Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
How do you think Boris has handled it so far ? July edition
- Thread starter WATFORD zero
- Start date
Medwayseagull
JCB
Not sure either of them would want to be associated with the bumbling buffoon.
Maybe he should do it in blackface, while affecting a watermelon grin?
In answer to the question, I have been amazed how poor the HMG response has been. Engineering political advantage, I can understand. Using the situation to do a bit of social and economic resetting, fine.
But the dithering, the waffle, the soppy wheezes....the deaths....
If anyone needs any further proof of anything, see this from the John Hopkins site:
This graph means that we are either the worst nation in the world for testing, or we have shit unhealthy people who die far too easily when they get sick.
And it looks even worse if you calculate the disaster by a different yardstick:
Maybe we are just really good at writing death certificates without a proper assessment of cause of death, and blaming too many deaths on Covid? That's....understandable. In a 'last chicken in the shop' kinda nation.
Whatever the explanation, we are now officially the shittest nation in the world.
I blame.....the government. Even if their worst sin is merely an inability to manipulate data so they don't look like the biggest moron dimbot clowns in the entire effing world.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,300
Maybe we are just really good at writing death certificates without a proper assessment of cause of death, and blaming too many deaths on Covid? That's....understandable. In a 'last chicken in the shop' kinda nation.
Whatever the explanation, we are now officially the shittest nation in the world.
I blame.....the government. Even if their worst sin is merely an inability to manipulate data so they don't look like the biggest moron dimbot clowns in the entire effing world.
i cant see any reason on the site why the other European countries are omitted. though doesnt change worst country status. should we draw from this that we must adopt a more American or Brazilian healthcare policy?
Ooh it’s a corner
Well-known member
Nice to have a monthly opportunity to reinforce the only view any sensible, reasonable, objective person can take. The Govt handling of Covid has fluctuated between appalling and shambolic - other synonyms welcome. BJ epitomises it all - words fail me to correctly sum up quite how bad it has been. Early on in this or a similar thread I expressed my utter disbelief at how ANYONE could view the Govt’s performance In a positive light. The furlough scheme is possibly the one aspect they have done ok on so far.
I fear though that the farce of the DC affair is already forgotten by some and somehow BJ, Hancock, Raab, Jenrick and co. will weasel their way out of their accountability.
I feel marginally better now - I’ve also been in Ireland for a month so the world looks better anyway
I fear though that the farce of the DC affair is already forgotten by some and somehow BJ, Hancock, Raab, Jenrick and co. will weasel their way out of their accountability.
I feel marginally better now - I’ve also been in Ireland for a month so the world looks better anyway
Where do I start here? The list shows we are the worst performing nation in the world. Not far below us are Brazil and USA. Data from most European nations is not included in the 'top ten' of bad performers, because they are not among the top ten.
So why would you propose we adopt USA or Brazil policy?
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,300
going by the stats at bottom of page, by every measure we're near Italy, Spain, France. and we know this from following this for weeks, no new data here. its odd they put likes of Ecuador in the chart and not say Spain or Belgium.
comment about Brazil and US is reflecting that they appear to have handled everything even worse than us, but come out better on the stats.
If you take another look at my post, if you phone has the necessary software of course, you will see I embedded two graphs. These show the UK at the top of the dung pile on two measures. I did not refer to anything found by scrolling down a page, and you did not make it clear you were not referring to the content of my post but juxtaposing my comments with other data.
We went into this crisis with a National Health Service that was fully under government control (plus the private health sector more or less put itself at the government's disposal) and being an island we could have shut the borders down or controlled people coming into the country from areas with an outbreak relatively easily early on and we ended up as the worst in the world.
I know our high obesity rates probably didn't help and it is beginning to look like it had come over here before anyone realised but it frankly isn't good enough.
I know our high obesity rates probably didn't help and it is beginning to look like it had come over here before anyone realised but it frankly isn't good enough.
nicko31
Well-known member
You do have to ask yourself, if Theresa May had still been PM in January, how many more people would now be alive?
Garry Nelson's teacher
Well-known member
I think another casualty of this dreadful period will (or should be) public trust. This is not new: I remember when the Thatcher govt changed the way that unemployment figures were manipulated about 28 times with each recalculation (other than one, I think) resulting in lower figures; and to balance it out the Blair govt's habit of 'burying' bad news.
But this lot have taken it to a new level; an art form. The latest - in a long line- is the granularity of the data shared with local authority public health departments. Typically you hear from the local experts that there have been problems; then you hear Hancock saying there are no problems. Hmm.......... who to believe??
The root problem is that with a congenital liar for a PM, everyone (even Hancock and co) appear to be relatively honest. Johnson has debased the currency of our discourse to such an extent that lying and deceit are the accepted (and worse stil, expected) legal tender.
But this lot have taken it to a new level; an art form. The latest - in a long line- is the granularity of the data shared with local authority public health departments. Typically you hear from the local experts that there have been problems; then you hear Hancock saying there are no problems. Hmm.......... who to believe??
The root problem is that with a congenital liar for a PM, everyone (even Hancock and co) appear to be relatively honest. Johnson has debased the currency of our discourse to such an extent that lying and deceit are the accepted (and worse stil, expected) legal tender.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,300
knowing how hard it is to get data out of the health service and health care organisations, things have actually improved from normal. they tie themselves in knots over privacy and GDPR has made it worse.
I imagine Cummings has been seriously losing his sh1t over this stuff and it possibly looks something like this (or not, or they have just been throwing darts)
First step the councils get the consolidated data from the hospital trusts and rightly point out they haven't got any information from the drive in test centres. Next the councils get this second set of data hurray! Except of course due to GDPR blah blah blah the data is anonymised. With just totals per postcode area, it takes a while to figure out that the numbers are overstated amd to realise that some people have gone to a test centre, tested positive, gone home and then been taken to hospital, where they have tested positive again. If this scenario is in anyway true, it would be reasonable to say that no one has deliberately misled the public at any point in the process.
They now have a rolling dashboard published here;
https://digital.nhs.uk/dashboards/progression
This of course is based on triage diagnosis (including 101 online diagnosis) rather than actual tests. Here are the caveats;
This data is based on potential COVID-19 symptoms reported by members of the public to NHS Pathways through NHS 111 or 999 and 111 online, and is not based on the outcomes of tests for coronavirus.
This is not a count of people. In 111 online, any user that starts and launches the COVID-19 assessment services is indicating they may have symptoms of coronavirus.
Members of the public may have accessed the service multiple times with different symptoms.
The North East, West Midlands, South East Coast, South Central, and Isle of Wight Ambulance Services use NHS Pathways to triage calls to 999. The North West, Yorkshire, East Midlands, East of England, London, and South Western Ambulance Services use another system to triage calls to 999. Therefore, for CCGs in those areas, data here will not include most 999 calls related to COVID-19.
NHS Pathways data is sourced from a live system that is updated every 15 minutes. The data is extracted for the dashboard and open data files with as little delay as possible but there can be a time delay between the extraction processes meaning that the dashboard and open data files may have different totals.
Users of 111 online can change answers and reach multiple dispositions so the data indicates those users that have started an assessment and completed a final disposition.
Users enter their current location which may differ from their home postcode.
111 online updated the service on 9 April so that under 16s are directed to use the normal 111 online triage. Due to small numbers data for 17 and 18 year olds has been suppressed and therefore does not appear in the data. This means that data for the 0-18 age band is no longer available in the 111 online data and is not included within the overall totals for 111 online.
111 online updated the service on 23 April so that there is now a separate covid assessment for 5 - 15 year olds. This means that from data for 23rd April 2020 onwards the 0-18 age band will be reinstated into the 111 online data and will cover ages from 5 to 18 years old.
Following the changes to the assessment of COVID-19 in NHS Pathways release release 19.3.8 (on 18 May) those receiving a specific COVID-19 disposition will be reduced for the following reason:
At the start of the pandemic, work was undertaken at pace to create a COVID-specific pathway. This was intended to capture all patients with symptoms of fever or cough (as defined by Public Health England at that time) and reflected the high prevalence of coronavirus in the community. Through the pandemic, as further clinical evidence has emerged and the prevalence of coronavirus has decreased, it has become possible to more fully integrate this COVID-specific approach with the main NHS Pathways system to ensure that the potential diagnosis of COVID-19 is more accurate.
The initial approach may have overestimated the number of potential coronavirus patients because the symptoms of coronavirus overlap with those of other infections not caused by coronavirus, such as colds and flu.
release 19.3.8 of NHS Pathways integrated Covid-19 more fully into the main Pathways system. This release also included a change to the management of self-care dispositions. These changes coincided with a national decrease in call volumes related to Covid-19 in NHS 111.
Following detailed data analysis we have noted that these changes had an impact on the reporting of Covid-19 self-care dispositions. As a result an average of 500 Covid-19 self-care dispositions a day may have been omitted from our nationally reported daily data. An amendment has been made to better capture this data and was deployed to sites on the 26th June. We therefore anticipate that the number of Covid-19 self-care dispositions captured in this report will increase as this change is deployed.
I'd agree to an extent but i don't think many of us old un's will see the result of any enquiry. The Buffoon will lie and delay any enquiry till either he's gone or we are, just like the Russian interference in our election process's.
darkwolf666
Well-known member
I take it back..
stewart12
Well-known member
- Jan 16, 2019
- 1,588
it's fine, it's only POTG who thinks that 60,000 people dying is a suitable thing to "wind up lefties" about
It doesn't change anything and the figures are truly awful, but what has happened to Belgium?
The last time I looked at any stats, they had the highest deaths per 100,000 head of population.....at 85.5.
Last edited:
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,892
She may not have been that much better but you can bet she would have listened to the scientific briefings, turned up for COBRA meetings and spent long hours trying to figure out what the best way forward would be for the country.
I think she learned a lot from the mishandling if Grenfel and would certainly have handled Covid 19 better than the Buffoon. There would have been none of the mixed message garbled cluster **** press conferences we have had to endure.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 27,892
I was going to post " Poor " but then thought back to all the lies and the prevarication and then the double standards as regards lockdown ( Johnson's old man the latest instance ) and voted " Very poor " accordingly.