politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some points from today’s new polling
Comments
-
One even invented the question mark. Mind you, those lazy chestnuts...TheScreamingEagles said:
The Belgians are awesome, might be the best things the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
-
"When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"Malmesbury said:
Said the guy defending the indefensible.Sunil_Prasannan said: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."
"Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTJj4wbmAhkMalmesbury said:
One even invented the question mark. Mind you, those lazy chestnuts...TheScreamingEagles said:
The Belgians are awesome, might be the best things the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
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.FrancisUrquhart said:
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....Sandpit said:
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.CarlottaVance 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.
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.0 -
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'Sunil_Prasannan said:
The French copied the Americans:Charles said:
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.MaxPB said:
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.bigjohnowls said:159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.
Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?
So we had no plan B
It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
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."0 -
Yeskinabalu said:
No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.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.
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?0 -
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?Andy_JS said:
Totteridge?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
And that's before we start looking for yew trees...0 -
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.TimT said:
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.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In South Korea, the government send a "ration" of two masks per person each week, I think.AlastairMeeks 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.
I don't see HMG doing that for us!
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 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.1 -
100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?FrancisUrquhart 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
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.'...0 -
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.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.
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!0 -
"If you can't do something smart... do something right"Sunil_Prasannan said:
"When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"Malmesbury said:
Said the guy defending the indefensible.Sunil_Prasannan said: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."
"Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
There's a funny story I think of, to go with that quote. But I am too sober.0 -
Public health communications 101:AlastairMeeks said:
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.TimT said:
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.Sunil_Prasannan said:
In South Korea, the government send a "ration" of two masks per person each week, I think.AlastairMeeks 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.
I don't see HMG doing that for us!
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 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.
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.0 -
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.1
-
Bit more complicated than that, as they will presumably be trying different dosages, as well ?TimT said:
Yeskinabalu said:
No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.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.
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?
(The Chinese PII vaccine trial did this, and has already abandoned one of the dosages.)0 -
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 effectiveNigelb said:
Bit more complicated than that, as they will presumably be trying different dosages, as well ?TimT said:
Yeskinabalu said:
No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.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.
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?
(The Chinese PII vaccine trial dis this, and has already abandoned one of the dosages.)0 -
Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*Nigelb said:
100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?FrancisUrquhart 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
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.'...
No one who does real science would make that claim.3 -
"Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"MarqueeMark said:
The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
You aim to misbehave?Malmesbury said:
"If you can't do something smart... do something right"Sunil_Prasannan said:
"When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"Malmesbury said:
Said the guy defending the indefensible.Sunil_Prasannan said: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."
"Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
There's a funny story I think of, to go with that quote. But I am too sober.0 -
Yes, I took "accurate" as journalistic hyperbole.Malmesbury said:
Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*Nigelb said:
100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?FrancisUrquhart 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
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.'...
No one who does real science would make that claim.
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).0 -
He rebadged the Jefferson method.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Belgians are awesome, might be the best thing the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
Nigel, this sensitivity/specificity ratio is the argument behind the Stanford paper.Nigelb said:
Yes, I took "accurate" as journalistic hyperbole.Malmesbury said:
Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*Nigelb said:
100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?FrancisUrquhart 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
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.'...
No one who does real science would make that claim.
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).0 -
Right. That's quite exciting then.TimT said:
Yeskinabalu said:
No comment from me on Alastair's boxers.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.
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?
The point I don't fully understand is how they will expose the participants to the virus given we are in lockdown?0 -
Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking?TimT 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'Sunil_Prasannan said:
The French copied the Americans:Charles said:
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.MaxPB said:
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.bigjohnowls said:159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.
Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?
So we had no plan B
It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
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."
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?1 -
Are we signing up to the EU Sunbathing Box Scheme?
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-hope-for-holidaymakers-as-eu-urges-smart-solutions-for-tourists-11976383?fbclid=IwAR2Qu-n41OclCCimzIrqhOfzQrNWD4RipPvM2YpTX1GHiw3sOA1tnWc6E1Y0 -
Would be like a bloody greenhouse in that thing.MarqueeMark said:Are we signing up to the EU Sunbathing Box Scheme?
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-hope-for-holidaymakers-as-eu-urges-smart-solutions-for-tourists-11976383?fbclid=IwAR2Qu-n41OclCCimzIrqhOfzQrNWD4RipPvM2YpTX1GHiw3sOA1tnWc6E1Y0 -
No scientific company would use "100%" anywhere in anything like this. It instantly sounds like bullshit.Nigelb said:
Yes, I took "accurate" as journalistic hyperbole.Malmesbury said:
Anyone claiming 100% testing accuracy in anything should be considered, in scientific language, to be peddling bullshit. Until proven otherwise. And I mean *proven*Nigelb said:
100% claimed sensitivity - but specificity ?FrancisUrquhart 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
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.'...
No one who does real science would make that claim.
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).2 -
Sunil_Prasannan said:
You aim to misbehave?Malmesbury said:
"If you can't do something smart... do something right"Sunil_Prasannan said:
"When I talk about belief, why do you always assume I'm talking about God?"Malmesbury said:
Said the guy defending the indefensible.Sunil_Prasannan said: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."
"Hell, I'm gonna grant your greatest wish. I'm gonna show you a world without sin."
There's a funny story I think of, to go with that quote. But I am too sober.
"'Course, that ain't exactly plan A."0 -
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-PM2
-
"Hell, lets do what we always do...."Sunil_Prasannan said:
"Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"MarqueeMark said:
The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
Tan and a sauna. Double the bang for the buck!RobD said:
Would be like a bloody greenhouse in that thing.MarqueeMark said:Are we signing up to the EU Sunbathing Box Scheme?
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-hope-for-holidaymakers-as-eu-urges-smart-solutions-for-tourists-11976383?fbclid=IwAR2Qu-n41OclCCimzIrqhOfzQrNWD4RipPvM2YpTX1GHiw3sOA1tnWc6E1Y0 -
-
It would seem that voters are far more pragmatic about the Govts difficulties than some onPB.1
-
Because our inertial bureaucratic state hates original thinking and flexible practices.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.
0 -
As per Yes Prime Minister: “A clarification is not to make oneself clear, but to put oneself in the clear”Scott_xP said:
0 -
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/0 -
Better to have it and not need it given the circumstances.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
It turns out it is a mistake to allow yourself to be dependent on things outside your control.Charles said:
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.MaxPB said:
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.bigjohnowls said:159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.
Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?
So we had no plan B
It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French0 -
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.TheScreamingEagles 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/
"All the patients had been intubated and were on a ventilator because they were so unwell."1 -
-
You could occupy Paris, I suppose.another_richard said:
It turns out it is a mistake to allow yourself to be dependent on things outside your control.Charles said:
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.MaxPB said:
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.bigjohnowls said:159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.
Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?
So we had no plan B
It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French0 -
What's Prince Andrew done to annoy the Yanks?Theuniondivvie said:
Megs still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:
Edit - Oh, now I remember.0 -
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).matthiasfromhamburg said:
Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking?TimT 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'Sunil_Prasannan said:
The French copied the Americans:Charles said:
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.MaxPB said:
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.bigjohnowls said:159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.
Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?
So we had no plan B
It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
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."
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?
"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/0 -
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.0 -
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
Ooh, my late year trip to Amsterdam might now not be off.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/12526467525675581460 -
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?HYUFD said:1 -
51% of Hillary voters have a very favourable opinion of Meghan compared to only 27% of Trump voters thoughTheuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:
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
0 -
Like JFK the icon lives onMexicanpete said:
Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?HYUFD said:0 -
Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.RobD said:
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
I am puzzled as to what relevance all this has to...well anything?HYUFD said:
51% of Hillary voters have a very favourable opinion of Meghan compared to only 27% of Trump voters thoughTheuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:
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_royals0 -
Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?ukpaul said:
Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.RobD said:
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!HYUFD said:
Like JFK the icon lives onMexicanpete said:
Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?HYUFD said:0 -
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
Call NerysHughes for a rebuttal to the scandalous fake news that patients are being turned away!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/
I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.1 -
I assumed he was running in the Democratic Primary somehow, everyone else was.Mexicanpete said:
They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!HYUFD said:
Like JFK the icon lives onMexicanpete said:
Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?HYUFD said:2 -
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.RobD said:
Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?ukpaul said:
Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.RobD said:
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
So a majority of a majority then.HYUFD said:
51% of Hillary voters have a very favourable opinion of Meghan compared to only 27% of Trump voters thoughTheuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:
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'm shocked that Trump voters might have a less than positive view of a mixed race actress.0 -
Probably because the staff is at the regular hospitals - which are not (currently) overwhelmed.TheScreamingEagles said:
To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/
I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
Equally probably they don't want to actually call up the air crew etc unless it is really necessary.0 -
Better it is there and not needed. The idea of turning patients away due to short-staffing is a worry though.RobD said:
I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
A comparison of media reporting and opinion polls over coronavirus suggests otherwise.ukpaul said:
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.RobD said:
Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?ukpaul said:
Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.RobD said:
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:1 -
A test tube of JFK genetic material would probably be in with a shout.kle4 said:
I assumed he was running in the Democratic Primary somehow, everyone else was.Mexicanpete said:
They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!HYUFD said:
Like JFK the icon lives onMexicanpete said:
Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?HYUFD said:
I make no comment on how it would compare with the intellectual abilities of the favourite.1 -
I think it's a lack of staff for the most serious patients, not generally.TheScreamingEagles said:
To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/
I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.0 -
A Princess Royale being what they call a quarter pounder princess over there.HYUFD said:2 -
Lucky we stockpiled masses of PPE just on the off chance it might be needed. No wait....TheScreamingEagles said:
To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/
I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.
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!0 -
The traditional arrogant retort is "Control the coinage and the courts. Let the rabble have the rest."RobD said:
A comparison of media reporting and opinion polls over coronavirus suggests otherwise.ukpaul said:
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.RobD said:
Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?ukpaul said:
Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.RobD said:
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
There shouldn't be a lack of staff generally given how much of 'normal' operations have been cancelled.TheWhiteRabbit said:
I think it's a lack of staff for the most serious patients, not generally.TheScreamingEagles said:
To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/
I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.0 -
That's the criminal justice system.TheScreamingEagles said: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.
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).
0 -
they have been saying that since weekend GBig_G_NorthWales said:
On this I have no doubt it is already in motion to role out on thursdaymalcolmg said:
How many days did they say the PPE was coming from TurkeyBig_G_NorthWales said:
I doubt he would have announced that important moment if it was not already in motionbigjohnowls said:Vaccine to be trialed in people from this Thursday
Lets hope its not a Hancock over promise again.0 -
Because we ordered a massive amount from VygonMaxPB 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.
0 -
People not experienced in wearing face masks may be just as likely to transfer the virus as to protect themselves and others from it.0
-
That is grossly unfair. Joe still remembers with complete clarity the meeting he had with JFK just last week!Theuniondivvie said:
A test tube of JFK genetic material would probably be in with a shout.kle4 said:
I assumed he was running in the Democratic Primary somehow, everyone else was.Mexicanpete said:
They don't know JFK is no longer with us either? Blimey!HYUFD said:
Like JFK the icon lives onMexicanpete said:
Lady Diana Spencer? Should the American public not be told?HYUFD said:
I make no comment on how it would compare with the intellectual abilities of the favourite.0 -
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.RobD said:
I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
Is that a quote from Wall Street (1987)?Sunil_Prasannan said:
"Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"MarqueeMark said:
The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
That's only true if those patients were denied treatment elsewhere. I don't think the article states that.kinabalu said:
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.RobD said:
I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
Austin PowersAndy_JS said:
Is that a quote from Wall Street (1987)?Sunil_Prasannan said:
"Why make trillions when we can make... billions?"MarqueeMark said:
The UK Govt. should offer to fund their scaling up NOW - if it works, they get half the additional output.FrancisUrquhart 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
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY3DrA7tJFk0 -
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.TimT said:
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).matthiasfromhamburg said:
Excuse me, but can you direct me towards any actual source of debunking?TimT 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'Sunil_Prasannan said:
The French copied the Americans:Charles said:
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.MaxPB said:
Yup, why have we waited until now. Where was the strategy to ensure we never got to this situation in the first place.bigjohnowls said:159 UK new Suppliers of PPE to come on board.
Why weren't they on board 4 weeks ago?
So we had no plan B
It turns out it is a mistake to trust the French
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."
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?
"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/0 -
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.0
-
The Germans have a decent track record on using fake news.....TimT said:
It is ironic that even the Germans are using Trump's own tactics against him.0 -
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.RobD said:
A comparison of media reporting and opinion polls over coronavirus suggests otherwise.ukpaul said:
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.RobD said:
Could be vice versa of course, or is your contention that the average Brit can't make up their minds about something themselves?ukpaul said:
Strange how these opinions mirror what a tabloid decides is the ‘right’ answer.RobD said:
Or, wait for it, people in different countries have different opinions.ukpaul said:
The way that so many allow the tabloids to decide their opinions is astonishing. Trial by tabloid is a persistent stain on this country.Theuniondivvie said:
Megs & Harry still right up there, the Septics evidently don't read British tabloids.HYUFD said:0 -
Oh, and I had a trip to the bottlebank without being berated by locals.0
-
-
Bollox, a total waste of money. Total PR job.RobD said:
Better to have it and not need it given the circumstances.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
If it is a COVID-19 only hospital, would you be volunteering to work there?TheScreamingEagles said:
To be honest, part of me wants them to be a white elephant because our main hospitals aren't overflowing with Covid-19 patients.kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/
I am concerned that they are turning away patients because of a lack of staff though.0 -
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?Charles said:
Because we ordered a massive amount from VygonMaxPB 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.
0 -
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?HYUFD said:0 -
Not sure they are suitable to be honest with you.Sunil_Prasannan 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?HYUFD said:0 -
LOL. Right. No doubt you would be asking why triage hospitals weren't constructed if things went worse than they did.malcolmg said:
Bollox, a total waste of money. Total PR job.RobD said:
Better to have it and not need it given the circumstances.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
Jefferson was a serologist ?IshmaelZ said:
He rebadged the Jefferson method.TheScreamingEagles said:
The Belgians are awesome, might be the best thing the Belgians have done since Victor D'Hondt came up with his PR system.FrancisUrquhart 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.html0 -
If it was actually needed and had no staff what do you think they would do , nurse themselves.RobD said:
I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
If things were really bad you start drafting in people to do stuff. You make it sound like such things are impossible.malcolmg said:
If it was actually needed and had no staff what do you think they would do , nurse themselves.RobD said:
I doubt they'd be calling it that if it was actually needed!kinabalu said:
Accords with what I'm hearing. Fair or not, some senior NHS management are talking about a white elephant.TheScreamingEagles 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/0 -
Has she donated any of her personal wealth to the various fundraisers?RobD said:
Not sure they are suitable to be honest with you.Sunil_Prasannan 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?HYUFD said:
Let us not forget she was a tax dodger for most of her life.1 -
Must have been a BAU assumption for supply chains..MaxPB said:
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?Charles said:
Because we ordered a massive amount from VygonMaxPB 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.
0 -
Did you mean to write "not an option" ?TheScreamingEagles said: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.0 -
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.TheScreamingEagles said: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.
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.0 -
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/2xQnu5w3
