The virus. PPE. Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
myotis said:
Assuming this is correct, I wonder if this is also a problem in Wales and Northern Ireland.

11:17
Scotland hit by 'England-only' supply decision
cc784ee7-2351-483f-a4c9-a9250203251f.jpg

Mornings with Kaye Adams
BBC Radio Scotland
Supplies of protective equipment to carers in Scotland have been hit by the decision of the four largest manufacturers in the UK saying they will limit supplies to England, it has been revealed.
But Dr Donald Macaskill, chief executive of Scottish Care, tells BBC Radio Scotland that, although he remains concerned about supplies, he believes they are improving.
"We are facing an additional problem and that is that the care home sector and the care at home sector had traditionally ordered PPE from various sources, but the four largest companies in the UK last week said they were not sending to Scotland and their priority was going to be England - English NHS and then English social care providers.
"So, within two or three days, we've had a massive dry up of procurement into Scotland and that's had a really serious impact on our care homes and care organisations. Things have improved over the weekend. We are confident the stuff is there but just needs to be put out."
Click to expand...
sphexx said:
I hope this untrue, the only rationale I can think of is that there are many more cases in England and they are concentrating supplies where most needed?
Click to expand...

I hope that it is just a rationalisation of where it's going rather than a complete England only approach. Thing is the report doesnt seem to name these 4 big manufacturers so I take it all with a bit of a pinch of salt at the moment.
 
myotis said:
Assuming this is correct, I wonder if this is also a problem in Wales and Northern Ireland.

11:17
Scotland hit by 'England-only' supply decision
cc784ee7-2351-483f-a4c9-a9250203251f.jpg

Mornings with Kaye Adams
BBC Radio Scotland
Supplies of protective equipment to carers in Scotland have been hit by the decision of the four largest manufacturers in the UK saying they will limit supplies to England, it has been revealed.
But Dr Donald Macaskill, chief executive of Scottish Care, tells BBC Radio Scotland that, although he remains concerned about supplies, he believes they are improving.
"We are facing an additional problem and that is that the care home sector and the care at home sector had traditionally ordered PPE from various sources, but the four largest companies in the UK last week said they were not sending to Scotland and their priority was going to be England - English NHS and then English social care providers.
"So, within two or three days, we've had a massive dry up of procurement into Scotland and that's had a really serious impact on our care homes and care organisations. Things have improved over the weekend. We are confident the stuff is there but just needs to be put out."
Click to expand...

I'm not saying this is the case, but if there is a perception in Scotland that death's have resulted due to England getting preferential treatment, then the IndyRef2 (should it ever happen) outcome will be a foregone conclusion.
 
nilagin said:
Biggest silverlining, is not having Greta in the news. :)
Click to expand...

Once the virus is clear, then I don`t think Greta will have to say much about pollution at all as just look at all the images since the world lockdown, even from the Space Station is like WOW where has it all gone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mex
sphexx said:
As I said, a reasonable point, but they didn't make it so it is unlikely to have been considered. Even her moving out of Downing Street in the first place may have been against the rules and presumably meant extra security employed.
Click to expand...
You seriously think they didn't consider security because they never mentioned it?
:LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Just saw a report on the the BBC news from Sizewell B power station.

They started their contingency plans for the virus two months before we had the first case in the UK. They have increased their stock so they should not need anything extra until 2021.

Dave
 
Fuji Dave said:
Once the virus is clear, then I don`t think Greta will have to say much about pollution at all as just look at all the images since the world lockdown, even from the Space Station is like WOW where has it all gone.
Click to expand...
I think It will probably come back quicker than it disappeared.
 
sphexx said:
I hope this untrue, the only rationale I can think of is that there are many more cases in England and they are concentrating supplies where most needed?
Click to expand...
This could well be a reflection of how complex the PPE logistics is, because I can fully understand PPE going to where its most needed, but not sure this should be a decision made by the PPE suppliers. If that is indeed what is happening.

It would be nice to think there was "UK government" approach to this, but if the UK briefings are anything to go by, it's difficult to untangle the UK bits from the English bits. A possible penalty of England not actually having a Government.
 
Uncle Fester said:
I'm not saying this is the case, but if there is a perception in Scotland that death's have resulted due to England getting preferential treatment, then the IndyRef2 (should it ever happen) outcome will be a foregone conclusion.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think you may be correct, and although not a supporter of an Independent Scotland, I do think that Nicola Sturgeon (at her daily briefings) is coming across as far more competent and in control of the situation than the UK lot: Boris, Hancock, Rabb etc, which can't be doing the SNP any harm.
 
Donnie said:
So, that makes it ok then?



It's still against the advice for the masses and does increase risk of spreading covid19



Indeed, for those that can afford testing and get it done quicker while the masses ....... well no one really seems to care



Indeed looking at when he tested positive (showing symptoms for 24-48 hours previously) and her reporting of her symptoms there's a definite overlap and thus she should have actually stayed isolated in downing street with him. But again seems different for some :cautious::cautious:
Click to expand...

Yes because in many cases rules need to be flexible as you get exceptions or edge cases. There will be legitimate reasons why people may need to move location. Like I said, one reason could be the security services saying for manpower wise they need to consolidate and the risk/danger is being outweighed by the benefits.

I used to care for my Nan in the next Village and if she was still alive I might have had to make the decision to move her in with me somehow if her health deteriorated or had a fall for example. Probably against the rules but otherwise she would not have been able to do some of the basics. Once I had to go round to get her out of bed as she couldn’t get up. If that happened now should I just leave her or break the rules?
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
You seriously think they didn't consider security because they never mentioned it?
:LOL::LOL::LOL:
Click to expand...
No, I don’t think Johnson & GF considered security, I think they just did, like various other Ministers here and NZ. The security would follow automatically. Remember this is the pillock who when he was Foreign Secretary buggered off to Italy without his security and staggered back on a regular flight looking hungover (to be charitable :( .
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
This is where the real problem with controlling the contagion will emerge. When a government tells its citizens to behave in an unnatural manner then every single member of that government must be seen to comply. Each time a member of the hierarchy is seen to break the rules they are (in effect) giving all other citizens permission to also break the rules. Where the leadership of a government is in the hands of people widely perceived to be untrustworthy this is a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...
Odd then that nobody has complained about the Queen moving out to Windsor where I believe her husband is also, should she not have stayed at Buck Palace and Philip in Norfolk. Prince Charles flew off to Scotland, presumably in the hope of not catching it and I believe by private plane, which wasnt exactly eco friendly. Now, there may have been good reason but it doesn't look like there was.
Anyone who doesn't believe in one rule for the oiks and another for the Toffs is in cloud cuckoo land.
 
Last edited:
sphexx said:
As I said, a reasonable point, but they didn't make it so it is unlikely to have been considered. Even her moving out of Downing Street in the first place may have been against the rules and presumably meant extra security employed.
Click to expand...
Downing Street would be classified as an "office" given the number of people visiting daily, it would seem to make sense to remove anyone showing signs of a disease from said office to their home and then make sense in this case to move said person to partners home for security reasons when partner discharged from hospital to their home.
 
sphexx said:
Oh dear, another one (2 judging by ‘likes’) who are frightened of a little girl :).
Click to expand...
Her story seems to me reminiscent of Jeanne d'Arc: a not especially bright, impressionable teenager groomed by some very unpleasant people and used as a figurehead.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Her story seems to me reminiscent of Jeanne d'Arc: a not especially bright, impressionable teenager groomed by some very unpleasant people and used as a figurehead.
Click to expand...
If only she'd talked to those nice people from the oil industry, and educated her poor female teenage mind with the wise words of the middle aged men who spend their declining years making climate change denial videos on Youtube.
 
Retune said:
If only she'd talked to those nice people from the oil industry, and educated her poor female teenage mind with the wise words of the middle aged men who spend their declining years making climate change denial videos on Youtube.
Click to expand...
We use 100million barrels a day, that's going to take some effort to get it to zero.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Her story seems to me reminiscent of Jeanne d'Arc: a not especially bright, impressionable teenager groomed by some very unpleasant people and used as a figurehead.
Click to expand...
Well she's bright enough to realise that we're f*****g up our planet.
There really is no need to be so insulting about someone you don't even know.
Says a lot more about your intelligence than hers.. :LOL:
 
MatBin said:
Odd then that nobody has complained about the Queen moving out to Windsor where I believe her husband is also, should she not have stayed at Buck Palace and Philip in Norfolk. Prince Charles flew off to Scotland, presumably in the hope of not catching it and I believe by private plane, which wasnt exactly eco friendly. Now, there may have been good reason but it doesn't look like there was.
Anyone who doesn't believe in one rule for the oiks and another for the Toffs is in cloud cuckoo land.
Click to expand...
You miss the point I am making. There are reasonable reasons why all these things may have been (Sovereign and heir shouldn’t travel in same “plane” etc) but these reasons were not given. I’m not even sure it holds good for the PMs GF — he has ex-wives, GFs & spawn all over the place, are they all getting protection? How much is it all costing?
 
MatBin said:
Downing Street would be classified as an "office" given the number of people visiting daily, it would seem to make sense to remove anyone showing signs of a disease from said office to their home and then make sense in this case to move said person to partners home for security reasons when partner discharged from hospital to their home.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but that didn’t happen did it? BJ stayed in DS with symptoms and only left to go to hospital!
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Her story seems to me reminiscent of Jeanne d'Arc: a not especially bright, impressionable teenager groomed by some very unpleasant people and used as a figurehead.
Click to expand...
Always attack the messenger not the message eh? Her message stands up because it is backed by science.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
Do you want them to phone you up and tell you?
Maybe the reasons were given, to the people that need to know?
Click to expand...
Where did I suggest that? You are being facetious. Can you still see the sky from down there? :)
 
nilagin said:
Frightened? Where the hell does that strange notion come from?
Have you been sitting in the sun?
Click to expand...

Because trying to humiliate someone doesn't work if you don't phrase things in a way to make them feel shame.
 
sphexx said:
Always attack the messenger not the message eh? Her message stands up because it is backed by science.
Click to expand...
What about her 1st claim (tearful rant) that her childhood had been stolen?
She was 16 at the time, childhood over. Get a job. Free loading off other people to get a free trip around the world isn't a job.
What about her claim that if we didn't act now that the damage to the planet would be irreversible?
But here we are, in an almost worldwide lockdown and the planet is repairing itself.
 
ancient_mariner said:
Because trying to humiliate someone doesn't work if you don't phrase things in a way to make them feel shame.
Click to expand...
As, I don't feel frightened, humiliated, nor shamed, it still didn't work.
If only people had the ability to use and understand logic. ;)
 
sphexx said:
Always attack the messenger not the message eh? Her message stands up because it is backed by science.
Click to expand...
Up to a point, Lord Copper. The observation that the planet's climate is changing is unassailable. The claim that this is anthropic is much more questionable. The theory that humans can do anything to make a substantial alteration to the current trajectory is probably wrong. Ice core analysis and geology indicate that Earth's climate has always been unstable due to both internal and external influences. The biggest influence on the surface temperature is almost certainly solar radiation. Not only is the volume of the sun's output variable, so are the interplay of orbits between the sun, the other planets and that of earth. Because of this the earth's path varies enough of itself to alter the amount of radiation absorbed by the surface and the oceans. It's possible that biological effects have acted as triggers that move the climate through step changes but there is, as yet, no real proof of this.

...and no, I wasn't attacking the girl. As I made clear: I think she's nothing more than a useful idiot for people whose world view is not too far off that of ISIS.
 
Last edited:
nilagin said:
What about her 1st claim (tearful rant) that her childhood had been stolen?
She was 16 at the time, childhood over. Get a job. Free loading off other people to get a free trip around the world isn't a job.
What about her claim that if we didn't act now that the damage to the planet would be irreversible?
But here we are, in an almost worldwide lockdown and the planet is repairing itself.
Click to expand...
Those changes you see are just temporary, once industry etc starts up again the pollution will revert to”normal”. Similar changes were seen after the twin towers bombing when all flights stopped — there was a measured increase in sunlight getting through due to no contrails but it soon went back to “normal” :(.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
Up to a point, Lord Copper. The observation that the planet's climate is changing is unassailable. The claim that this is anthropic is much more questionable. The theory that humans can do anything to make a substantial alteration to the current trajectory is probably wrong. Ice core analysis and geology indicate that Earth's climate has always been unstable due to both internal and external influences. The biggest influence on the surface temperature is almost certainly solar radiation. Not only is the volume of the sun's output variable, so are the interplay of orbits between the sun, the other planets and that of earth. Because of this the earth's path varies enough of itself to alter the amount of radiation absorbed by the surface and the oceans. It's possible that biological effects have acted as triggers that move the climate through step changes but there is, as yet, no real proof of this.

...and no, I wasn't attacking the girl. As I made clear: I think she's nothing more than a useful idiot for people whose world view is not too far off that of ISIS.
Click to expand...
Look, let’s suppose you are right, (almost) everything that we need to do to avert climate change is desirable in itself so then where are your objections?
 
nilagin said:
As, I don't feel frightened, humiliated, nor shamed, it still didn't work.
If only people had the ability to use and understand logic. ;)
Click to expand...
:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top