Boris or Corbyn for our crisis

[TVC15]

I think the messages on the 1.5m shielded were crystal clear. That's what I was referring to. Some of the other communications have been unclear but on the whole I think the guidance has been good. PPE has been a big concern although significant progress has been made over the past week or so. But on both communications and PPE, I feel there needs to be more realism and moderating of expectations. These are enormously challenging and fast changing times, meaning mistakes will be made and there will be lessons to be learned. I keep saying that decisions are being made and plans implemented in days or even hours, that would normally take many months.

Yes you keep on saying how “crystal clear” this message was yet people who received the letter were not clear and very experienced / dedicated nurses and doctors did not have the answers when their patients were calling them this week.
Is it not a possibility that they were just crystal clear to you ? It’s strange that you seem you to be attaching some kind of blame to the nurses and doctors who are having to deal with the reality of this.

[KateR]

Good points - trying not to politicise things as it’s absolutely pointless and ruins every thread.
My daughter is on the frontline in the police and I know their force still has no PPE - that in my view is a disgrace and I would feel the same whoever was in power.

I do think that both the police and health service are suffering from the austerity measures and cut backs - I thought this before but it’s only in the last few months that hearing the reality from my daughter that I know 100% that there is a massive amount of ignorance in the country about what the police do and how big the impact has been of cutting their numbers and all the support services.

It’s the same in the NHS too - the cuts went way too far. And I realise that nobody could have predicted this pandemic but the service was already on its knees.

I don't disagree and also don't want to bring politics in to the subject but unfortunately it seems to be how the world is operating in many places, I know it is part of the Oppositions job description to be critical of the ruling party but right now I believe not at all helpful. I know very little regarding the heath service except for the hospitals I had to visit during 2014/2018/19, the service was excellent, lost my mother and mother in-law, plus a serious incident with myself, no shortage of beds, staff were wonderful. 2020, Feb my best friend was in Hospital in London and unfortunately passed away, none C-19 related but she was in for a week in Nov 2019 and visited her everyday and again nothing but praise for the hospital and staff. That's 4 different hospitals in 4 different areas of the country, which were super, no complaints from any doctors and nurses heard, so that's my experience on shortages during those testing times; the virus has been a game changer and our contingency planning, like every country in the world did not cope. Surely everywhere is rushing to plug holes, beds, ventilators, etc.

My daughter is a policewomen in Preston so I fear for her but am positive there is much more to fear if we would have relatives working in healthcare. My daughter has not complained regarding shortages and I of course get the "stop worrying" but of course it is part of my job description to worry, same as yours I expect.

[taio]

Yes you keep on saying how “crystal clear” this message was yet people who received the letter were not clear and very experienced / dedicated nurses and doctors did not have the answers when their patients were calling them this week.
Is it not a possibility that they were just crystal clear to you ? It’s strange that you seem you to be attaching some kind of blame to the nurses and doctors who are having to deal with the reality of this.

I've said "crystal clear" just once if I recall correctly. You said they hadn't seen the guidance or even the letter - so I'm not surprised they weren't clear. I'm not blaming the staff or your wife for that matter. I'm blaming whoever in the practice was supposed to be responsible for receiving and sharing such important information. I wouldn't blanket fashion blame the very people I work with and admire.

Was doubting myself so just looked back - you said this:

"And do you know what advice / guidance they have had from the government on this ? Zero - not even a copy of the communication sent out."

I'm not sure now if they didn't receive, as above, or if they received it but thought it was confusing.

[TVC15]

Now you are being pedantic - and you’ve said a number of times how clear you thought the message was. The fact you start to use the word crystal is you deciding to emphasis just how clear you thought the message was.

And just to clarify in no way do I think this is just my wife’s practice - to be honest the fact you now seem to be homing in on this being the only one I actually find laughable.
Where is this knowledge of yours about the crystal clear clarity in the GP sector coming from ?

[taio]

Now you are being pedantic - and you’ve said a number of times how clear you thought the message was. The fact you start to use the word crystal is you deciding to emphasis just how clear you thought the message was.

And just to clarify in no way do I think this is just my wife’s practice - to be honest the fact you now seem to be homing in on this being the only one I actually find laughable.
Where is this knowledge of yours about the crystal clear clarity in the GP sector coming from ?

I do believe the letter to GP practices was clear, although I haven't previously said it a number of time (third time you have said I've said things that I haven't). Which parts weren't clear according to those you spoke not connected to your wife's practice?

I work with GPs and primary care networks on a daily basis.

[claretandy]

In the real world, the Tories have just hit 54%, there highest ever poll rating.

[Jakubclaret]

I don't disagree and also don't want to bring politics in to the subject but unfortunately it seems to be how the world is operating in many places, I know it is part of the Oppositions job description to be critical of the ruling party but right now I believe not at all helpful. I know very little regarding the heath service except for the hospitals I had to visit during 2014/2018/19, the service was excellent, lost my mother and mother in-law, plus a serious incident with myself, no shortage of beds, staff were wonderful. 2020, Feb my best friend was in Hospital in London and unfortunately passed away, none C-19 related but she was in for a week in Nov 2019 and visited her everyday and again nothing but praise for the hospital and staff. That's 4 different hospitals in 4 different areas of the country, which were super, no complaints from any doctors and nurses heard, so that's my experience on shortages during those testing times; the virus has been a game changer and our contingency planning, like every country in the world did not cope. Surely everywhere is rushing to plug holes, beds, ventilators, etc.

My daughter is a policewomen in Preston so I fear for her but am positive there is much more to fear if we would have relatives working in healthcare. My daughter has not complained regarding shortages and I of course get the "stop worrying" but of course it is part of my job description to worry, same as yours I expect.

With the headline & subject of the thread I don't see how it's possible not to bring politics into it, similar to talking about Kenny dalgish & Bobby Robson & not mentioning football. Every healthcare provider in every region operate under different resources & pressures applied, that's why you've got different people experiencing different levels of problems, some areas it's relatively smoothly running others areas it's chaos & confusion, it's that simple.

[dsr]

Nine weeks from mid January - when the first human to human transmission was substantiated. The NHS won't be considering responses to a disease only from the first local UK transmission - thankfully. Nine weeks! As for Horten, I can see you'd love to be able to discredit him, but that still wouldn't undermine the validity of his questions. Why was the government unable to supply first line staff with the equipment they need to do their jobs and remain safe - considering the government had at least a month if not nine weeks to prepare?

What the professor is saying is that the government had 9 weeks from mid-January to the 23rd March (when the article was published) in which the government could have been getting in supplies and doing research, but they didn't do any of that - they remained passive. This is up to last Monday, that he claims the government was passive.

Obviously that's rubbish. The government was doing some of those things. What he is saying is that if the government had ordered 10,000 ventilators on the day the first human case was confirmed, it would have been better than waiting some unspecified time until the crisis got bigger. Well, that's what Basil Fawlty would have called "the bleeding obvious". With hindsight, we know there were many wrong decisions - if they had shot (or isolated) the first person to get it, we would have been spared all this. But unless Professor Sridhar can point to articles written in January pointing this out - can he? - then all he is doing is using hindsight to point out what went wrong. The article contributes nothing to the debate except blame.

[TVC15]

I do believe the letter to GP practices was clear, although I haven't previously said it a number of time (third time you have said I've said things that I haven't). Which parts weren't clear according to those you spoke not connected to your wife's practice?

I work with GPs and primary care networks on a daily basis.

Sorry - are you saying that was the first time you used the word clear about the message / guidelines to GPs ? (Forget that - it’s not important and I’m unclear as to what point you are getting upset about)

So this is what happened last week. Judge for yourself whether it’s clear or whether you seriously think it was isolated to one practice.

The 1.5m letter are sent out based on medical coding data decided centrally.
Examples of ambiguity include “severe asthma” being included in the criteria with no definition provided to GPs as to what constitute this....or transplants with no clarity on whether this includes partial transplants.

As you aware the coding of medical data has changed significantly over the years and this in itself is leading to many questions from patients as to why they are on the list or why they are not.

Patients are ringing the practice and asking why they are not on the list and some complaining that they should be. They are asking the GPs and nurses to get them on the list and at this stage there is a lack of clarity as to exactly what formula, template etc equates to classifying as being in the group.

Then there are some patients who don’t know why they have been sent the letter - and feel they are fit and healthy enough to not be in this category. Again same ambiguity in how to respond to this if they insist they want something doing about it...what does a nurse or GP do in this situation when a patient insists they want to know why they have been assessed in this way and exactly what in their medical records is leading to this categorisation ?

At this stage the practice are telling many patients to wait to see if they get the letter and seeing whether the picture becomes any clearer next week when they know more and more patients will be ringing them.

I’m really not sure how this confusion can be isolated to the one general practice.

[RingoMcCartney]

A special lever that says,



"For Instant Immediate Perfection In Unprecedented Pandemic, Pull Here"




Does not exist. Repeat. The lever does not exist.

[KateR]

With the headline & subject of the thread I don't see how it's possible not to bring politics into it, similar to talking about Kenny dalgish & Bobby Robson & not mentioning football. Every healthcare provider in every region operate under different resources & pressures applied, that's why you've got different people experiencing different levels of problems, some areas it's relatively smoothly running others areas it's chaos & confusion, it's that simple.

well I disagree, your analogy about football is fine, however we all know most of what each person/party/team did so you can make some form of meaningful comparison. How can you do the same with this thread title, you simply can't because one of them has zero experience and shown us nothing therefore no one should be able to criticize him. On the other hand one has experience that is unfolding before our eyes and we can make meaningful assessments of performances.

If you want to make football comparisons then JC is like the reserve team coach, he was looked at to step in as the 1st team coach and lead the team in the PL with a chance at Europe, the Board (population) however decided he was not the right man (for the second time) and therefore brought in a new manager from the outside. Just a little bit of light banter and irrelevant really but you get my idea, hopefully

[RingoMcCartney]

You’re seriously using Horton for a credible balanced view ? A raving left wing lunatic whose usually using his elevated status ranting about climate change and Palestine within the journal .He’s an attention seeking absolute whore . He acts like a glorified union rep , It’s Dick’s way or the highway is his only tactic .

From Tricky Dickys Twitter feed , the day of the general election.

richard horton@richardhorton1·
Dec 12, 2019
The UK seems to have elected the most right-wing populist government just about ever. And it’s our fault. #shame



Hardly politically neutral.......

[taio]

Sorry - are you saying that was the first time you used the word clear about the message / guidelines to GPs ? (Forget that - it’s not important and I’m unclear as to what point you are getting upset about)

So this is what happened last week. Judge for yourself whether it’s clear or whether you seriously think it was isolated to one practice.

The 1.5m letter are sent out based on medical coding data decided centrally.
Examples of ambiguity include “severe asthma” being included in the criteria with no definition provided to GPs as to what constitute this....or transplants with no clarity on whether this includes partial transplants.

As you aware the coding of medical data has changed significantly over the years and this in itself is leading to many questions from patients as to why they are on the list or why they are not.

Patients are ringing the practice and asking why they are not on the list and some complaining that they should be. They are asking the GPs and nurses to get them on the list and at this stage there is a lack of clarity as to exactly what formula, template etc equates to classifying as being in the group.

Then there are some patients who don’t know why they have been sent the letter - and feel they are fit and healthy enough to not be in this category. Again same ambiguity in how to respond to this if they insist they want something doing about it...what does a nurse or GP do in this situation when a patient insists they want to know why they have been assessed in this way and exactly what in their medical records is leading to this categorisation ?

At this stage the practice are telling many patients to wait to see if they get the letter and seeing whether the picture becomes any clearer next week when they know more and more patients will be ringing them.

I’m really not sure how this confusion can be isolated to the one general practice.

I'm not upset. I just struggle to understand why you had to change your tone during a respectful debate and start misquoting me:

'You’ve said a number of times how clear you thought the message was'

How many times did I say that prior to you saying the above?

'It’s strange that you seem you to be attaching some kind of blame to the nurses and doctors who are having to deal with the reality of this'

What did I write that made you think that?

"if you want to think or put forward a view that everything is fine across the NHS and there is no chaos etc that’s up to you'

Where for a moment did I suggest everything is fine?

'I’m pretty sure you have been putting forward the view that the NHS is well prepared, there is no chaos or panic and that they are being briefed clearly'.

Again, where have a said such a thing?

I'm terms of the coding it was never going to be without problems. Such things are notoriously problematic. But once again this is a fast changing situation that requires rapid action. We will not get perfection and so people need to be realistic about that and their expectations. Inaction would have been far more damaging than wasting precious time trying and probably failing to get it absolutely correct. Public bodies regularly have to make judgement calls in good faith about writing to people knowing a small proportion will receive a letter inappropriately. It's about how to best manage the risks.

In an ideal world, and it's far from ideal right now, there would have been time and capacity for GP practices and secondary care to thoroughy check the centrally devised lists. The trade-off would have been delay and risking patient safety. Even then there would still be in inaccuracies.

The NHS and local government organisations across the country are quickly trying to cross reference their data to prioritise vulnerable people most at risk and in need of support. Some people will end up on a top priority list that don't need extra help and some people will unfortunately be missed which could have catastrophic consequences. Lines have to be drawn and, again, these things are done with the very best of intentions.

[RingoMcCartney]

Your contribution is to insult people. That's not a complaint, but an observation. You've suggested before that my posts are boring. Now that you've described Ringo as a "great white" I understand you're not talking about my style of writing, but my opinions. You're always welcome to discuss these with me, but I get the impression from your insults you'd rather me be silent, as though unwilling to even contemplate ideas that challenge your "truths". As Thatcher (who I sometimes wonder whether you're attempting to emulate) once said; "When they attack me personally, I know they haven't got a political argument left".

The following posts you made were aimed at me.

You are a wind sock!

At least now you can scratch off your bucket list; “being shouted at by a wind sock”.

it could be entirely coincidental, and you arrived at your choices because fairies whispered them in your ear. But it still makes you Murdoch’s wind sock.

Using your logic, you were "left without a political arguement". THREE TIMES!

[Jakubclaret]

well I disagree, your analogy about football is fine, however we all know most of what each person/party/team did so you can make some form of meaningful comparison. How can you do the same with this thread title, you simply can't because one of them has zero experience and shown us nothing therefore no one should be able to criticize him. On the other hand one has experience that is unfolding before our eyes and we can make meaningful assessments of performances.

If you want to make football comparisons then JC is like the reserve team coach, he was looked at to step in as the 1st team coach and lead the team in the PL with a chance at Europe, the Board (population) however decided he was not the right man (for the second time) and therefore brought in a new manager from the outside. Just a little bit of light banter and irrelevant really but you get my idea, hopefully

Just talking generally, both are politician's so it's well within normal expectation to assume the thread would be politically orientated, regarding the core question asked, I wouldn't know where to start with an honest answer, my honest answer would be nobody knows & it'd be entirely guesswork, I agree with the general sentiment now is not the time to criticise
either policy, questions & inquests can go on a backburner for now until this things have calmed down,
It's futile debate surmising who'd cope & manage better because we'll never know regarding JC.

[TVC15]

You are doing pedantry on the level of certain other posters.
But if you weren’t saying it was the couple of practices I mentioned (ran and owned by the GPs) fault for not being briefed and having clear guidelines then I apologise.
If you weren’t saying that the message from the government on the 1.5m was clear or crystal clear then i apologise.
And if you weren’t saying you thought the NHS were prepared then again I apologise.

In terms of your other points I am not and have never said anything about expecting things to be perfect and no mistakes - that is impossible.
And I understand full well this is about managing risk - and again completely agree with you.
But you are widening the debate beyond my original point which was some real life feedback as to what is happening on the front line. If you know of general practices who know the answers to the very specific points I have raised then post them on here and I will very gratefully pass them on. That would be a positive and real thing that would help at least one group of medical staff.

[RingoMcCartney]

Thu Mar 19, 2020 1:41 am

This isn’t a party political issue.

Over a week of being hoist by his own petard

[KateR]

Just talking generally, both are politician's so it's well within normal expectation to assume the thread would be politically orientated, regarding the core question asked, I wouldn't know where to start with an honest answer, my honest answer would be nobody knows & it'd be entirely guesswork, I agree with the general sentiment now is not the time to criticise
either policy, questions & inquests can go on a backburner for now until this things have calmed down,
It's futile debate surmising who'd cope & manage better because we'll never know regarding JC.

we have an accord, love it

[fanzone]

Boris

[Down_Rover]

Do you guys realise that you are just getting angry about posts from folk you will probably never meet? You may as well stand in front of the mirror and shout at yourself

My only point is that I work in an industry that is widely covered in the media and, in my experience, the reports are always factually incorrect. Then add the fake stories in social media you can never have any idea what has or is going on.

the weakness any PM has here is that his actions will be judged with the benefit of hindsight. Put your hand up if you are perfect in every real time decision you make

This crisis is not political, and the only political comments I have heard come from Sajid Jarvid, McDonnell and Corbs. Trying to make capital out of this is as low as it gets.

Off to self harm now for getting involved

[evensteadiereddie]

Why , on earth , would I want to log in under a different user name, when I wipe the floor with each one of your merry band. On a regular and consistent basis. Why give somebody else the credit for winning arguments by simply expressing what the vast majority of right minded people in the real world think?

I leave those who wish to have more than one account to those who previously bragged about " taking part in verbal Guerilla warfare " (evensreadiereddie) on another football teams message board of all places, for God's sake! Glad we cleared that up chum.

Bit disingenious there, pal. As you know, I spent a good few months on a Bolton forum generally stirring up a bit of unrest whilst, in subtle, fashion, revelling in their freefall.

I admitted it, it was great fun but as you say, it was on another message board.
Why you do it on here, God only knows.
Not point-scoring or owt, just putting you right.

[Paul Waine]

Nine weeks from mid January - when the first human to human transmission was substantiated. The NHS won't be considering responses to a disease only from the first local UK transmission - thankfully. Nine weeks! As for Horten, I can see you'd love to be able to discredit him, but that still wouldn't undermine the validity of his questions. Why was the government unable to supply first line staff with the equipment they need to do their jobs and remain safe - considering the government had at least a month if not nine weeks to prepare?

As I said, measuring time period as 9 weeks is all with the "benefit of hindsight" - or just looking to "find fault" and "add nothing of value or constructive." So, mid-Jan, when there were reports of a virus in Wuhan, did you know that it would spread from China and other parts of Asia to Europe, North America and, as we now expect, the rest of the world?

Company I work for is global, including offices in China, HK, Singapore. 21-Jan our "global security support centre" reported "health screenings for people having travelled from Wuhan have been implemented at borders and airports in HK, Macau, the US, Australia, Japan, Spore, Malaysia and S.Korea. With the Lunar New Year holiday due to commence at the end of this week, there will very large numbers of people travelling throughout the region... However, it should be noted that WHO currently advises against any travel restrictions and has not recommended any specific measures for travellers to China."

So, what should UK gov't have been doing - given the WHO advice on 21-Jan: no travel restrictions, no specific measures for travellers to China...?

31-Jan, our company issued "Coronavirus Travel Advisory" - saying "all travel to and from China should be deferred until further notice..."

So, what should UK gov't have been doing 31-Jan?

3-Feb our Coronavirus response team issued "Return to Work Guidance" for those who'd been "anywhere in mainland China" for Lunar New Year (or other reasons) "please avoid returning to the office and work from home for 14 days since the date you left China."

Around last week in Jan, I advised a member of my team, based in US, to postpone plans to make a trip to Spore in Feb. On 7-Feb I was scheduled to video interview an new hire for my team who was based in Spore. He cancelled the interview as the Spore office had just issued their first set of work-from-home instructions.

I could go on, both with my personal work experience or with the media reports - and I dare say the posts on the original coronavirus thread on here.

I'm sure you get it. There was no reason for UK gov't/NHS to be doing anything exceptional 9 weeks ago with the expectation that the coronavirus was already "on it's way."

As for Horton, don't you think he discredits himself with his back story? (Thanks, again for posting the links, btw).

[AndrewJB]

What the professor is saying is that the government had 9 weeks from mid-January to the 23rd March (when the article was published) in which the government could have been getting in supplies and doing research, but they didn't do any of that - they remained passive. This is up to last Monday, that he claims the government was passive.

Obviously that's rubbish. The government was doing some of those things. What he is saying is that if the government had ordered 10,000 ventilators on the day the first human case was confirmed, it would have been better than waiting some unspecified time until the crisis got bigger. Well, that's what Basil Fawlty would have called "the bleeding obvious". With hindsight, we know there were many wrong decisions - if they had shot (or isolated) the first person to get it, we would have been spared all this. But unless Professor Sridhar can point to articles written in January pointing this out - can he? - then all he is doing is using hindsight to point out what went wrong. The article contributes nothing to the debate except blame.

I just had another look at the article, and he didn't say; "if the government had ordered 10K ventilators on the day the first human (to human transmission) case was confirmed..." He just said the government had nine weeks notice. We know that despite that time, we are still woefully short of equipment, and also missed the EU purchasing consortium bulk purchase of ventilators. We also didn't respond to several UK companies who actually make ventilators, who offered to increase production. When the inquiry takes place, I'm sure we'll find out then exactly what the government was doing during that time, but for now we're short-handed, and have to catch up.

[Paul Waine]

Still struggling with how Google works, Paul?

Hi greenmile, yes, of course I am "struggling with how google works." Why is it that some people immediately decide that someone is an expert because they like the political viewpoint he expresses? Meanwhile, others "take a step back" and think about his record and credibility. I'm grateful for Andrew for finding me the links. It means he didn't need to seek to downplay them if I'd posted them first.

[taio]

You are doing pedantry on the level of certain other posters.
But if you weren’t saying it was the couple of practices I mentioned (ran and owned by the GPs) fault for not being briefed and having clear guidelines then I apologise.
If you weren’t saying that the message from the government on the 1.5m was clear or crystal clear then i apologise.
And if you weren’t saying you thought the NHS were prepared then again I apologise.

In terms of your other points I am not and have never said anything about expecting things to be perfect and no mistakes - that is impossible.
And I understand full well this is about managing risk - and again completely agree with you.
But you are widening the debate beyond my original point which was some real life feedback as to what is happening on the front line. If you know of general practices who know the answers to the very specific points I have raised then post them on here and I will very gratefully pass them on. That would be a positive and real thing that would help at least one group of medical staff.

I'm not being pedantic. You can't accept you were wrong to say that GP practices hadn't received guidance or even a copy of the letter - ZERO. That was absolutely incorrect and practices have to take responsibility for keeping informed on the guidance being released specifically for them. They should also play their part in verifying the accuracy of patient data. I've repeatedly said PARTS of the NHS are as prepared as they can be for the upsurge because their demand for acute services has been down but other providers are under significant pressure - you interpreted this as me saying everything was fine which was hideous.

[RingoMcCartney]

Bit disingenious there, pal. As you know, I spent a good few months on a Bolton forum generally stirring up a bit of unrest whilst, in subtle, fashion, revelling in their freefall.

I admitted it, it was great fun but as you say, it was on another message board.
Why you do it on here, God only knows.
Not point-scoring or owt, just putting you right.

By you're own admittance, you do it. You've done it on another teams message board!

I dont do it. Why give another "poster" the reflective glory , when I regularly and consistently wipe the floor with each and every one of your merry band?

Consequently, you're putting nobody right.

[evensteadiereddie]

Yup, I did it, oh how many years is it since Bolton went down ? Reading and adding to those poor sods' torment was, bearing in mind the grief they'd given us Clarets, quite amusing. I didn't even get a ban.
Why you do it on here, God only knows. Your er, condition, I suppose. You don't even do it cleverly but that's your choice, I guess.
Wipe the floor ? Course you do. For a living maybe,but not on here. Even the mods have sussed you.
Not point-scoring, just putting you right.
Anyway, you crack on, I'm done, I'll stick to the interesting stuff.

Tick, tock.

[dsr]

I just had another look at the article, and he didn't say; "if the government had ordered 10K ventilators on the day the first human (to human transmission) case was confirmed..." He just said the government had nine weeks notice. We know that despite that time, we are still woefully short of equipment, and also missed the EU purchasing consortium bulk purchase of ventilators. We also didn't respond to several UK companies who actually make ventilators, who offered to increase production. When the inquiry takes place, I'm sure we'll find out then exactly what the government was doing during that time, but for now we're short-handed, and have to catch up.

All right then, if you want to be pedantic. What he is implying is that the government had 9 weeks from the day the first human caught the virus from another human, until last Monday, in which time they should have been doing something but instead they were passive.

The two big issues I have with the article are one, that he should have said so the day after the first virus transmission when it would have been useful instead of waiting ten weeks and saying "I could have told you so but I didn't"; second, his suggestion that the government didn't do anything until last Monday, it remained passive.

[AndrewJB]

The following posts you made were aimed at me.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wind%20sock

I wasn't insulting, but describing you. Never voted for a losing party, therefore you always know which way the wind blows. As for your diatribes - one of them ending with: "STOP YOUR IDIOTIC VACUOUS , PATHETIC SNIPING" - "idiotic, vacuous, pathetic" - open to opinion, but what I don't do is snipe. I don't deliver pot shots and leave. I make my points, and defend them.












Using your logic, you were "left without a political arguement". THREE TIMES!

[RingoMcCartney]

I wasn't insulting, but describing you.

But Andrew, I wasnt the one attempting to take the moral high ground. By saying that if people resort to personal insults they've lost the arguement. That was you!

I was just suggesting that people in glass houses........

[RingoMcCartney]

Yup, I did it, oh how many years is it since Bolton went down ? Reading and adding to those poor sods' torment was, bearing in mind the grief they'd given us Clarets, quite amusing. I didn't even get a ban.
Why you do it on here, God only knows. Your er, condition, I suppose. You don't even do it cleverly but that's your choice, I guess.
Wipe the floor ? Course you do. For a living maybe,but not on here. Even the mods have sussed you.
Not point-scoring, just putting you right.
Anyway, you crack on, I'm done, I'll stick to the interesting stuff.

Tick, tock.

You're judging others by you're own standards old boy. I dont do it " cleverly ". Because I don't do it.

I have to tell you there's nothing "clever" in pretending to be someone else in the first place. But you appear to be blissfully unaware of that buggerlugs!

As for the mods "sussing " me

When you go running to them.

Miss! Miss! That nasty RingoMcCartney has said something I dont like! Tell him Miss! Tell him!

[Greenmile]

Hi greenmile, yes, of course I am "struggling with how google works." Why is it that some people immediately decide that someone is an expert because they like the political viewpoint he expresses? Meanwhile, others "take a step back" and think about his record and credibility. I'm grateful for Andrew for finding me the links. It means he didn't need to seek to downplay them if I'd posted them first.

My view that Dr Horton is a (medical) expert is more to do with the fact that he’s editor-in-chief of one of the oldest and most prestigious medical journals on the planet than anything to do with his politics.

What is it - apart from his politics obviously, because you’re not a hypocrite - that makes you need to “take a step back” and cast doubts on his credibility?

[AndrewJB]

As I said, measuring time period as 9 weeks is all with the "benefit of hindsight" - or just looking to "find fault" and "add nothing of value or constructive." So, mid-Jan, when there were reports of a virus in Wuhan, did you know that it would spread from China and other parts of Asia to Europe, North America and, as we now expect, the rest of the world?

Company I work for is global, including offices in China, HK, Singapore. 21-Jan our "global security support centre" reported "health screenings for people having travelled from Wuhan have been implemented at borders and airports in HK, Macau, the US, Australia, Japan, Spore, Malaysia and S.Korea. With the Lunar New Year holiday due to commence at the end of this week, there will very large numbers of people travelling throughout the region... However, it should be noted that WHO currently advises against any travel restrictions and has not recommended any specific measures for travellers to China."

So, what should UK gov't have been doing - given the WHO advice on 21-Jan: no travel restrictions, no specific measures for travellers to China...?

31-Jan, our company issued "Coronavirus Travel Advisory" - saying "all travel to and from China should be deferred until further notice..."

So, what should UK gov't have been doing 31-Jan?

3-Feb our Coronavirus response team issued "Return to Work Guidance" for those who'd been "anywhere in mainland China" for Lunar New Year (or other reasons) "please avoid returning to the office and work from home for 14 days since the date you left China."

Around last week in Jan, I advised a member of my team, based in US, to postpone plans to make a trip to Spore in Feb. On 7-Feb I was scheduled to video interview an new hire for my team who was based in Spore. He cancelled the interview as the Spore office had just issued their first set of work-from-home instructions.

I could go on, both with my personal work experience or with the media reports - and I dare say the posts on the original coronavirus thread on here.

I'm sure you get it. There was no reason for UK gov't/NHS to be doing anything exceptional 9 weeks ago with the expectation that the coronavirus was already "on it's way."

As for Horton, don't you think he discredits himself with his back story? (Thanks, again for posting the links, btw).

The writer sets out a timeline in the article - and says that in the first week of March, we were still ahead of the game, and that the turning point for us was when we stopped testing, and turned toward herd immunity. The article is written after nine weeks, so in hindsight, but criticisms of the actions of our government when set against the actions of other governments suggest ours got things wrong. We don't have enough equipment or testing kits. When we had as much time as Germany did - whether that's nine weeks, or just four weeks - and they are in a far better position than us, that tells me we made (possibly serious) mistakes in comparison. And with all respect, I'd hope our government is well ahead of private companies when it comes to understanding and setting in motion action to mitigate the virus.

As for Horton, he is who he is. It doesn't really matter whether he's espoused Palestinian rights, or those of Israeli settlers. The questions he's asked are still valid ones. You said you'd take the word of the medical people flanking the government minister over his, yet do you know their backstories? They work for the government, so they're hardly going to say the person in the middle is wrong.

[AndrewJB]

But Andrew, I wasnt the one attempting to take the moral high ground. By saying that if people resort to personal insults they've lost the arguement. That was you!

I was just suggesting that people in glass houses........

I was pointing out that I didn't insult you.

[RingoMcCartney]

I was pointing out that I didn't insult you.

This typifies the double standards that you live by.

When you throw personal insults around-

You are a wind sock!

At least now you can scratch off your bucket list; “being shouted at by a wind sock”.

it could be entirely coincidental, and you arrived at your choices because fairies whispered them in your ear. But it still makes you Murdoch’s wind sock.

You are "describing" you're not insulting.

When people insult you. You take umbrage and claim by doing so, they've lost the arguement!

Now that you've described Ringo as a "great white" I understand you're not talking about my style of writing, but my opinions. You're always welcome to discuss these with me, but I get the impression from your insults you'd rather me be silent, as though unwilling to even contemplate ideas that challenge your "truths". As Thatcher (who I sometimes wonder whether you're attempting to emulate) once said; "When they attack me personally, I know they haven't got a political argument left".

When people just to read a different newspaper to the one you read, they are "being fed"

Where as when you read a newspaper, that newspaper, doesn't "feed" you. It simply reflects your , presumably, enlightened opinions.

[Paul Waine]

My view that Dr Horton is a (medical) expert is more to do with the fact that he’s editor-in-chief of one of the oldest and most prestigious medical journals on the planet than anything to do with his politics.

What is it - apart from his politics obviously, because you’re not a hypocrite - that makes you need to “take a step back” and cast doubts on his credibility?

Horton doesn't appear to have served as a medical doctor for very long. I assume he hasn't been serving as a doctor and acting as editor-in-chief of the Lancet at the same time. And, yes, I'm assuming that his Wikipedia profile - linked by Andrew - is as accurate as Horton wishes it to be.

I also question his judgement given that the Lancet published Wakefield's anti-vaccination claims - and when these had been proved to be dangerous, the Lancet was still very, very slow at withdrawing Wakefield's article.

Then there's his climate change stuff. I'd don't deny him an opinion. I do wonder how is medical qualifications allows him time for climate science expertise.

[ClaretTony]

As promised - thread locked