The virus. PPE. Part 1

[Donnie]

The Emma Barnett show on Five Live has just started and she's asking people if they want to call in re PPE they can do so anonymously because some Trusts have sent Emails out instructing staff not to talk politics and quote PPE specifically. I wonder if HMG has had a hand in that ? Ian Duncan Smith was very forceful, even aggressive, responding Nolan (Five Live) last night when challenged on the points raised in the Times article. The issue of whether raising the shortcomings now as opposed to when its all over has become an issue in itself.

Yep, its not uncommon for trusts to send emails generally about the use of social media, all trusts have a policy on it and it will be essentially used as a gagging order on staff. This is what Ive said before though re the difference between nurses and doctors, if a doctor speaks out they rally round and protect their own and essentially fight management on it, whereas nursing staff don't rally round and get gagged and disciplined / bullied into silence.

 

[Box Brownie]

!!!

A few thoughts struck me about this aspect of some Americans

Does the constitution give them the inalienable right to act in a manner that threatens and actually could/will result in their fellow citizens dying?

Does the mentality being exhibited fall into the category of "if I can't see it, smell it, touch it...." et al. It will not affect me. NB from the way they shouted and made their feelings public, it seems they have not yet been 'touched' by the effects of Covid19??? And what would the same folk say if their kith & kin started dying???

"They" often say it is not the gun that kills but the person holding the gun.......by that analogy any of them could be a loaded gun and playing russian roulette with their unwitting fellow citizens!!!

 

[Retune]

I think I may be mean not world wide effecting every country in the same way this has affected countries or are we just panicking more this time round because internet access is more widely available and everyone suddenly becomes an expert on everything from running the country to how to cure /stop diseases spreading that even scientist are struggling with

Counting the deaths in care homes, COVID-19 has already killed more people in the UK alone than Ebola, SARS, MERS and H5N1 (combined) have ever killed worldwide. The global running total of reported deaths (certainly an underestimate) is already at the lower end of the range of estimates for 2009 H1N1 flu deaths, and this virus is just hitting its stride. In hard-hit countries like the US, more than 3 times as many people have already died from COVID-19 than died from 2009 H1N1, and there's a long way to go.

 

[Gremlin]

Counting the deaths in care homes, COVID-19 has already killed more people in the UK alone than Ebola, SARS, MERS and H5N1 (combined) have ever killed worldwide. The global running total of reported deaths (certainly an underestimate) is already at the lower end of the range of estimates for 2009 H1N1 flu deaths, and this virus is just hitting its stride. In hard-hit countries like the US, more than 3 times as many people have already died from COVID-19 than died from 2009 H1N1, and there's a long way to go.

and your point is ?
Hopefully something will be learnt from this for the next pandemic, as you have made clear the world has never faced anything on this scale, so perhaps you would like to give us your expert advice on how to cope with it be I suspect even the WHO aren't 100% certain

 

[Dave *]

It is prohibited if it's your second walk of the day, unless of course you have a reasonable excuse, ie medical requirements for example, etc.
Overall the legislation seems pretty straight forward and not that difficult to understand, but I guess you'll always get those types who think it doesn't apply to them or thicko Police officers who simply cannot comprehend the limit of their powers.

No, the reasonable excuse is "taking exercise" not the reason behind it, everyone can take exercise as they see fit (some might be less than sensible, but that doesn't come into what the law allows) .

The problem is the guidance and the law are different, almost like the authors of both (which essentially was the government for both) didn't think to link the two.

This tweet (and replies to it) is a pretty good read to show the idiocy of the differences between the law on one hand and government ministers opinions and the issued guidance on another.


View: https://BANNED/barristersecret/status/1251552130546241537?s=21

 

[sphexx]

and your point is ?
Hopefully something will be learnt from this for the next pandemic, as you have made clear the world has never faced anything on this scale, so perhaps you would like to give us your expert advice on how to cope with it be I suspect even the WHO aren't 100% certain

It’s well known how to prepare for this as for example South Korea and Singapore did successfully. I posted earlier that it is claimed Singapore used a U.K. plan as a basis . UK didn’t implement anything until it was too late (due to Boris lazing away in glorious Kent, no doubt) and it’s not clear even now that HMG is working to a plan .

 

[NeilA1975]

No, the reasonable excuse is "taking exercise" not the reason behind it, everyone can take exercise as they see fit (some might be less than sensible, but that doesn't come into what the law allows) .

The problem is the guidance and the law are different, almost like the authors of both (which essentially was the government for both) didn't think to link the two.

This tweet (and replies to it) is a pretty good read to show the idiocy of the differences between the law on one hand and government ministers opinions and the issued guidance on another.

The legislation states...

6.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—

(b)to take exercise either alone or with other members of their household;

So is it reasonable to 'need' to exercise more than once a day and what excuse can be used to justify it?

 

[cambsno]

A few thoughts struck me about this aspect of some Americans

Does the constitution give them the inalienable right to act in a manner that threatens and actually could/will result in their fellow citizens dying?

Does the mentality being exhibited fall into the category of "if I can't see it, smell it, touch it...." et al. It will not affect me. NB from the way they shouted and made their feelings public, it seems they have not yet been 'touched' by the effects of Covid19??? And what would the same folk say if their kith & kin started dying???

"They" often say it is not the gun that kills but the person holding the gun.......by that analogy any of them could be a loaded gun and playing russian roulette with their unwitting fellow citizens!!!

Maybe the governments should inform the public about the entire cost of Covid - i.e. lives expected to saved through lockdown as well as lives lost as a result of lockdown. Granted these are educated guesses/forecasts but many people (myself included) have little faith in governments to make the best decisions. The data is simply not being made available.

 

[cambsno]

The legislation states...

6.—(1) During the emergency period, no person may leave the place where they are living without reasonable excuse.

(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), a reasonable excuse includes the need—

(b)to take exercise either alone or with other members of their household;

So is it reasonable to 'need' to exercise more than once a day and what excuse can be used to justify it?

Common sense needs to be applied - for example, what is better (in terms of lockdown), a one hour walk or four 10 minute walks?

Location too - I can go out for a walk round me for 2 hours, and easily not see anyone within 100m

 

[Box Brownie]

Maybe the governments should inform the public about the entire cost of Covid - i.e. lives expected to saved through lockdown as well as lives lost as a result of lockdown. Granted these are educated guesses/forecasts but many people (myself included) have little faith in governments to make the best decisions. The data is simply not being made available.

Point well made!

But I also recalled that "prepping" is almost an industry in the USA........................so were many of the protesters also preppers and if so are the two positions in conflict because prepping, in principle, is designed to 'protect' ones personal interests by mitigating for a disaster. So if the prepper is hiding away why are they demanding more freedom to keep working at their jobs etc.......................if (some of) those folk are preppers don't they realise in the case of a pandemic by the time they realise they or their loved ones have contracted it, it is too late to 'batten down the hatches' and hide away :banghead:

I know that is a sweeping surmise but as I said I do wonder???

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

...and it’s not clear even now that HMG is working to a plan .

My opinion is that the current government are not capable of handling any major public business, let alone an emergency on this scale. We allowed our democracy to descend into a popularity contest and now we're living (or dying) with the consequencies.

 

[cambsno]

Counting the deaths in care homes, COVID-19 has already killed more people in the UK alone than Ebola, SARS, MERS and H5N1 (combined) have ever killed worldwide. The global running total of reported deaths (certainly an underestimate) is already at the lower end of the range of estimates for 2009 H1N1 flu deaths, and this virus is just hitting its stride. In hard-hit countries like the US, more than 3 times as many people have already died from COVID-19 than died from 2009 H1N1, and there's a long way to go.

Trouble with comments/info like that is that it has no context. Data is a complex thing and rarely black and white. Are other reasons for death higher / lower than before and on what scale. People in care homes will be older and probably have more conditions, so any small virus or bug could kill.

In simple terms a care home of 20 could have an average of 10 people a year die - 3 from cancer, 3 from heart, 3 from flu and 1 other. This year that care home has 9 die from Covid and 1 from cancer. The headline would be that 9 have died from Covid but in actual terms, no more people died than usual, so its a substitute reason. Now if it was 9 died from Covid, 3 from cancer, 2 heart, 1 flu and 2 other then it tells a different story as most of those Covid deaths would have probably lived. Now that is a really simple example, it is far more complex than that, but as someone who works with data a lot, you need to see the bigger picture.

This is one of my big issues with news and reporting, people are getting a false picture. Lots of criticism of the US (some justified) and while I appreciate countries are at different stages, looking at total deaths is pointless, as a large country like the US will always top the charts (factors like lots of old people, social mobility etc..). If you look at current stats, they have a death per million rate from Covid at 124 per million people - better than Belgium, France, Spain, Italy, UK, Netherlands, Swiss, Sweden and Ireland., so all other things being equal are they doing as bad a job as we think? Likewise there is lots of criticism in the UK (me included) but we are at 241 per million with Belgium over twice as bad at 497 per million.

We will not be able to use this fully for a while, as not everyone is at the same stage, but we need to look at other factors too - no point 'saving' 5,000 Corona deaths only for there to be 10,000 of deaths by other reasons as a result.

 

[cambsno]

My opinion is that the current government are not capable of handling any major public business, let alone an emergency on this scale. We allowed our democracy to descend into a popularity contest and now we're living (or dying) with the consequencies.

I am not sure any government we could have is fit for that. Had Corbyn won the last election, would things be MUCH different? The CMO and CSO would be the same people and so have given the same advice. Now unless they said on Feb 18th to lockdown that week, and we ignored that, the Corbyn would have done the same. Maybe a few things may have been different, he may have locked down a few days before, but I dont see how fundamentally different it would have been?

 

[NeilA1975]

Common sense needs to be applied - for example, what is better (in terms of lockdown), a one hour walk or four 10 minute walks?

Location too - I can go out for a walk round me for 2 hours, and easily not see anyone within 100m

Law states you cannot leave your house without reasonable excuse - good luck in justifying needing to do it 4 times a day soley to excercise!

 

[nilagin]

No, the reasonable excuse is "taking exercise" not the reason behind it, everyone can take exercise as they see fit (some might be less than sensible, but that doesn't come into what the law allows) .

Taking 1hrs exercise per day is a reasonable excuse.
Taking 3hrs exercise per day is not a reasonable exercise.

It's the same as going shopping for essentials. Going to one supermarket and doing your shopping is a reasonable excuse, going to two or three supermarkets because you prefer Sainsbury's fresh meat to that in Tesco, but Tesco prices are cheaper for the rest of the shopping, is not a reasonable excuse.

 

[nilagin]

Maybe the governments should inform the public about the entire cost of Covid - i.e. lives expected to saved through lockdown as well as lives lost as a result of lockdown. Granted these are educated guesses/forecasts but many people (myself included) have little faith in governments to make the best decisions. The data is simply not being made available.

Would you like the figures to the nearest 100, 1000, or 1,000,000?
I doubt there is even an expert guess or prediction. It's like all the calls for a date of when our lockdown can be lifted. It isn't worth announcing anything, because it is an unknown.

 

[NeilA1975]

Taking 1hrs exercise per day is a reasonable excuse.
Taking 3hrs exercise per day is not a reasonable exercise.

It's the same as going shopping for essentials. Going to one supermarket and doing your shopping is a reasonable excuse, going to two or three supermarkets because you prefer Sainsbury's fresh meat to that in Tesco, but Tesco prices are cheaper for the rest of the shopping, is not a reasonable excuse.

There isnt a time limit in England.

 

[Tringa]

The Culture Secretary (Oliver Dowden) was interviewed on the BBC1 Breakfast programme this morning. A couple of things he said were -

In the early stages we pursued a track and trace policy(which sounds like what South Korea were/are doing) - was I the only one who missed that?

Government is working to overcome each challenge as it arrives - shouldn't there be some forward planning?

A billion pieces of ppe have been delivered - Oliver Dowden did not give the timescale over which these pieces of ppe were delivered but as the interview was obviously about the pandemic I assume this provision was since Covid 19 appeared and one billion is a lot.

I tried to translate this figure into something easier to handle. To make the calculation easy I assumed the delivery of these one billion pieces started on January 10th (Jan 10th is 100 days from yesterday). One billion pieces of ppe delivered in that time period equates to 10,000,000 pieces delivered every day since Jan 10th.

That would be quite an achievement anyway but seems unlikely given that for some time many concerns have been raised about the lack of adequate equipment.

I wonder if the Culture Secretary was being creative with the figures, ie perhaps the one billion referred to a period that started before Covid19 was ever heard of, or perhaps he just got the figure wrong.

Anyone else think that a billion is an unlikely figure?

Dave

 

[Deleted sulking member 63079]

I am not sure any government we could have is fit for that. Had Corbyn won the last election, would things be MUCH different? The CMO and CSO would be the same people and so have given the same advice. Now unless they said on Feb 18th to lockdown that week, and we ignored that, the Corbyn would have done the same. Maybe a few things may have been different, he may have locked down a few days before, but I dont see how fundamentally different it would have been?

I don't think the way the CMO and CSO give advice is as black and white as that.

There'll have been a range of options with a heath and economic risk attached, and the Govt will pick the model they like the look of the best.

It's probably why, against their own protocol, they're not publishing the minutes of the meetings until the pandemic ends.

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...-advice-wont-be-published-until-pandemic-ends

 

[Dave *]

Taking 1hrs exercise per day is a reasonable excuse.
Taking 3hrs exercise per day is not a reasonable exercise.

It's the same as going shopping for essentials. Going to one supermarket and doing your shopping is a reasonable excuse, going to two or three supermarkets because you prefer Sainsbury's fresh meat to that in Tesco, but Tesco prices are cheaper for the rest of the shopping, is not a reasonable excuse.

Care to point out where the law says that?

 

[cambsno]

Would you like the figures to the nearest 100, 1000, or 1,000,000?
I doubt there is even an expert guess or prediction. It's like all the calls for a date of when our lockdown can be lifted. It isn't worth announcing anything, because it is an unknown.

It does need to be a factor because keeping the lockdown for too long could ultimately cost far more lives.

 

[nilagin]

There isnt a time limit in England.

Just because an exact time limit is quoted, the word "reasonable" comes into play.
1hr is more than enough per day and hence a reasonable excuse.
3hrs exercise per day is an excessive amount and unnecessary so doesn't constitute a reasonable excuse.

 

[Dave *]

Just because an exact time limit is quoted, the word "reasonable" comes into play.
1hr is more than enough per day and hence a reasonable excuse.
3hrs exercise per day is an excessive amount and unnecessary so doesn't constitute a reasonable excuse.

You mean, in your opinion?

If parliament had meant to restrict exercise to 1hr a day they would done so in the Regulations.

1hr might be plenty or excessive for one person but not enough for another.

 

[nilagin]

It does need to be a factor because keeping the lockdown for too long could ultimately cost far more lives.

I am aware of that. But our curve has only just flattened and it needs to sustain that and dip. Ensuring that things are improving. Then certain aspects of the lockdown can be relaxed progressively to maintain some sort of control. For instance COVID 19 patients are being transferred to the London Nightingale Hospital, allowing other hospitals to start recommending their treatments and appointments for other illnesses etc.
But it is still impossible to give an exact date.
It is no different to asking, How long is a piece of string?

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

Anyone else think that a billion is an unlikely figure?

I think these yourng ladies are saying "Pull the other one! You'll hear the bells ringing!"

 

[nilagin]

1hr might be plenty or excessive for one person but not enough for another.

We are in lockdown, no one is likely to be training for a marathon or other long distance run.
WHO recommendations for amount of weekly exercise for health benefits.
https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_adults/en/

Since we are in a period of lockdown and it is only essential to exercise to remain healthy rather than train for a sporting event. 300 minutes per week is all that is necessary. So no-one has a need to exercise for more than an hour per day.

 

[Deleted member 49549]

The Culture Secretary (Oliver Dowden) was interviewed on the BBC1 Breakfast programme this morning. A couple of things he said were -

In the early stages we pursued a track and trace policy(which sounds like what South Korea were/are doing) - was I the only one who missed that?

Government is working to overcome each challenge as it arrives - shouldn't there be some forward planning?

A billion pieces of ppe have been delivered - Oliver Dowden did not give the timescale over which these pieces of ppe were delivered but as the interview was obviously about the pandemic I assume this provision was since Covid 19 appeared and one billion is a lot.

I tried to translate this figure into something easier to handle. To make the calculation easy I assumed the delivery of these one billion pieces started on January 10th (Jan 10th is 100 days from yesterday). One billion pieces of ppe delivered in that time period equates to 10,000,000 pieces delivered every day since Jan 10th.

That would be quite an achievement anyway but seems unlikely given that for some time many concerns have been raised about the lack of adequate equipment.

I wonder if the Culture Secretary was being creative with the figures, ie perhaps the one billion referred to a period that started before Covid19 was ever heard of, or perhaps he just got the figure wrong.

Anyone else think that a billion is an unlikely figure?

Dave

Because i like 'bag of the fag packet' calculations:-


Very roughly there are 500,000 frontline staff that may use ppe in the NHS (this may be a high estimate, but rough order of magnitude correct)
Let's say they work a 5 day week, over 100 calendar days that is approx 70 work days. (perhaps on the low side at a time like this..)
This gives around 35,000,000 work days.

This is where my guesswork gets a little shaky...Would appreciate better estimates from medical workers...
Lets say that a worker uses 30 items of ppe in a day
30 x 35,000,000 is .....
1,050,000,000
Or just over one billion items used

So if my fag packet calculation is correct, the amount being delivered is only matching the demand.

PS, calculating the amount of volume / number of lorry loads this may be:-
An artic lorry has a capacity of 80m3 or 26 tonne
A packet of gloves is around 25cm x 10cm x 7cm
A packet has a volume of 0.00175 m3
A glove weighs around 3.5 grams
A lorry can carry 45,000 of these boxes
45,000 boxes weighs around 15 tonnes, so within the payload of an artic
100 gloves per box, so each lorry can carry 4,500,000 gloves.
So a billion items is around 200 artics, assuming they are the only gloves. Assuming most PPE is larger than gloves, the total amount of loads will be a multiple of 200.

PPS, should be working really!

 

[Retune]

Trouble with comments/info like that is that it has no context. Data is a complex thing and rarely black and white. Are other reasons for death higher / lower than before and on what scale. People in care homes will be older and probably have more conditions, so any small virus or bug could kill.

We aren't talking about subtle differences here. Ebola has killed about 15,000 people worldwide since it was discovered in the 70s. There are already more COVID-19 deaths in UK hospitals than this. Worldwide there are 10 times that many deaths so far, and we know this count is incomplete (e.g. the UK figure does not include deaths in care homes and the wider community, a number that various reports suggest is now well into the thousands). SARS, MERS and H5N1 have killed fewer than a thousand people each worldwide, or about as many as are dying of COVID-19 every day in UK hospitals. COVID-19 is already killing many more people than a bad flu epidemic like 2009 H1N1 did in the same countries, where healthcare systems were not strained in the same way they are being now, sometimes past breaking point. The epidemiological models tell us the number of deaths would be much higher without the extreme measures we are taking to slow the spread of the disease - if we relied on the policy of mitigation without suppression we were originally following, we could see as many deaths in the UK as 2009 H1N1 caused worldwide.

 

[Retune]

and your point is ?
Hopefully something will be learnt from this for the next pandemic, as you have made clear the world has never faced anything on this scale, so perhaps you would like to give us your expert advice on how to cope with it be I suspect even the WHO aren't 100% certain

Personally I think we should follow the real experts, and the WHO have been telling everyone to test, track and isolate since January (a policy we abandoned in March, and are now belatedly thinking about trying again). South Korea have done this very effectively, and have recorded a grand total of 236 deaths from a population the size of England's. In the UK, we are seeing three times that many every day.

 

[nilagin]

Personally I think we should follow the real experts, and the WHO have been telling everyone to test, track and isolate since January (a policy we abandoned in March, and are now belatedly thinking about trying again). South Korea have done this very effectively, and have recorded a grand total of 236 deaths from a population the size of England's. In the UK, we are seeing three times that many every day.

The fact that S Korea has recorded just 236 deaths is in part down to restricting the virus to 10674 cases at the moment. But is there another reason the why the death figure is so low?
Germany has recorded 145,743 infection cases, yet their deaths is just, 4642. France for example has recorded 7151 more infection cases than Germany, yet France's current death toll is 19718. Obviously there will be differences in age, health issues etc., but is there any differences in the treatment being administered?

 

[Nod]

Is there an accurate and reliable test yet?

 

[Retune]

The fact that S Korea has recorded just 236 deaths is in part down to restricting the virus to 10674 cases at the moment. But is there another reason the why the death figure is so low?
Germany has recorded 145,743 infection cases, yet their deaths is just, 4642. France for example has recorded 7151 more infection cases than Germany, yet France's current death toll is 19718. Obviously there will be differences in age, health issues etc., but is there any differences in the treatment being administered?

I would take those total numbers of cases with a large pinch of salt (more so than the numbers of deaths, where there are also significant uncertainties). Germany is testing more than France or the UK, so they find more cases because they are looking harder. I don't know what France is doing, but since we abandoned contact tracing, the UK has mostly been testing only patients who turn up at hospitals (now expanding to NHS staff etc.). But most patients have mild disease, don't go to hospital, and don't get counted. For all we know, our epidemic may be larger than Germany's, which could at least partly explain why we have more deaths.

 

[cambsno]

So the only clear end to this is to get a vaccine - but how safe is that? We know that for most people, its not a killer - certainly if you have no issues and are under 50 (or 40 for sure), the death rate is tiny! How will we know that this vaccine does not have other side effects, longer term ones, that we will not know for a while? This is one thing that worries me about the pace of this development.

 

[Dave *]

We are in lockdown, no one is likely to be training for a marathon or other long distance run.
WHO recommendations for amount of weekly exercise for health benefits.
https://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_adults/en/

Since we are in a period of lockdown and it is only essential to exercise to remain healthy rather than train for a sporting event. 300 minutes per week is all that is necessary. So no-one has a need to exercise for more than an hour per day.

Can I just remind you that we're discussing the legal aspect ONLY, not the opinion of the WHO in this case.

By the way, there's a very good chance there are people out training for a marathon, triathlon, 5k, 10k, cycling etc, the Olympics is now less than a year away (again).

 

[Uncle Fester]

Because i like 'bag of the fag packet' calculations:-


Very roughly there are 500,000 frontline staff that may use ppe in the NHS (this may be a high estimate, but rough order of magnitude correct)
Let's say they work a 5 day week, over 100 calendar days that is approx 70 work days. (perhaps on the low side at a time like this..)
This gives around 35,000,000 work days.

This is where my guesswork gets a little shaky...Would appreciate better estimates from medical workers...
Lets say that a worker uses 30 items of ppe in a day
30 x 35,000,000 is .....
1,050,000,000
Or just over one billion items used

So if my fag packet calculation is correct, the amount being delivered is only matching the demand.

PS, calculating the amount of volume / number of lorry loads this may be:-
An artic lorry has a capacity of 80m3 or 26 tonne
A packet of gloves is around 25cm x 10cm x 7cm
A packet has a volume of 0.00175 m3
A glove weighs around 3.5 grams
A lorry can carry 45,000 of these boxes
45,000 boxes weighs around 15 tonnes, so within the payload of an artic
100 gloves per box, so each lorry can carry 4,500,000 gloves.
So a billion items is around 200 artics, assuming they are the only gloves. Assuming most PPE is larger than gloves, the total amount of loads will be a multiple of 200.

PPS, should be working really!

Probably nothing to do with your calculations, but I have read that the delayed shipment of PPE from Turkey (84 Tonnes) will be used up in just three days:

https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/18/governments-emergency-shipment-ppe-will-used-nhs-three-days-12576010/

It looks as if we will be in a state of perpetual PPE crisis, if that is the case.

 

[Dave *]

Probably nothing to do with your calculations, but I have read that the delayed shipment of PPE from Turkey (84 Tonnes) will be used up in just three days:

https://metro.co.uk/2020/04/18/governments-emergency-shipment-ppe-will-used-nhs-three-days-12576010/

It looks as if we will be in a state of perpetual PPE crisis, if that is the case.

and yet...

View: https://BANNED/danielhewittitv/status/1251636019084046338?s=21

 

[Dave *]

View: https://BANNED/koatmedi/status/1251234394691579905?s=21



View: https://BANNED/koatmedi/status/1251935709541400577?s=21

 

[Uncle Fester]

and yet...

View: https://BANNED/danielhewittitv/status/1251636019084046338?s=21

Jenrick seems like a Gerry Anderson puppet, mouthing whatever banal platitudes are appropriate at the moment.

He should answer the simple question "What should NHS staff do if they have insufficient PPE, do they treat the patient and risk their lives or let the patient die?"

I suspect the answer would vary if ministers of state could be prosecuted under 'employers liability' legislation.

 

[nilagin]

Can I just remind you that we're discussing the legal aspect ONLY, not the opinion of the WHO in this case.

By the way, there's a very good chance there are people out training for a marathon, triathlon, 5k, 10k, cycling etc, the Olympics is now less than a year away (again).

Can I just remind you that we are discussing reasonable excuses. Training for the Olympics is not a necessity so not reasonable.
The idea of allowing people to exercise outside the confines of there home is to remain healthy and maintain / improve the immune system. One hours exercise a day will do that. More is unnecessary. With the right exercises it is possible to maintain or improve health in 30 to 45 minutes per day. More than an hour per day is unnecessary and pointless.
The idea of a lockdown is to minimise the amount of time spent outside unless you have a reasonable excuse, not having a reasonable excuse and then spending as much time as you like doing it.

 

[sphexx]

View: https://BANNED/koatmedi/status/1251234394691579905?s=21



View: https://BANNED/koatmedi/status/1251935709541400577?s=21

This is just incomprehensible. I’ve been reading reports like that for weeks about UK manufacturers. Sometimes these people are mistaken/con men/whatever, but they can’t all be. And I woul d tend to believe local MP Jess Phillips, who is no fool.