COVID-19

Glad you're home and hopefully on the way to a full recovery.

 

Thanks all. I feel much better now. Just worrying that i don't think this oxygen level problem has been publicized at all. I might have recovered on my own, but doubt it.

 

how did you check your oxygen levels at home?

 

We bought something called a fingertip pulse oxymeter. They are about £20 we got ours from Argos. My level was 84% and should have been 94% plus

 

You're lucky that was diagnosed as covid, those were the exact same symptoms you had when Connolly left

Glad you're feeling better though in all seriousness.

 

I wouldn't say "reasonable" but it is I suppose natural that people such as that would seek to benefit from the worldwide scrabble for resources and any contacts that would have in those areas.

All governments were over a barrel and had to make choices about dealing with these people or not getting PPE and neither is good. When we were in the middle of the PPE shortage issue I don't think many people would have had sympathy with our government if it was because they were taking a hardliners approach on dealing with middle men. If anything it shows why they often revert back to dealing with people that they have previously worked with rather than new entrants.

 

The media at it again with their anger inducing stories rather than actually explaining with balance.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/nov/18/ppe-suppliers-with-political-ties-given-high-priority-status-report-reveals

Talk of "ties" and "links" and implications of dodgy deals.

But what were these links in actual fact......ah there it is....."referrals from MPs who had gone to ministers with a possible manufacturer in their constituency, and where private individuals had written to the minister or the private office with offers of help”

So if an MP had a company in their constituency who they trusted and thought could help they were given a higher priority than a company who had nobody to vouch for them. Isn't that exactly what you would expect? Ties and links sounds much more interesting than simply "constituents" I suppose.

 

glad you are on the mend

 

Cheers mate

 

Glad you posted these figures from early in the month. I've been trying to figure out if there was a lag in the admissions statistics as well and it looks like there is, although not as severe as the case lag.

 

Just seen a report on BBC from America about how the number of deaths quoted there is done via collation of death certificates, just like here but the big difference is a certificate can usually take between 3-6 weeks to be issued. So the figures for deaths can be over a month out of date.

 

In case anyone eligible wants to get an antibody test

https://www.gov.uk/register-coronavirus-antibody-test

 

I see alot of talk about Christmas and we have a few camps.

We have a camp where people think it should be put to bed, we should all lock ourselves in our houses and hide under the stairs.

We have a camp where people think of seeing their family but being very careful about it, ie staying isolated for a week before and not meeting up with anyone else to ensure they can meet with family.

There is then the camp of ease the restrictions and let of steam for a few days.

I have to say I am firmly in the middle camp of seeing close family and no one else over Christmas and I think the majority are in that group, however those in he hide under the stairs group think everyone else is in the go out group and act as normal.

As mine and my other halves parents are retired and they look the kids so we can go to work in theory they are already within our household bubble for childcare purposes, so them coming to our house to see their grandchildren to open their presents is no more dangerous than them picking the kids up from school and staying at our house till we finish work, and on that basis we will proceed with no other outside contact.

 

I’m in another group which is the decision of what should happen should be made ignoring the fact that it is Christmas. So if that means relaxing rules then fair enough and if it means staying sane again fair enough.

 

People are talking of Christmas parties, that's quite frankly ridiculous. I also think people's view point is different if they have children as they are expected to turn up to school with 30 others every day, so telling them they can't see their cousins at Christmas is a bid daft.

 

I see where you're coming from but doesn't that 'reason' work for everyone?

Neither of my kids are at school but both of them are still working so see lots of people every day.....especially one of them who works in a hospital.

Does that follow the same logic? Is having a two tier system where people with school age children are free to have a relatively normal Christmas but everyone else can be damned?

 

OK, it's the Guardian, so many will dismiss it, but this article is written by someone who was a member of the National Screening Committee for years.
Yet more evidence of how utterly incompetent this government is. They spend billions of public money setting up untried systems run by companies with no experience in the field, but haven't bothered to consult the real experts - the National Screening Committee. You couldn't make it up. Note that this could have been done quickly so time is no excuse:
"Grey reveals, astonishingly, that “there is no protocol for this pilot in the public domain, let alone systems specification or ethical approval”. Spending this monumental sum “on an unevaluated, under-designed national programme leading to a regressive, insufficiently supported intervention – in many cases of the wrong people – cannot be defended”. But perhaps, I ask him, in this crisis, there was no time? He says the National Screening Committee could have scrutinised it, setting the right objectives, “in a week or so”.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/19/operation-moonshot-england-screening-covid-testing-liverpool?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

Seeing as you have been very vocal about younger children not being spreaders of the virus then yes, younger kids should be treated differently or are you going against information you have provided previously supporting the return of school?

 

I get that, they definitely halve less of a transmission risk.

But that's not particularly what we're saying here. Are you saying that families with school age children should be able to have a relatively normal Christmas but people without should continue with the same restrictions?

Its not about transmission I'm just trying to get clear in my head what you're actually proposing over Christmas.