of new evidence) and circumstances have changed.

    1. The supply of N95 masks has improved, and multiple groups have developed safe methods for their re-use in healthcare settings provided they are not heavily soiled
    2. Evidence is increasing that aerosols are indeed a factor in transmission, particularly in indoor settings with smaller exposures over prolonged periods.
    3. Simple cloth or surgical face masks can cut to just about zero aerosol generation from the mere act of talking. So while these masks may confer no protection to the wearer, they do contribute to a very large reduction of aerosol generation if everyone wears them when out in public spaces.
    4. The stay at home orders have reduced the hours that people are outside, and hence the hours and single period duration that they will be wearing face masks, reducing to close to zero the likelihood that they will be worn to the point of saturation per point 4 above.

    In novel, uncertain situations, risk responses have to adapt as new evidence comes in and as the situation evolves. We should expect many of the early 'facts', responses, and decisions to be wrong. We should not criticize public health authorities for changing advice, nor for getting things wrong if those errors were based on the best available information at the time and good intentions. Indeed, failure to adapt and change would be a bigger and more valid cause for condemnation.

    You are absolutely right, Alastair, that one of the main planks of public health communications should be to give the public useful, practical information on what they can be doing to contribute to tackling this pandemic.

    This is woefully absent from the White House. I am not in the UK, but if it is absent from HMG, they deserve criticism for that.
    I have been critical of the UK government about some aspects of its handling of the pandemic (one of which is catching fire today, it seems), but I have to say I generally give them very high marks for communication. They have drummed home a simple message repeatedly and the British public have got it very firmly in their heads.

    I agree that the authorities should not be criticised if changing information means that advice needs to change. The problem at present is that you get the distinct sense that they know the advice needs to change but they haven't yet worked out how to backtrack, so there's an information vacuum at present. If they are going to backtrack, they need to do so quickly. The public will understand, if they don't try to bullshit too much.
    Public health communications 101:
    1. Tell them what you know
    2. Tell them what you don't know
    3. Tell them what you're doing about what you don't know
    4. To the extent possible, give timelines
    5. Tell them what, in the meantime, the public can do to protect themselves, based on the best info currently available.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    As I've been saying this EU or not EU stuff is a red herring. Neither of the EU schemes have delivered anything and aren't expected to for a while. The question that needs answering is why are we only involving UK industry now for PPE? What was the decision making process behind bringing UK industry into ventilator manufacturing but not do the same for PPE where the same or worse shortages from international markets were expected.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,792
    edited April 2020
    TimT said:

    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT @ MrMeeks "I have two virtual leaving drinks next week and I'm being entirely serious when I say that I don't know what to wear."

    I thought the new smart casual was boxer shorts, socks and a dress shirt.

    No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.

    But on the vaccine trial starting this week -

    Would this be that "Phase 2" you were referring to in your note to me the other day? The crux main trial of two large groups divided into vaccine and placebo?
    Yes
    Bit more complicated than that, as they will presumably be trying different dosages, as well ?
    (The Chinese PII vaccine trial did this, and has already abandoned one of the dosages.)
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    Nigelb said:

    TimT said:

    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT @ MrMeeks "I have two virtual leaving drinks next week and I'm being entirely serious when I say that I don't know what to wear."

    I thought the new smart casual was boxer shorts, socks and a dress shirt.

    No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.

    But on the vaccine trial starting this week -

    Would this be that "Phase 2" you were referring to in your note to me the other day? The crux main trial of two large groups divided into vaccine and placebo?
    Yes
    Bit more complicated than that, as they will presumably be trying different dosages, as well ?
    (The Chinese PII vaccine trial dis this, and has already abandoned one of the dosages.)
    Thanks for the correction, Nigel. Yes, I think everyone is trying to collapse the testing timeline to the greatest extent possible within the requirements both to be safe and to be effective
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560
    Nigelb said:

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?

    This was also interesting from the link...
    But UK-based manufacturers are struggling to access blood samples of infected patients to trial their devices on. Essex-based Biosure said there was 'a national shortage' of samples.It is now calling for blood donations from members of the public who were either diagnosed with, or were suspected of having, the virus.
    A spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We have discovered there is no current UK based bio-bank for confirmed positive COVID-19 blood samples.'...
    Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*

    No one who does real science would make that claim.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,401

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.
    "Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,401

    Chiwetel Ejiofor in "Serenity" (2005):

    "You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords."

    Said the guy defending the indefensible.

    "Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
    "When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"
    "If you can't do something smart... do something right"

    There's a funny story I think of, to go with that quote. But I am too sober.
    You aim to misbehave?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,792

    Nigelb said:

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?

    This was also interesting from the link...
    But UK-based manufacturers are struggling to access blood samples of infected patients to trial their devices on. Essex-based Biosure said there was 'a national shortage' of samples.It is now calling for blood donations from members of the public who were either diagnosed with, or were suspected of having, the virus.
    A spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We have discovered there is no current UK based bio-bank for confirmed positive COVID-19 blood samples.'...
    Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*

    No one who does real science would make that claim.
    Yes, I took "accurate" as journalistic hyperbole.

    You can make a test 100% sensitive - but that's very likely to mean that it will detect other antibodies than the one you're looking for as well. Hence the question about specificity (which is in this case possibly a more important metric).
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The Belgians are awesome, might be the best thing the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.
    He rebadged the Jefferson method.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?

    This was also interesting from the link...
    But UK-based manufacturers are struggling to access blood samples of infected patients to trial their devices on. Essex-based Biosure said there was 'a national shortage' of samples.It is now calling for blood donations from members of the public who were either diagnosed with, or were suspected of having, the virus.
    A spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We have discovered there is no current UK based bio-bank for confirmed positive COVID-19 blood samples.'...
    Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*

    No one who does real science would make that claim.
    Yes, I took "accurate" as journalistic hyperbole.

    You can make a test 100% sensitive - but that's very likely to mean that it will detect other antibodies than the one you're looking for as well. Hence the question about specificity (which is in this case possibly a more important metric).
    Nigel, this sensitivity/specificity ratio is the argument behind the Stanford paper.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,320
    TimT said:

    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT @ MrMeeks "I have two virtual leaving drinks next week and I'm being entirely serious when I say that I don't know what to wear."

    I thought the new smart casual was boxer shorts, socks and a dress shirt.

    No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.

    But on the vaccine trial starting this week -

    Would this be that "Phase 2" you were referring to in your note to me the other day? The crux main trial of two large groups divided into vaccine and placebo?
    Yes
    Right. That's quite exciting then.

    The point I don't fully understand is how they will expose the participants to the virus given we are in lockdown?
  • Options
    TimT said:

    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.

    Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?

    Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
    We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.

    So we had no plan B

    It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
    The French copied the Americans:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52161995

    "The US has been accused of redirecting 200,000 Germany-bound masks for its own use, in a move condemned as "modern piracy".
    "The local government in Berlin said the shipment of US-made masks was "confiscated" in Bangkok.
    "The FFP2 masks, which were ordered by Berlin's police force, did not reach their destination, it said."
    Sunil, I believe that story has been totally debunked, although the Germans, taking a leaf from Trump's own book, continue to peddle it regardless of it being based on false 'facts'
    Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking?
    I haven't seen any retraction by the Berlin Police Force from their public statement at the time, that the stuff was ordered, payed for, and notification of delivery received, before it was confiscated while already loaded onto the plane.

    Further, could you please point out to me any instance of "the Germans peddling these 'false facts' regardless", besides, maybe, this comment of mine?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?

    This was also interesting from the link...
    But UK-based manufacturers are struggling to access blood samples of infected patients to trial their devices on. Essex-based Biosure said there was 'a national shortage' of samples.It is now calling for blood donations from members of the public who were either diagnosed with, or were suspected of having, the virus.
    A spokesperson told MailOnline: 'We have discovered there is no current UK based bio-bank for confirmed positive COVID-19 blood samples.'...
    Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*

    No one who does real science would make that claim.
    Yes, I took "accurate" as journalistic hyperbole.

    You can make a test 100% sensitive - but that's very likely to mean that it will detect other antibodies than the one you're looking for as well. Hence the question about specificity (which is in this case possibly a more important metric).
    No scientific company would use "100%" anywhere in anything like this. It instantly sounds like bullshit.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    Chiwetel Ejiofor in "Serenity" (2005):

    "You know, in certain older civilized cultures, when men failed as entirely as you have, they would throw themselves on their swords."

    Said the guy defending the indefensible.

    "Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
    "When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"
    "If you can't do something smart... do something right"

    There's a funny story I think of, to go with that quote. But I am too sober.
    You aim to misbehave?

    "'Course, that ain't exactly plan A."
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,978
    Apparently Starmer will do PMQs even though Boris is away. I like that. I kind of get why there's this thing where if the PM is away the LoTo likewise gets a deputy in, but he's still on the job, it's not like its an affront to ask questions of the non-PM
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.
    "Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"
    "Hell, lets do what we always do...."
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328
    RobD said:
    Tan and a sauna. Double the bang for the buck!
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,368
    It would seem that voters are far more pragmatic about the Govts difficulties than some onPB.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128
    MaxPB said:

    As I've been saying this EU or not EU stuff is a red herring. Neither of the EU schemes have delivered anything and aren't expected to for a while. The question that needs answering is why are we only involving UK industry now for PPE? What was the decision making process behind bringing UK industry into ventilator manufacturing but not do the same for PPE where the same or worse shortages from international markets were expected.

    Because our inertial bureaucratic state hates original thinking and flexible practices.
  • Options
    Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 4,818
    Scott_xP said:
    As per Yes Prime Minister: “A clarification is not to make oneself clear, but to put oneself in the clear”
  • Options
    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Better to have it and not need it given the circumstances.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,249
    edited April 2020
    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128
    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.

    Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?

    Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
    We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.

    So we had no plan B

    It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
    It turns out it is a mistake to allow yourself to be dependent on things outside your control.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    The point of the Nightingale hospitals was to treat the milder cases, so that the more severe cases could get full treatment in regular hospitals.

    "All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell."
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.

    Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?

    Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
    We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.

    So we had no plan B

    It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
    It turns out it is a mistake to allow yourself to be dependent on things outside your control.
    You could occupy Paris, I suppose.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,563
    edited April 2020

    HYUFD said:
    Megs still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    What's Prince Andrew done to annoy the Yanks?

    Edit - Oh, now I remember.
  • Options
    TimTTimT Posts: 6,328

    TimT said:

    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.

    Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?

    Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
    We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.

    So we had no plan B

    It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
    The French copied the Americans:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52161995

    "The US has been accused of redirecting 200,000 Germany-bound masks for its own use, in a move condemned as "modern piracy".
    "The local government in Berlin said the shipment of US-made masks was "confiscated" in Bangkok.
    "The FFP2 masks, which were ordered by Berlin's police force, did not reach their destination, it said."
    Sunil, I believe that story has been totally debunked, although the Germans, taking a leaf from Trump's own book, continue to peddle it regardless of it being based on false 'facts'
    Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking?
    I haven't seen any retraction by the Berlin Police Force from their public statement at the time, that the stuff was ordered, payed for, and notification of delivery received, before it was confiscated while already loaded onto the plane.

    Further, could you please point out to me any instance of "the Germans peddling these 'false facts' regardless", besides, maybe, this comment of mine?
    3M is the only US company with N95 production facilities in the region, and hence the only company from which the US could have 'confiscated' the order. They have no record of the so-called Berlin order. The Mayor of Berlin later admitted that the order was with a German company, (and hence not susceptible to the US requisition order).

    "German officials on Friday were stinging in their criticism of the Trump administration after a consignment of face masks that they said was ordered and paid for by the Berlin police was diverted en route from China. But one of the officials backpedaled from his statement on Saturday.

    "Andreas Geisel, Berlin’s interior minister, said the delivery made it as far as Bangkok before being “confiscated.” In a statement Friday, he said the masks had been ordered from a U.S. firm and “we are currently assuming that this is related to the U.S. government’s ban on mask exports." Berlin mayor Michael Müller also weighed in to call the action “inhumane and unacceptable.”

    "But on Saturday, Geisel wrote on Twitter that he had clarified that the order was placed with a German firm, and that supply-chain issues were being “reviewed.”
    "German press reports said Friday the consignment was ordered from 3M. 3M later said it had “no evidence” that its products had been seized, as it had “no record of any order of respirators from China for the Berlin police.”

    "The German federal government did not respond to a request to comment on Friday. The U.S. State Department declined to comment on the complaints from various countries."

    It is ironic that even the Germans are using Trump's own tactics against him.

    Source:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/03/white-house-scrambles-scoop-up-medical-supplies-angering-canada-germany/
  • Options
    This is a thread about trying to do things remotely/social distancing and the justice system.

    Spoiler: It really is an option.

    https://twitter.com/MelStooks/status/1252520863821434880

    A friend speculates this is the time to commit low to medium level non violent/no sexual crimes, the justice system might not be able to cope, and you'll never get to trial, unless we go the way of North Britain.
  • Options
    ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
  • Options
    Ooh, my late year trip to Amsterdam might now not be off.

    https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1252646752567558146
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,304
    HYUFD said:
    Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,127

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    51% of Hillary voters have a very favourable opinion of Meghan compared to only 27% of Trump voters though
    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/articles-reports/2019/12/03/americas-favorite-british-royal?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=favorite_british_royals
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,127

    HYUFD said:
    Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?
    Like JFK the icon lives on
  • Options
    ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
    Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,304
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    51% of Hillary voters have a very favourable opinion of Meghan compared to only 27% of Trump voters though
    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/articles-reports/2019/12/03/americas-favorite-british-royal?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=favorite_british_royals
    I am puzzled as to what relevance all this has to...well anything?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
    Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.
    Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,304
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?
    Like JFK the icon lives on
    They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,320

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,304
    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    Call NerysHughes for a rebuttal to the scandalous fake news that patients are being turned away!
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,563
    edited April 2020
    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.

    I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,978

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?
    Like JFK the icon lives on
    They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!
    I assumed he was running in the Democratic Primary somehow, everyone else was.
  • Options
    ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    edited April 2020
    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
    Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.
    Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?
    The media is the most powerful means of creating opinion that we have. Why else do totalitarian states control it? The sad fact is that people’s opinions, whatever country they are in, are easily distorted by what they see and hear. Especially if they do not have the time or wherewithal to seek out competing views.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,249
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    51% of Hillary voters have a very favourable opinion of Meghan compared to only 27% of Trump voters though
    https://today.yougov.com/topics/international/articles-reports/2019/12/03/americas-favorite-british-royal?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=website_article&utm_campaign=favorite_british_royals
    So a majority of a majority then.
    I'm shocked that Trump voters might have a less than positive view of a mixed race actress.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.

    I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
    Probably because the staff is at the regular hospitals - which are not (currently) overwhelmed.

    Equally probably they don't want to actually call up the air crew etc unless it is really necessary.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,304
    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!
    Better it is there and not needed. The idea of turning patients away due to short-staffing is a worry though.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
    Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.
    Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?
    The media is the most powerful means of creating opinion that we have. Why else do totalitarian states control it? The sad fact is that people’s opinions, whatever country they are in, are easily distorted by what they see and hear. Especially if they do not have the time or wherewithal to seek out competing views.
    A comparison of media reporting and opinion polls over coronavirus suggests otherwise.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,249
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?
    Like JFK the icon lives on
    They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!
    I assumed he was running in the Democratic Primary somehow, everyone else was.
    A test tube of JFK genetic material would probably be in with a shout.

    I make no comment on how it would compare with the intellectual abilities of the favourite.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.

    I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
    I think it's a lack of staff for the most serious patients, not generally.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:
    A Princess Royale being what they call a quarter pounder princess over there.
  • Options
    alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.

    I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
    Lucky we stockpiled masses of PPE just on the off chance it might be needed. No wait....

    That’s apparently was the French health minister did in 2003 when SARS looked a threat. Criticised for wasting millions she was. Of course they have a far more reliable method of “procurement” this time around!
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,560
    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
    Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.
    Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?
    The media is the most powerful means of creating opinion that we have. Why else do totalitarian states control it? The sad fact is that people’s opinions, whatever country they are in, are easily distorted by what they see and hear. Especially if they do not have the time or wherewithal to seek out competing views.
    A comparison of media reporting and opinion polls over coronavirus suggests otherwise.
    The traditional arrogant retort is "Control the coinage and the courts. Let the rabble have the rest."
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,128

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.

    I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
    I think it's a lack of staff for the most serious patients, not generally.
    There shouldn't be a lack of staff generally given how much of 'normal' operations have been cancelled.
  • Options
    TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 12,388

    This is a thread about trying to do things remotely/social distancing and the justice system.

    Spoiler: It really is an option.

    https://twitter.com/MelStooks/status/1252520863821434880

    A friend speculates this is the time to commit low to medium level non violent/no sexual crimes, the justice system might not be able to cope, and you'll never get to trial, unless we go the way of North Britain.

    That's the criminal justice system.

    I think people have too narrow a view of what our Courts actually do.

    I have no idea why my directions hearings are ever listed in person, or why I can't issue online (or by email).

  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062

    malcolmg said:

    Vaccine to be trialed in people from this Thursday

    Lets hope its not a Hancock over promise again.

    I doubt he would have announced that important moment if it was not already in motion
    How many days did they say the PPE was coming from Turkey
    On this I have no doubt it is already in motion to role out on thursday
    they have been saying that since weekend G
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MaxPB said:

    As I've been saying this EU or not EU stuff is a red herring. Neither of the EU schemes have delivered anything and aren't expected to for a while. The question that needs answering is why are we only involving UK industry now for PPE? What was the decision making process behind bringing UK industry into ventilator manufacturing but not do the same for PPE where the same or worse shortages from international markets were expected.

    Because we ordered a massive amount from Vygon
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,897
    People not experienced in wearing face masks may be just as likely to transfer the virus as to protect themselves and others from it.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,304
    edited April 2020

    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:
    Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?
    Like JFK the icon lives on
    They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!
    I assumed he was running in the Democratic Primary somehow, everyone else was.
    A test tube of JFK genetic material would probably be in with a shout.

    I make no comment on how it would compare with the intellectual abilities of the favourite.
    That is grossly unfair. Joe still remembers with complete clarity the meeting he had with JFK just last week!
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,320
    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!
    True. But the charge is that it IS needed now and is not able to do the business. That's the Guardian story, which accords with what I have been told.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,897

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.
    "Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"
    Is that a quote from Wall Street (1987)?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    kinabalu said:

    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!
    True. But the charge is that it IS needed now and is not able to do the business. That's the Guardian story, which accords with what I have been told.
    That's only true if those patients were denied treatment elsewhere. I don't think the article states that.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,401
    Andy_JS said:

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.
    "Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"
    Is that a quote from Wall Street (1987)?
    Austin Powers :lol:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY3DrA7tJFk
  • Options
    TimT said:

    TimT said:

    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.

    Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?

    Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.
    We ordered material manufactured by the highest quality (and most expensive) provider. We were their earliest and largest order so had priority. We assumed that given this was a reputable company located in a close ally and a fellow EU state we would have no issues with fulfilment.

    So we had no plan B

    It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
    The French copied the Americans:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-52161995

    "The US has been accused of redirecting 200,000 Germany-bound masks for its own use, in a move condemned as "modern piracy".
    "The local government in Berlin said the shipment of US-made masks was "confiscated" in Bangkok.
    "The FFP2 masks, which were ordered by Berlin's police force, did not reach their destination, it said."
    Sunil, I believe that story has been totally debunked, although the Germans, taking a leaf from Trump's own book, continue to peddle it regardless of it being based on false 'facts'
    Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking?
    I haven't seen any retraction by the Berlin Police Force from their public statement at the time, that the stuff was ordered, payed for, and notification of delivery received, before it was confiscated while already loaded onto the plane.

    Further, could you please point out to me any instance of "the Germans peddling these 'false facts' regardless", besides, maybe, this comment of mine?
    3M is the only US company with N95 production facilities in the region, and hence the only company from which the US could have 'confiscated' the order. They have no record of the so-called Berlin order. The Mayor of Berlin later admitted that the order was with a German company, (and hence not susceptible to the US requisition order).

    "German officials on Friday were stinging in their criticism of the Trump administration after a consignment of face masks that they said was ordered and paid for by the Berlin police was diverted en route from China. But one of the officials backpedaled from his statement on Saturday.

    "Andreas Geisel, Berlin’s interior minister, said the delivery made it as far as Bangkok before being “confiscated.” In a statement Friday, he said the masks had been ordered from a U.S. firm and “we are currently assuming that this is related to the U.S. government’s ban on mask exports." Berlin mayor Michael Müller also weighed in to call the action “inhumane and unacceptable.”

    "But on Saturday, Geisel wrote on Twitter that he had clarified that the order was placed with a German firm, and that supply-chain issues were being “reviewed.”
    "German press reports said Friday the consignment was ordered from 3M. 3M later said it had “no evidence” that its products had been seized, as it had “no record of any order of respirators from China for the Berlin police.”

    "The German federal government did not respond to a request to comment on Friday. The U.S. State Department declined to comment on the complaints from various countries."

    It is ironic that even the Germans are using Trump's own tactics against him.

    Source:
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/03/white-house-scrambles-scoop-up-medical-supplies-angering-canada-germany/
    Thank you for linking the WaPo article. As I understand it, the heart of the matter is that the Berlin Police Force didn't order directly from 3M, but from a German kit wholesaler who in turn then ordered from 3M. The redirection of the delivery seems to have happened nevertheless, the masks didn't arrive as previously notified. I'm unable to find any information, though, on whether and when the delivery then actually occured.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    I recreated the daily death reporting spreadsheet for NHS England data by day of reporting and day of death. I'll keep it updated as the data comes out. For today's data around 20% of newly reported deaths were from more than 7 days prior to the reporting day, which compares to an average of 7%. However, there was still a big rise compared to the weekend.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    TimT said:


    It is ironic that even the Germans are using Trump's own tactics against him.

    The Germans have a decent track record on using fake news.....
  • Options
    ukpaulukpaul Posts: 649
    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    RobD said:

    ukpaul said:

    HYUFD said:
    Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.
    The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.
    Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.
    Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.
    Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?
    The media is the most powerful means of creating opinion that we have. Why else do totalitarian states control it? The sad fact is that people’s opinions, whatever country they are in, are easily distorted by what they see and hear. Especially if they do not have the time or wherewithal to seek out competing views.
    A comparison of media reporting and opinion polls over coronavirus suggests otherwise.
    An issue which, as it means life or death, has had people access many sources of information in order for them to be knowledgeable. If all they had was the Mail they'd be getting very short changed, for example.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,137
    Oh, and I had a trip to the bottlebank without being berated by locals.
  • Options

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.

    I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
    If it is a COVID-19 only hospital, would you be volunteering to work there?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    edited April 2020
    RobD said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Better to have it and not need it given the circumstances.
    Bollox, a total waste of money. Total PR job.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,618
    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    As I've been saying this EU or not EU stuff is a red herring. Neither of the EU schemes have delivered anything and aren't expected to for a while. The question that needs answering is why are we only involving UK industry now for PPE? What was the decision making process behind bringing UK industry into ventilator manufacturing but not do the same for PPE where the same or worse shortages from international markets were expected.

    Because we ordered a massive amount from Vygon
    Even if that order had gone through, it wouldn't have been a permanent solution, we would still have run out, just a bit later. Additionally, we predicted that there would be a scramble to get ventilators and probable export restrictions, why was the same thought process not followed for PPE?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,401
    HYUFD said:
    This is the same Queen who hasn't donated a square foot of floor space in her myriad palaces to help test/treat her subjects during the pandemic?
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989

    HYUFD said:
    This is the same Queen who hasn't donated a square foot of floor space in her myriad palaces to help test/treat her subjects during the pandemic?
    Not sure they are suitable to be honest with you.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    malcolmg said:

    RobD said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Better to have it and not need it given the circumstances.
    Bollox, a total waste of money. Total PR job.
    LOL. Right. No doubt you would be asking why triage hospitals weren't constructed if things went worse than they did.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,792
    IshmaelZ said:

    A Belgian biotech firm claims it has developed a foolproof coronavirus antibody test that is 100 per cent accurate.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8241195/Belgian-biotech-firm-claims-coronavirus-antibody-test-100-accurate.html

    The Belgians are awesome, might be the best thing the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.
    He rebadged the Jefferson method.
    Jefferson was a serologist ?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!
    If it was actually needed and had no staff what do you think they would do , nurse themselves.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,989
    malcolmg said:

    RobD said:

    kinabalu said:

    Oh dear.

    Dozens of patients with Covid-19 have been turned away from the NHS Nightingale hospital in London because it has too few nurses to treat them, the Guardian can reveal.

    The disclosure comes amid a growing belief among hospital management in the capital that the Nightingale, built to great acclaim over just nine days, was becoming a “white elephant”.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    The revelation raises questions about the role and future of the hospital, which up until Monday had only treated 41 patients, despite being designed to include almost 4,000 beds.

    That means that the hospital has rejected more patients, due to a combination of understaffing and the patients’ health, than it has treated. Of those 41 patients, four have died, seven have been discharged to a less critical level of care, and the other 30 were still being cared for at the Nightingale.


    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/04/21/some-points-from-todays-new-polling/

    Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.
    I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!
    If it was actually needed and had no staff what do you think they would do , nurse themselves.
    If things were really bad you start drafting in people to do stuff. You make it sound like such things are impossible.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    HYUFD said:
    This is the same Queen who hasn't donated a square foot of floor space in her myriad palaces to help test/treat her subjects during the pandemic?
    Not sure they are suitable to be honest with you.
    Has she donated any of her personal wealth to the various fundraisers?

    Let us not forget she was a tax dodger for most of her life.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,986
    MaxPB said:

    Charles said:

    MaxPB said:

    As I've been saying this EU or not EU stuff is a red herring. Neither of the EU schemes have delivered anything and aren't expected to for a while. The question that needs answering is why are we only involving UK industry now for PPE? What was the decision making process behind bringing UK industry into ventilator manufacturing but not do the same for PPE where the same or worse shortages from international markets were expected.

    Because we ordered a massive amount from Vygon
    Even if that order had gone through, it wouldn't have been a permanent solution, we would still have run out, just a bit later. Additionally, we predicted that there would be a scramble to get ventilators and probable export restrictions, why was the same thought process not followed for PPE?
    Must have been a BAU assumption for supply chains..
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    edited April 2020

    Oh dear.

    The hospital has been unable to admit about 50 people with the disease and needing “life or death” care since its first patient arrived at the site, in the ExCeL exhibition centre, in London’s Docklands, on 7 April. Thirty of these people were rejected because of a lack of staff.

    The planned transfer of more than 30 patients from established London hospitals to the Nightingale was “cancelled due to staffing issues”, according to NHS documents seen by the Guardian. All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell.

    Not this crap again. From the very start, they said the plan was for less serious cases. And was a backstop for if things got really tight for capacity, which it hasn't.

    Nightingale hospital in London 'to treat less critical Covid-19 cases'

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/30/nightingale-hospital-in-london-to-treat-less-critical-covid-19-cases

    I think we would all love the equivalent of these for making PPE.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,986

    This is a thread about trying to do things remotely/social distancing and the justice system.

    Spoiler: It really is an option.

    https://twitter.com/MelStooks/status/1252520863821434880

    A friend speculates this is the time to commit low to medium level non violent/no sexual crimes, the justice system might not be able to cope, and you'll never get to trial, unless we go the way of North Britain.

    Did you mean to write "not an option" ?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,062
    A good news story just for a change
    Three-week-old baby Peyton, though to be Scotland’s youngest COVID-19 patient, has recovered from the virus and is finally home, thanks to the dedicated care of NHS Lanarkshire staff. Full story here http://bit.ly/2xQnu5w
This discussion has been closed.