Jump to content

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Scientist Neil Ferguson resigns.

Broke lockdown to meet his married mistress.

FFS what is it with these people who think the rules only apply to everyone else?

. .another possibility is of course , that he knew how flawed his computer models were and knew that is was safe to go see his mistress anywayūü§£

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Scientist Neil Ferguson resigns.

Broke lockdown to meet his married mistress.

FFS what is it with these people who think the rules only apply to everyone else?

One of the problems is the rules don't really make any sense, which is why a lot of people are breaking them to different degrees. Sturgeon today was saying people shouldn't go to the drive thru Costa for a coffee - how exactly is that risking a spread of the virus if you don't get out your car?

The current strategy assumes risk is the same everywhere, regardless of the situation and who's involved. School is very low risk while care homes are very high risk, yet schools are shut while those in care homes have been left to die.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



Sturgeon today was saying people shouldn't go to the drive thru Costa for a coffee - how exactly is that risking a spread of the virus if you don't get out your car?


Let's be honest, what she was really saying was "Do you really think anyone stupid enough to spend two hours sitting in a car waiting for a cup of coffee should be allowed out?"

Might have been just me thinking that, mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Hendo said:

One of the problems is the rules don't really make any sense, which is why a lot of people are breaking them to different degrees. Sturgeon today was saying people shouldn't go to the drive thru Costa for a coffee - how exactly is that risking a spread of the virus if you don't get out your car?

The current strategy assumes risk is the same everywhere, regardless of the situation and who's involved. School is very low risk while care homes are very high risk, yet schools are shut while those in care homes have been left to die.

Dear oh dear, you are on fire.

This, and there's been plenty, has to be one of the most incredibly stupid statements in this thread. :thumbsdown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, salmonbuddie said:


 

 


Let's be honest, what she was really saying was "Do you really think anyone stupid enough to spend two hours sitting in a car waiting for a cup of coffee should be allowed out?"

Might have been just me thinking that, mind.
 

 

Just wait till McDonalds opens....................................:rolleyes:

Edited by faraway saint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Hendo said:

One of the problems is the rules don't really make any sense, which is why a lot of people are breaking them to different degrees. Sturgeon today was saying people shouldn't go to the drive thru Costa for a coffee - how exactly is that risking a spread of the virus if you don't get out your car?

The current strategy assumes risk is the same everywhere, regardless of the situation and who's involved. School is very low risk while care homes are very high risk, yet schools are shut while those in care homes have been left to die.

 

1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

Dear oh dear, you are on fire.

This, and there's been plenty, has to be one of the most incredibly stupid statements in this thread. :thumbsdown

I genuinely cannot see anything wrong with what hendo wrote.

it would be useful to understand why his statement made you react with....  that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, antrin said:

 

I genuinely cannot see anything wrong with what hendo wrote.

it would be useful to understand why his statement made you react with....  that?

 

4 minutes ago, antrin said:

while those in care homes have been left to die.

You believe this, and if so, explain? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, antrin said:

 

I genuinely cannot see anything wrong with what hendo wrote.

it would be useful to understand why his statement made you react with....  that?

1) have schools been closed -Yes

2) are people in care homes dying -Yes

That’s the only part of Hendo’s post that actually stacks up.

The use of the emotive language ‚Äúbeing left to die‚ÄĚ is over the top at best and more importantly, comparing schools to care homes is utterly nonsensical. It‚Äôs easy to close schools. You just erm....close the school and send the kids home to their parents.

What does Hendo suggest we do with the people in the closed care homes. Next he‚Äôll be saying we should close the hospitals because people are being ‚Äúleft to die‚ÄĚ in there.¬†

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

1) have schools been closed -Yes

2) are people in care homes dying -Yes

That’s the only part of Hendo’s post that actually stacks up.

The use of the emotive language ‚Äúbeing left to die‚ÄĚ is over the top at best and more importantly, comparing schools to care homes is utterly nonsensical. It‚Äôs easy to close schools. You just erm....close the school and send the kids home to their parents.

What does Hendo suggest we do with the people in the closed care homes. Next he‚Äôll be saying we should close the hospitals because people are being ‚Äúleft to die‚ÄĚ in there.¬†

My point is there is no strategy for managing risk in care homes. Most are run privately for profit, so innovative solutions like how to isolate in that environment are not fully explored, in particular because the regulation of that sector is so poor. That means the virus is allowed to spread like wildfire and nobody does anything about it.

Yes, it is easy to close schools. Doesn't mean it makes sense though, when the risk there is low.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, antrin said:

 

I genuinely cannot see anything wrong with what hendo wrote.

it would be useful to understand why his statement made you react with....  that?

 

3 hours ago, faraway saint said:

 

You believe this, and if so, explain? 

Hmmm.  No answer...

You respond to a civil question by asking the questioner to furnish you with excuses.

 

As care homes, care workers and the people in care were ignored whilst the govt ineffectually tried to focus on (and direct some resources and thought towards) the nhs, then it is no exaggeration to say people in care homes were left to die.

There was no strategy to suggest how they might continue in operation safely, they were far behind in receiving supplies of PPE that, as mostly private businesses, they had to source and fund.

Your reaction to hendo‚Äôs comment as being one of the ‚Äúmost incredibly stupid posts on this thread‚ÄĚ struck me that you were wilfully trolling or you don‚Äôt check your own posts.

I had to ask.  Thanks for clarifying.

Edited by antrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hendo said:

My point is there is no strategy for managing risk in care homes. Most are run privately for profit, so innovative solutions like how to isolate in that environment are not fully explored, in particular because the regulation of that sector is so poor. That means the virus is allowed to spread like wildfire and nobody does anything about it.

Yes, it is easy to close schools. Doesn't mean it makes sense though, when the risk there is low.

Funds and logistical help should have been considered and given to the Care Home sector. ¬†The govt offered none. ¬†Those people were a huge slab of the herd that we could ‚Äúafford‚ÄĚ to lose.

It was a callous lack of assistance. ¬†‚ÄúLeft to die‚ÄĚ was not an over simplification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, beyond our ken said:

The welcoming arms of Louisa Jordan should be extended towards every positive care home test to allow some distancing in the homes

 

Aye.

that could easily and sensibly have been part of a strategy for minimising death and further spread of the virus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point is there is no strategy for managing risk in care homes. Most are run privately for profit, so innovative solutions like how to isolate in that environment are not fully explored, in particular because the regulation of that sector is so poor. That means the virus is allowed to spread like wildfire and nobody does anything about it.
Yes, it is easy to close schools. Doesn't mean it makes sense though, when the risk there is low.
No sure the risk in schools is low if you are an overweight teacher who is over 50 with any underlying health condition?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aye.
that could easily and sensibly have been part of a strategy for minimising death and further spread of the virus.
Not so sure it would have done either. Most folk in care homes are DNR for a reason. Transferring them from a contained environment to a much larger building with more staff and patients increases rather than minimises risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hang on. You can't simultaneously criticise my source and then use it to try and prove your point. 
I didn't say that any NHS hospital ran out. All I'm saying is that there have been PPE shortages in Scotland too. If Boris is to be criticised for shortages, so does Nicola.
I am criticising neither of them in this situation.
The difference is hospitals in England have run out of some ppe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, antrin said:

 

Hmmm.  No answer...

You respond to a civil question by asking the questioner to furnish you with excuses.

 

As care homes, care workers and the people in care were ignored whilst the govt ineffectually tried to focus on (and direct some resources and thought towards) the nhs, then it is no exaggeration to say people in care homes were left to die.

There was no strategy to suggest how they might continue in operation safely, they were far behind in receiving supplies of PPE that, as mostly private businesses, they had to source and fund.

Your reaction to hendo‚Äôs comment as being one of the ‚Äúmost incredibly stupid posts on this thread‚ÄĚ struck me that you were wilfully trolling or you don‚Äôt check your own posts.

I had to ask.  Thanks for clarifying.

You asked me a question which was, TBH, so obvious it didn't need to be asked.

I asked if you believed this and could you explain, reasonable, well to most people except you.

The vast majority of care homes locked down well before the public were in lockdown.

The vast majority of care homes are private and as such why should they be bailed out by the government, never mind trying to say, as you do on a regular basis, the government are to blame for everything? 

Going back to Hendo's glib post, "left to die" is in utter contempt of the people who work in these places.

A cheap shot as the people in these places are the highest risk in the community and many die each year as that's what older people tend to do.

It doesn't take much to push this group over the edge.

As for my posts, I suggest you look at the mirror, you're the clown who said "So a roll of 500 paper towels would have similarly been 500 new pieces of equipment" and also said Italy were having a hard time because they had lots of Chinese people. .:lol:

Now, as times precious, I suggest you toddle of to Waitrose with the other pseudo snobs and enjoy an afternoons shopping. :byebye

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:
1 hour ago, Hendo said:
My point is there is no strategy for managing risk in care homes. Most are run privately for profit, so innovative solutions like how to isolate in that environment are not fully explored, in particular because the regulation of that sector is so poor. That means the virus is allowed to spread like wildfire and nobody does anything about it.
Yes, it is easy to close schools. Doesn't mean it makes sense though, when the risk there is low.

No sure the risk in schools is low if you are an overweight teacher who is over 50 with any underlying health condition?

Indeed, the logistics of running a school, not ignoring the children are going home every night after being in close proximity to other kids, is the reason most countries closed schools. 

12 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:
38 minutes ago, antrin said:
Aye.
that could easily and sensibly have been part of a strategy for minimising death and further spread of the virus.

Not so sure it would have done either. Most folk in care homes are DNR for a reason. Transferring them from a contained environment to a much larger building with more staff and patients increases rather than minimises risk.

Indeed, the DNR instruction would prevent any such movement and as care/nursing homes have neither the equipment nor personnel to do much except make residents comfortable the results were almost inevitable. 

Good posts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hendo said:

My point is there is no strategy for managing risk in care homes. Most are run privately for profit, so innovative solutions like how to isolate in that environment are not fully explored, in particular because the regulation of that sector is so poor. That means the virus is allowed to spread like wildfire and nobody does anything about it.

Yes, it is easy to close schools. Doesn't mean it makes sense though, when the risk there is low.

Do you work in the care home sector by any chance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

You asked me a question which was, TBH, so obvious it didn't need to be asked.

And you still have not answered coherently and without ad hominem...

Quote

I asked if you believed this and could you explain, reasonable, well to most people except you.

The vast majority of care homes locked down well before the public were in lockdown.  

Good off-the-cuff irrelevant response.  It simply demonstrates that the govt didn't care about the residents in the homes.

The vast majority of care homes are private and as such why should they be bailed out by the government, never mind trying to say, as you do on a regular basis, the government are to blame for everything? 

Unlike you, I have been thinking not of the PRIVATE CARE HOME responsibilities but of the older british public being killed in them.    I presume you are quite unaware of the large number of care home staff who, reasonably, self isolated and were unable to help in their care homes?  Care Homes have been understaffed.  The govt. didn't care.

The government are the government - the ultimate seat of responsibility for the ways in which we care for our society - or, as in tihs example - the way on whch we don't show care.

 

Quote

Going back to Hendo's glib post, "left to die" is in utter contempt of the people who work in these places.

No, it wasn't.  It was a condemnation of an absent government, one that you abjectly support - right or wrong, it appears.

A cheap shot as the people in these places are the highest risk in the community and many die each year as that's what older people tend to do.

Thanks for the revelatory, perceptive insight, Einstein. Any news about the Titanic? :rolleyes:

It doesn't take much to push this group over the edge.

As for my posts, I suggest you look at the mirror, you're the clown who said "So a roll of 500 paper towels would have similarly been 500 new pieces of equipment" and also said Italy were having a hard time because they had lots of Chinese people. .:lol:

I stand by the arithmetic as practised by this government in the first half of that quote  - and the second half was quoting scientific supposition and facts about what happened in Northern Italy... and it is still accepted as correct.  Try harder.  Keep struggling.  Try harder.  :)

Now, as times precious, I suggest you toddle of to Waitrose with the other pseudo snobs and enjoy an afternoons shopping. :byebye

Barrel-scraping.  :lol:  A cruel attack on my retail therapy!   A rushed job, I know, as that one flailing sentence contains two three spelling mistakes.

Happy to be a pseudo snob.  

btw, The Buffoon, your hero, has just confessed that "he bitterly regrets the deadly outbreaks in Care Homes".  So, that's alright, then.

It's not as if he was in a position of power where he might have instructed that measures be taken, to mitigate such a disaster. 

"Sorry" seems to be the cheapest word.

 

 

Edited by antrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

31 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

The woman that Ferguson was having an affair has a surname of Staats.

That's quite amusing.

Come on people......

Aye, I enjoyed that when I read it yesterday, too.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, faraway saint said:

You asked me a question which was, TBH, so obvious it didn't need to be asked.

I asked if you believed this and could you explain, reasonable, well to most people except you.

The vast majority of care homes locked down well before the public were in lockdown.

The vast majority of care homes are private and as such why should they be bailed out by the government, never mind trying to say, as you do on a regular basis, the government are to blame for everything? 

Going back to Hendo's glib post, "left to die" is in utter contempt of the people who work in these places.

A cheap shot as the people in these places are the highest risk in the community and many die each year as that's what older people tend to do.

It doesn't take much to push this group over the edge.

As for my posts, I suggest you look at the mirror, you're the clown who said "So a roll of 500 paper towels would have similarly been 500 new pieces of equipment" and also said Italy were having a hard time because they had lots of Chinese people. .:lol:

Now, as times precious, I suggest you toddle of to Waitrose with the other pseudo snobs and enjoy an afternoons shopping. :byebye

 

Why is saying they have been "left to die" in contempt of care workers? My point is that governments, on both sides of the border, have ignored the risks in care homes and not acted to mitigate this risk. Those who work in care homes have also been left exposed and at risk - they are just as much victims of government inaction as residents. Today's statistics show that 59% of deaths have happened in care homes. That's shameful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Do you work in the care home sector by any chance?

No direct involvement in adult care, but I used to inspect care homes for children while employed by the Care Inspectorate, so I'm well aware of the weaknesses in the system and of poor regulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is saying they have been "left to die" in contempt of care workers? My point is that governments, on both sides of the border, have ignored the risks in care homes and not acted to mitigate this risk. Those who work in care homes have also been left exposed and at risk - they are just as much victims of government inaction as residents. Today's statistics show that 59% of deaths have happened in care homes. That's shameful.
What's your view on employer's responsibility to staff and residents under Health and safety law?

There seems to be a steady flow of stories from millionaire care home owner's blaming government (both in England and Scotland). I've not seen any follow up regarding why gov is more to blame or whether employers have been unable to source PPE. Only factor mentioned is huge price increase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

√ó
√ó
  • Create New...