Sunday Times - 38 days when Britain sleepwalked into disaster

[martin_p]

No, you are right, it doesn't matter. Why do you make these unfounded accusations about Cummings?

Unfounded? Don’t you read the news? Look up how Sajid Javid was treated before resigning before they had the chance to sack him for a start.

[Devils_Advocate]

Do we know who the Downing Streets spokesperson was who disputed the Gaurdians 'uncomfortable' claims?

[tiger76]

Testing increasing but still well short of the target.

Will the government meet its 100,000 daily testing target?

Reality Check

Health Secretary Matt Hancock says the government is “on track” to meet its goal of 100,000 daily coronavirus tests by the end of April, with only two days to go.

He said that 43,453 tests for coronavirus were carried out on Monday, about 6,000 more than the day before but less than half its target.

Until recently, the government was carrying out about 20,000 tests a day, so this means it has more than doubled testing numbers. Daily testing capacity – the amount of tests which could be done on any given day – has risen to 73,400.

Mr Hancock says he wants to increase demand by extending tests to care workers – who aren’t showing symptoms – and people who have to leave home for work – who are showing coronavirus symptoms. We explain more here about the process of going to get a test.

[Paul Waine]

Is this the answer to discussions at SAGE?

Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, said this week the Sage decision on masks had been taken several heated discussions to finalise, adding that the evidence was “quite difficult to interpret because it’s not very strong. You can build quite interesting arguments on sequentially weak pieces of evidence that looked like a strong recommendation.”

Extract from The Times, online 5pm today. Article headed: Britain to stockpile masks for public to use while shopping and on transport

byline: Chris Smyth, Whitehall Editor | Kieran Andrews, Scottish Political Editor| Lucy Fisher

[martin_p]

Any government defenders prepared to defend the fact they still haven’t brought in checks at airports or 14 day quarantine after entering the country ,anyone ?

For all the stick joey has got from certain posters on this it seems he’s the one that knows what he’s talking about. Priti Patel has just said the government are considering thermal screening and quarantine for those entering the country. Presumably those defending the government for seemingly not considering such measures important will take a dim view of this and really lay into them.

[Burnley Ace]

For all the stick joey has got from certain posters on this it seems he’s the one that knows what he’s talking about. Priti Patel has just said the government are considering thermal screening and quarantine for those entering the country. Presumably those defending the government for seemingly not considering such measures important will take a dim view of this and really lay into them.

So we are going to repeat the tests that are done before they get on the plane? What happens to those with a high temperature, what happens to all the other people on the plane if one person has a high temperature?

They would be wiser to install them at every Tube station and Bus station.

[joey13]

For all the stick joey has got from certain posters on this it seems he’s the one that knows what he’s talking about. Priti Patel has just said the government are considering thermal screening and quarantine for those entering the country. Presumably those defending the government for seemingly not considering such measures important will take a dim view of this and really lay into them.

Thank you Martin , I doubt you will get a sensible reply

[TheFamilyCat]

For all the stick joey has got from certain posters on this it seems he’s the one that knows what he’s talking about. Priti Patel has just said the government are considering thermal screening and quarantine for those entering the country. Presumably those defending the government for seemingly not considering such measures important will take a dim view of this and really lay into them.

The government are considering.... more decisive action.

And if Priti Vacant said it, who knows what she actually meant.

[Devils_Advocate]

Govt have responded to criticisms of Sage by looking to widen the expertise within the group. This comes after pressure and scrutiny from journalists around Cummings attendance and around gaps in certain areas of expertise

https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... are_btn_tw

Got to give credit to the govt on this for taking onboard concerns and taking some proactive action.

Also it it shows why scrutiny and holding the govt to account is needed and the positive impact it can have if channeled in the right way

[Paul Waine]

Govt have responded to criticisms of Sage by looking to widen the expertise within the group. This comes after pressure and scrutiny from journalists around Cummings attendance and around gaps in certain areas of expertise

https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... are_btn_tw

Got to give credit to the govt on this for taking onboard concerns and taking some proactive action.

Also it it shows why scrutiny and holding the govt to account is needed and the positive impact it can have if channeled in the right way

Valuable post, DA. Be interesting to see the job ads mentioned by Guardian.

[Burnley Ace]

Thank you Martin , I doubt you will get a sensible reply

You just ignore the questions!!

[aggi]

The government are considering.... more decisive action.

And if Priti Vacant said it, who knows what she actually meant.

I imagine she'll be looking to deport the virus.

[N_N_N]

Interesting story in today's Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -weeks-ago

UK turned down offer of 10,000 tests a day four weeks ago

Government declined ‘game-changing’ US-approved coronavirus saliva tests

Josh Halliday

Wed 29 Apr 2020 18.18 BST
Last modified on Wed 29 Apr 2020 21.28 BST

The UK government turned down an opportunity to buy tens of thousands of potentially “game-changing” coronavirus tests from an award-winning British scientist just days after Matt Hancock pledged to hit 100,000 tests a day by the end of April.

As the UK looks set to miss its target, the Guardian can reveal that the government spurned an offer nearly four weeks ago to purchase vast quantities of US-approved home testing kits from a firm carrying out tests for the US air force, and the states of Florida and Alaska.

The California-based company, Curative, offered to supply 50,000 saliva tests a week immediately, with the potential to increase this to 50,000 tests a day. On the day of the offer, 4 April, the UK had capacity to do just 15,499 tests a day and was only testing 8,651 people a day – far lower than other European nations such as Germany.

The missed opportunity comes as the UK remains under severe strain due to an apparent lack of its ability to pursue a ‘“test and trace” strategy. Experts have said the UK should not end the lockdown without developing a clear strategy for stamping out the virus through mass testing.

On Monday, the latest day for which figures are available, only 43,453 tests were carried out on 29,000 people, while the daily capacity of 73,400 remains well below the target of 100,000, which the government has pledged to hit by Thursday. The government can currently only provide 5,000 home-testing kits a day, but said it is “ramping up” this capacity.

The Curative test, which has been approved by the US Food and Drugs Agency (FDA), is less invasive and easier to use than the nasal swabs currently favoured in the UK as they only require a saliva sample from inside the mouth, rather than deep in the back of the throat or nose.

The two-minute test is self-administered and can be used at home without supervision, removing the need for potential Covid-19 victims to drive to testing facilities. It also lifts some of the strain on NHS staff, who are required to wear full personal protective equipment (PPE) to oversee the current tests. The results are analysed in the US and emailed within 72 hours, Curative said.

Early studies in the US, including one by Yale University, have found the saliva test to be as accurate - if not more so - than the nasal swab test and some scientists have hailed it as “game-changing”.

Curative is rapidly expanding its testing in the US and currently provides tests for the US air force as well as the states of Florida and Alaska, and the city of Los Angeles. It says it conducts nearly a quarter of all testing in California.

Philip Beales, a professor at the University College London Institute of Child Health, who has been helping to coordinate the efforts of UK testing firms, said saliva tests such as those provided by Curative “really could get us out of this epidemiological nightmare”.

In the US, experts have predicted that saliva testing will allow three times as many people to be tested per day and reduce the need for PPE by as much as 90%. Officials in Oklahoma and New Jersey are planning to deploy saliva tests in the coming days, the Washington Post has reported.

The so-called “next-gen” saliva test was developed in just 10 days earlier this year by Curative, which is run by 25-year-old Fred Turner, who won the EU’s contest for young scientists in 2013.

The Yorkshire-born scientist was named UK young engineer of the year in the same year when, aged 17, he built a DNA machine from his bedroom to discover whether he had the “ginger gene”, after merciless teasing from his schoolmates about why his brother had red hair and he had brown hair. He turned his focus to the coronavirus when the pandemic took hold in January.

Turner’s company contacted the UK government to offer its tests on 4 April, two days after Hancock’s 100,000-tests-a-day pledge. It received a brief reply from an unnamed official three days later to say the government was not interested because Curative’s test was “undifferentiated against the existing portfolio of tests”.

However, the response has caused confusion because the UK is not thought to have any of the next-gen saliva tests, as officials have focused on the nasopharyngeal swabs.

When contacted by the Guardian, the Department of Health and Social Care said it already had partnerships to supply hundreds of thousands of [nasal] swab tests and did not need any more.

Labour’s Bill Esterson, the shadow international trade minister, said: “The government could have hit its 100,000 target weeks ago. Curative gave the government the scientific evidence needed to show they met the specification on 4 April. It makes no sense that the government dismissed them out of hand.”

[dsr]

Interesting story in today's Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -weeks-ago

I have to say, if you want to have a go at the government, it's a fabulous opportunity. Only a fortnight ago the Guardian was having a dig at the government for buying a huge number of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy. Now they're having a go at the government because they didn't buy a different batch of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hiefs-told

[NewClaret]

[quote=N_N_N post_id=<a href="tel:1265231">1265231</a> time=<a href="tel:1588200341">1588200341</a> user_id=4438]
Interesting story in today's Guardian:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... -weeks-ago

I have to say, if you want to have a go at the government, it's a fabulous opportunity. Only a fortnight ago the Guardian was having a dig at the government for buying a huge number of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy. Now they're having a go at the government because they didn't buy a different batch of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hiefs-told
[/quote]

I have to say, if you want to have a go at the government, it's a fabulous opportunity. Only a fortnight ago the Guardian was having a dig at the government for buying a huge number of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy. Now they're having a go at the government because they didn't buy a different batch of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hiefs-told

They’re hilarious, aren’t they?

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

If you want a go at the government just use these figures...

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

The European country with the most warning and preparation time will actually end up with the most deaths due to the gross incompetence of its government.

Boris Johnson's speech in Greenwich 3 February 2020....

"There is a risk that new diseases such as coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange, some country ready to take off its Clark Kent spectacles and leap into the phone booth and emerge with its cloak flowing as the supercharged champion, of the right of the populations of the earth to buy and sell freely among each other."

Worst Prime Minister in history.

[N_N_N]

I have to say, if you want to have a go at the government, it's a fabulous opportunity. Only a fortnight ago the Guardian was having a dig at the government for buying a huge number of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy. Now they're having a go at the government because they didn't buy a different batch of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hiefs-told

A fortnight is a long time in politics dsr, and an absolute aeon in the progression of a viral pandemic. I think I'm right in saying that the huge number of useless tests now sitting in Matt Hancock's garden shed are antibody tests (I don't think any accurate tests of this type have been developed by anybody in the world yet unfortunately) whereas those discussed in the article are antigen (PCR) tests. I wouldn't expect the DHSC to panic buy millions (again) but I would have expected them to have at least given them a trial, given the fact that they have been approved by the FDA and are being used extensively in the USA.

[N_N_N]

I have to say, if you want to have a go at the government, it's a fabulous opportunity. Only a fortnight ago the Guardian was having a dig at the government for buying a huge number of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy. Now they're having a go at the government because they didn't buy a different batch of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hiefs-told

They’re hilarious, aren’t they?
[/quote]

I laughed so hard I had Kenco coming out of my nostrils

[Damo]

For all the stick joey has got from certain posters on this it seems he’s the one that knows what he’s talking about. Priti Patel has just said the government are considering thermal screening and quarantine for those entering the country. Presumably those defending the government for seemingly not considering such measures important will take a dim view of this and really lay into them.

I'm astonished that people are still free to enter the country without being tested and/or quarantined.
I flew home from spain on the day it went into lockdown and was worried I might not get home because of it.
That was about 6weeks ago

[Damo]

The European country with the most warning and preparation time will actually end up with the most deaths due to the gross incompetence of its government.

Boris Johnson's speech in Greenwich 3 February 2020....

"There is a risk that new diseases such as coronavirus will trigger a panic and a desire for market segregation that go beyond what is medically rational to the point of doing real and unnecessary economic damage, then at that moment humanity needs some government somewhere that is willing at least to make the case powerfully for freedom of exchange, some country ready to take off its Clark Kent spectacles and leap into the phone booth and emerge with its cloak flowing as the supercharged champion, of the right of the populations of the earth to buy and sell freely among each other."

Worst Prime Minister in history.

It will be a long time before you can say he was wrong to balance deaths from this virus with the economy.

[claretonthecoast1882]

If you want a go at the government just use these figures...

You are over your childish tantrum then and tears about never posting on here again or are you still struggling to work out how to stop posting ?

[Grumps]

I'm astonished that people are still free to enter the country without being tested and/or quarantined.
I flew home from spain on the day it went into lockdown and was worried I might not get home because of it.
That was about 6weeks ago

I was 2 days before you. But I've asked the question a few times, to no avail, which test would you use on arriving passengers
1. A simple temperature test, which has been shown to be highly inaccurate, even the lighting in the area of the test can affect the reading, and what would you do if someone showed a high temperature? What would you do with those who had been close to them? Would you even know who had been close to them. So quarantine the whole plane? What if they were the last person off the plane, how do you catch up with the others
2. The full virus test? What would we do with the passengers for the 48 hrs waiting for the result?

If there was a way to test passengers effectively, I would fully support it. Unfortunately its not possible at this present time.

[dsr]

A fortnight is a long time in politics dsr, and an absolute aeon in the progression of a viral pandemic. I think I'm right in saying that the huge number of useless tests now sitting in Matt Hancock's garden shed are antibody tests (I don't think any accurate tests of this type have been developed by anybody in the world yet unfortunately) whereas those discussed in the article are antigen (PCR) tests. I wouldn't expect the DHSC to panic buy millions (again) but I would have expected them to have at least given them a trial, given the fact that they have been approved by the FDA and are being used extensively in the USA.

A fortnight is a long time in development of this virus. The Guardian is pillorying the government for not buying these tests on 4th April; the US FDA approved them for use, under emergency powers, on 18th April. A fortnight, or a long time, later. You can't use FDA approval as an argument why the government should have bought them - all you can use is hindsight.

[Edit to correct the dates]

[martin_p]

I was 2 days before you. But I've asked the question a few times, to no avail, which test would you use on arriving passengers
1. A simple temperature test, which has been shown to be highly inaccurate, even the lighting in the area of the test can affect the reading, and what would you do if someone showed a high temperature? What would you do with those who had been close to them? Would you even know who had been close to them. So quarantine the whole plane? What if they were the last person off the plane, how do you catch up with the others
2. The full virus test? What would we do with the passengers for the 48 hrs waiting for the result?

If there was a way to test passengers effectively, I would fully support it. Unfortunately its not possible at this present time.

Perhaps all we need to do is ask the other countries that are doing it.

[Grumps]

Perhaps all we need to do is ask the other countries that are doing it.

Which countries are doing it, and which test do they use?

[martin_p]

Which countries are doing it, and which test do they use?

Without googling New Zealand quarantine on entry. If you want the details you can google yourself.

[Grumps]

Without googling New Zealand quarantine on entry. If you want the details you can google yourself.

We were talking testing, a quick Google shows no countries are testing. Emirates flights are subject to testing but that's the company not country.

Many countries quarantine on arrival, not sure how they police it, but that wasn't my point, and you know it.

[martin_p]

We were talking testing, a quick Google shows no countries are testing. Emirates flights are subject to testing but that's the company not country.

Many countries quarantine on arrival, not sure how they police it, but that wasn't my point, and you know it.

I’ll take you back to Joey’s original post which you amongst others ridiculed.

‘ Any government defenders prepared to defend the fact they still haven’t brought in checks at airports or 14 day quarantine after entering the country ,anyone ?’

Where does he mention tests?

[Paul Waine]

A fortnight is a long time in development of this virus. The Guardian is pillorying the government for not buying these tests on 4th March; the US FDA approved them for use, under emergency powers, on 18th March. A fortnight, or a long time, later. You can't use FDA approval as an argument why the government should have bought them - all you can use is hindsight.

Hi dsr, I've been back and checked the original post (I assume it is simple copy/paste from Guardian...), the post says that Curative offered tests to UK on 4th April. So, they had the US FDA approval for use and had at it for just over 2 weeks at that stage (can I assume the "emergency powers" allows short cuts in proof of effectiveness)? When I read the post I thought "when did the FDA approve?" but that info isn't shown in the post. I'm also intrigued by "analysed in US lab and result in 72 hours...." Again, Guardian doesn't say, was the idea that saliva samples taken at home in UK and then mailed back to US lab for analysis? Is the "72 hours" from receipt at the lab? If the analysis is delayed by a few days in the post, would the test still be able to identify covid-19? Then, if I was looking to set a "mass testing program" with Curative, I'd want to check the scale of their facilities. Could Curative handle all the tests UK would buy, plus all the other US testing they are performing and/or how long would they require to expand their capacity...

And, then, imagine the fuss if the media got hold of the idea that the UK had to go to Donald Trump's USA to buy testing facilities.... and those tests were found not to be effective....

It's only a little over 3 weeks since 4th April. I wonder how quickly these tests could have been in use if the order had been confirmed within 24 hours of being made? A day? A week? A month?

EDIT: A little google, so far all I've found is that Curative was founded Jan-2020 - and has a single page website: https://curativeinc.com/

Plus Yahoo News reports Curative got FDA approval on 18th April - and on that date: "The company can already process roughly 5,000 tests per day and is manufacturing 20,000 test kits over the same period. Test results can be delivered in around 31 hours."

Looks like the UK Gov't (and scientists) were right to say "thanks for your call..... we'll let you know....."

[dsr]

Hi dsr, I've been back and checked the original post (I assume it is simple copy/paste from Guardian...), the post says that Curative offered tests to UK on 4th April. So, they had the US FDA approval for use and had at it for just over 2 weeks at that stage (can I assume the "emergency powers" allows short cuts in proof of effectiveness)? When I read the post I thought "when did the FDA approve?" but that info isn't shown in the post. I'm also intrigued by "analysed in US lab and result in 72 hours...." Again, Guardian doesn't say, was the idea that saliva samples taken at home in UK and then mailed back to US lab for analysis? Is the "72 hours" from receipt at the lab? If the analysis is delayed by a few days in the post, would the test still be able to identify covid-19? Then, if I was looking to set a "mass testing program" with Curative, I'd want to check the scale of their facilities. Could Curative handle all the tests UK would buy, plus all the other US testing they are performing and/or how long would they require to expand their capacity...

And, then, imagine the fuss if the media got hold of the idea that the UK had to go to Donald Trump's USA to buy testing facilities.... and those tests were found not to be effective....

It's only a little over 3 weeks since 4th April. I wonder how quickly these tests could have been in use if the order had been confirmed within 24 hours of being made? A day? A week? A month?

Sorry, my mistake - I should have put April for both months. I'll edit the original. The UK was offered the tests on 4th April, and the US FDA approved them on 18th April.

https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/18/curat ... -19-tests/

[Grumps]

I’ll take you back to Joey’s original post which you amongst others ridiculed.

‘ Any government defenders prepared to defend the fact they still haven’t brought in checks at airports or 14 day quarantine after entering the country ,anyone ?’

Where does he mention tests?

I was replying to a post from damo yesterday, nothing to do with joey whoever, but if you want me to comment on the quote above, it says checks at airports. Would they not be tests? Or are you just arguing for arguing sake.

[NewClaret]

I was 2 days before you. But I've asked the question a few times, to no avail, which test would you use on arriving passengers
1. A simple temperature test, which has been shown to be highly inaccurate, even the lighting in the area of the test can affect the reading, and what would you do if someone showed a high temperature? What would you do with those who had been close to them? Would you even know who had been close to them. So quarantine the whole plane? What if they were the last person off the plane, how do you catch up with the others
2. The full virus test? What would we do with the passengers for the 48 hrs waiting for the result?

If there was a way to test passengers effectively, I would fully support it. Unfortunately its not possible at this present time.

Take your sense somewhere else please Grumps

Point is - everyone returning is going straight in to lockdown and self-isolation (if they show symptoms) anyway.

A more valid question is whether we should have banned inbound travel sooner, particularly from China, right at the outset? If there’s no people coming in, there’s no tests to worry about?

[joey13]

I’ll take you back to Joey’s original post which you amongst others ridiculed.

‘ Any government defenders prepared to defend the fact they still haven’t brought in checks at airports or 14 day quarantine after entering the country ,anyone ?’

Where does he mention tests?

Thanks again Martin , but you won’t get any sense out of the usual suspects, all they had to do was think for themselves, maybe if they had looked at Taiwan’s initial checks and Quarantine measures brought in earlier in the year based on their experience with SARS they might have changed their minds but no , too busy on trying to defend the indefensible

[joey13]

You just ignore the questions!!

There’s no question to answer, think for yourself

[Swizzlestick]

We were talking testing, a quick Google shows no countries are testing. Emirates flights are subject to testing but that's the company not country.

Many countries quarantine on arrival, not sure how they police it, but that wasn't my point, and you know it.

All arrivals into Hong Kong are tested.

Article about testing of arrivals https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/fortune. ... rport/amp/

[Paul Waine]

Sorry, my mistake - I should have put April for both months. I'll edit the original. The UK was offered the tests on 4th April, and the US FDA approved them on 18th April.

https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/18/curat ... -19-tests/

Yes, added my edit - we have the same process of investigation - we'd never be offered a job with the Guardian.

I wonder how quickly the Guardian will lose this article? Or, issue an apology?

[Paul Waine]

Take your sense somewhere else please Grumps

Point is - everyone returning is going straight in to lockdown and self-isolation (if they show symptoms) anyway.

A more valid question is whether we should have banned inbound travel sooner, particularly from China, right at the outset? If there’s no people coming in, there’s no tests to worry about?

You may recall that BA cancelled all their Wuhan/China, but it's pretty easy to change your route and put in an intermediate stop somewhere that is still flying to your intended destination.

[Grumps]

Take your sense somewhere else please Grumps

Point is - everyone returning is going straight in to lockdown and self-isolation (if they show symptoms) anyway.

A more valid question is whether we should have banned inbound travel sooner, particularly from China, right at the outset? If there’s no people coming in, there’s no tests to worry about?

Yes, we should perhaps have banned planes from high risk areas, but as I've said elsewhere that would have left a lot of British subjects stranded abroad
It's a difficult situation, it was the CMO I think who said air travel was low risk, compared with, say the tube,where thousands travel each day, in a high risk city without any checks
Is a plane from Lanzarote, where deaths are only in double figures, a lower risk than a 5 minute trip on the tube?

[Grumps]

All arrivals into Hong Kong are tested.

Article about testing of arrivals https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/fortune. ... rport/amp/

Sorry, that didn't show up on my first 3 pages of Google results

I couldn't read the whole article, is it a decision taken by the airport, City, or China?

[martin_p]

I was replying to a post from damo yesterday, nothing to do with joey whoever, but if you want me to comment on the quote above, it says checks at airports. Would they not be tests? Or are you just arguing for arguing sake.

So if it was nothing to do with Joey why was the first response to his initial post from you saying ‘ What test would you give them?’

[Grumps]

So if it was nothing to do with Joey why was the first response to his initial post from you saying ‘ What test would you give them?’

Jeez..... Tell me its the drugs and you're not normally this slow
The post I replied to was yesterday... With me so far?
It was from Damo
It was nothing to do, at this point with joey

Have you decided yet whether checks at airports, means the same as tests?

[Burnley Ace]

Introducing tests or checks on people arriving now is pointless in every way except to placate those that don’t understand it. It’s click bait for the masses.

Explain the logic Joey13 in testing that group rather than 15,000 that use the Tube every morning? South Korea hasn’t had a new case, travellers from that country are less likely to spread coved than someone from east London!!

You are right though in that the UK should have stopped all flights and passenger ferries into the country in January. If you were caught abroad then you would have to do 14 days isolation and then only be allowed back into the country after a negative test.

[chadders]

Surely they would have used the test they are using for the 100k tests per day and 14 day isolation. Common sense. My band pals and I had this discussion back in early March looking at the flight maps-my mate was screaming to stop flights. He's not a scientist. He's bloody good guitarist. We had lots (years) of notice to prep, reports, excercises, plans in place that weren't listened to/heeded. Cuts were made. Our death rate is still rising. We all need to step back and look to the facts (as best we can).

At what number do we say perhaps we didn't get it right? What number is acceptable? I'm not looking for a figure. Just things we should question ourselves. Give credit where we've got it right and question where we haven't. And those who have the difficult job of decision making should be held accountable where they have got it wrong. Regardless of who you voted for.

We had warning. We are living on an island. Prevention is better than the cure and if those numbers are kept low we don't need a big resource to deal with it.
Lets stop these numbers from rising and keep safe.

[martin_p]

Jeez..... Tell me its the drugs and you're not normally this slow
The post I replied to was yesterday... With me so far?
It was from Damo
It was nothing to do, at this point with joey

Have you decided yet whether checks at airports, means the same as tests?

Checks and tests mean two different things.

[Grumps]

Checks and tests mean two different things.

In this specific case it was about the Covid-19 virus, and passengers landing from abroad

I was talking about testing them

Joey was saying they should either be checked or quarantined

Please explain, in this case, how you see checks and tests being a different thing.

Or just ignore if you see fit.

[Burnley Ace]

Checks and tests mean two different things.

You are scrapping the barrel there!

Test - a procedure intended to establish the quality, performance or reliability of something.
Check - examine in order to determine its accuracy, quality or condition or to detect the presence of something.

How do you check something without a test?

What is the point of introducing tests at the point of arrival? How would it be done?

[tim_noone]

Excuse my ignorance ..but wasnt the first plane load of passengers from wuhan China tested and quarantined somewhere in Liverpool.....thereafter there were incoming and outgoing flights to various destinations.

[Claret-On-A-T-Rex]

It will be a long time before you can say he was wrong to balance deaths from this virus with the economy.

Nah, I'm saying it now.

[AndrewJB]

I have to say, if you want to have a go at the government, it's a fabulous opportunity. Only a fortnight ago the Guardian was having a dig at the government for buying a huge number of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy. Now they're having a go at the government because they didn't buy a different batch of coronavirus tests of unproven accuracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... hiefs-told

They’re hilarious, aren’t they?
[/quote]

It would be hilarious if it weren’t my tax money they’re spaffing up the wall. Diane Abbott is more competent than the entire useless lot of this government.