The Covid-19 serious chat thread

[Dolphin Ziggler]

First topic message reminder :

I will edit misinformation that I consider disrespectful and insulting. If you can’t respect that, they’ll be changed more firmly.

Such censorship is disappointing, but unsurprising given the often over-zealous moderating on here. Little wonder so many posters have drifted away when fair discussion is discouraged and alternative points of view are policed.

Over such a sensitive subject, and with people on here likely to have known people who have died, I stand by it on this issue and find your need to make a dig at the site disappointing.

Any further complaints can be directed to my inbox. Further comments will be moderated. Dangerous misinformation, especially presented as fact, will be moderated. If you feel your liberties unjustly compromised, go shout out a window or something.

[Samo]

If its all the same to you I’ll continue to insist that politicians are held accountable for words they say and promises they make. If you want to sweep them under the rug and forget about them be my guest.

[Pr4wn]

Were there not a global pandemic your continued insistence to bring up the buses might have some relevance. Shows a lack of mental dexterity.

A completely needless personal insult. Please don't do this.

Back to the point, the pandemic does, indeed, give this government the perfect excuse to do what they were always going to do anyway. Not spend this money on the NHS. Also funny how the global pandemic has allowed this government to award contracts worth hundreds of billions to their donors/spouses/friends/neighbours/former pub landlords.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

If you calculate actual hours worked, the pay is depressing. Was the same in teaching.

I’d bet a lot of nurses would be somewhat the same as teachers - if you felt funding was correct for you to do your job - not wages, just funding - then it would help. But you’re underpaid, hamstrung by the money available to do the job, and increasingly under appreciated whilst expected to do more than ever.

[Duty281]

Back to the point, the pandemic does, indeed, give this government the perfect excuse to do what they were always going to do anyway. Not spend this money on the NHS.

Eh? Planned spending for the Department of Health was nearly £202 billion in 2020/21, an increase of over £50 billion due to the Covid-19 pandemic. £5 billion of extra revenue spending was also allocated by the government in the Spring Budget last year.

Before Covid-19 even happened to this country, the government put through the NHS Funding Bill in January 2020 which would increase NHS spending by £34 billion by 2024.

[hampo17]

Duty you do realise how badly funded the NHS has been for the last decade right? Factor in that a lot of that money never filters down to the areas that actually need,something that the government will be aware of, it is just the fat cat getting fatter.

[Duty281]

Duty you do realise how badly funded the NHS has been for the last decade right? Factor in that a lot of that money never filters down to the areas that actually need,something that the government will be aware of, it is just the fat cat getting fatter.

The NHS has still had increased funding through every year of the last decade - £126.1 billion was the Department of Health's budget in 2010, up to £148.8 billion in 2020. Granted the NHS' increases in that time have been smaller than previous years, but that was a direct result of the financial hit and subsequent economic downturn starting in 2008. The NHS Funding Bill last year, however, was going to implement bigger increases in NHS funding up to and including 2024.

I can agree with your latter point, because the NHS is a bureaucratic monster that swallows up all this extra funding and, like Oliver Twist, will soon be back for more.

[Pr4wn]

So it's the NHS's fault?

[lostinwales]

Duty you do realise how badly funded the NHS has been for the last decade right? Factor in that a lot of that money never filters down to the areas that actually need,something that the government will be aware of, it is just the fat cat getting fatter.

The NHS has still had increased funding through every year of the last decade - £126.1 billion was the Department of Health's budget in 2010, up to £148.8 billion in 2020. Granted the NHS' increases in that time have been smaller than previous years, but that was a direct result of the financial hit and subsequent economic downturn starting in 2008. The NHS Funding Bill last year, however, was going to implement bigger increases in NHS funding up to and including 2024.

I can agree with your latter point, because the NHS is a bureaucratic monster that swallows up all this extra funding and, like Oliver Twist, will soon be back for more.

We should all not grow old or get sick then there won't be any problems.

[lostinwales]

Duty you do realise how badly funded the NHS has been for the last decade right? Factor in that a lot of that money never filters down to the areas that actually need,something that the government will be aware of, it is just the fat cat getting fatter.

The NHS has still had increased funding through every year of the last decade - £126.1 billion was the Department of Health's budget in 2010, up to £148.8 billion in 2020. Granted the NHS' increases in that time have been smaller than previous years, but that was a direct result of the financial hit and subsequent economic downturn starting in 2008. The NHS Funding Bill last year, however, was going to implement bigger increases in NHS funding up to and including 2024.

I can agree with your latter point, because the NHS is a bureaucratic monster that swallows up all this extra funding and, like Oliver Twist, will soon be back for more.

We should all not grow old or get sick then there won't be any problems.

Actually being serious - yes the NHS eats cash. But the alternatives eat cash faster. Well worth looking at the figures on how much a health service actually costs in different countries. The NHS tends to do very well under that criteria.

The big problem with health, just like with social security, is that yiou cannot actually, ultimately, avoid paying for it. It is just a question of how, and where you pay for it.

[Duty281]

Duty you do realise how badly funded the NHS has been for the last decade right? Factor in that a lot of that money never filters down to the areas that actually need,something that the government will be aware of, it is just the fat cat getting fatter.

The NHS has still had increased funding through every year of the last decade - £126.1 billion was the Department of Health's budget in 2010, up to £148.8 billion in 2020. Granted the NHS' increases in that time have been smaller than previous years, but that was a direct result of the financial hit and subsequent economic downturn starting in 2008. The NHS Funding Bill last year, however, was going to implement bigger increases in NHS funding up to and including 2024.

I can agree with your latter point, because the NHS is a bureaucratic monster that swallows up all this extra funding and, like Oliver Twist, will soon be back for more.

We should all not grow old or get sick then there won't be any problems.

Actually being serious - yes the NHS eats cash. But the alternatives eat cash faster. Well worth looking at the figures on how much a health service actually costs in different countries. The NHS tends to do very well under that criteria.

The big problem with health, just like with social security, is that yiou cannot actually, ultimately, avoid paying for it. It is just a question of how, and where you pay for it.

Data from the ONS (2018) seems to indicate that the UK government's spending on health comes out at 7.8% of GDP, this is higher than the majority of EU countries. Only Denmark, France and Austria come out as higher, with the Czechs/Dutch/Belgians roughly equal. Everyone else in the EU, which is the majority, spends less as a percentage of GDP. Non-EU Iceland is around the same as the UK, Norway a bit higher, and Switzerland a lot lower.

Given the NHS doesn't compare as favourably, as a healthcare service, to most of Western Europe (from Portugal to Germany), this isn't a particularly great return.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

£22B spent to date and a further £15B set aside for next year and we still have a dysfunctional and next to useless test and trace system. This from the Public Accounts Committee, an all party group of MPs looking into how public finances are used.

There is no evidence that the T & T system has had any effect on the stopping the spread of Covid-19. The two pieces of data that could evidence it has not been released by Harding and her cronies. How long has it taken on average to trace people once a positive test has been recorder and how many people have been traced relative to the amount of positive tests. Just setting out the number of tests possessed tells us nothing.

Some 400 contracts being signed with 217 different suppliers. Some 70% of the value of those contracts were directly awarded rather than being put out to tender. No wonder it was dysfunctional.

Up to £6,600 a day being paid to consultants, obviously not a tendered contract, there are still circa 2,500 of these consultants being paid ridiculous sums, not all £6,600 a day probably not many even but in the thousands per day to advise on a system that simply does not and has never worked.

Harding:
"She said performance had been improving with more people who tested positive being reached and more of their close contacts being asked to isolate.

"It is making a real impact in breaking the chains of transmission," she added."

But the MPs' report questioned:

An over-reliance on consultants with some paid more than £6,600 a day.

A failure to be ready for the surge in demand for tests seen last September.

Never meeting its target to turn around tests done face-to-face within 24 hours.

Contact tracers only having enough work to fill half their time even when cases were rising.

The BBC where this came from has a chart showing how complicated the process is, too big for this medium, but the link is below. It couldn't have got more complicated if they had tried.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56340831

It is almost as if someone said, "how can we make this as complicated as possible so that we can get as many of our friends and donors involved at ridiculous rates and get the tax pay to pay for them"

A splurge on rapid tests with no clear evidence they will help.

Committee chairwoman Meg Hillier said it was hard to point to a "measurable difference" the test-and-trace system had made.

"The promise on which this huge expense was justified - avoiding another lockdown - has been broken, twice," she said.

£22B is greater than her Department of Transport budget.

[BamBam]

NASA has a budget of ~£20bn for a permanent moon base project. God I wish I made friends with Tory Muppet at uni, could have been a nice little money spinner

[jimbopip]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/18/delaying-englands-winter-lockdown-caused-up-to-27000-extra-covid-deaths

An interesting read.

[Pr4wn]

The government saying that the inquiry isn't necessary is precisely why the UK should have one.

[Samo]

Nearly 27m now had atleast their first dose of the vaccine.

Credit where its due, thats a phenomenal number.

[WELL-PAST-IT]

Did anybody see Cummings interview by House of Commons science select committee

"Cummings told MPs that the Department of Health was “a smoking ruin in terms of procurement” and personal protective equipment at the start of the pandemic and that Johnson had been forced to take responsibility for vaccine procurement away from the agency last year."

I do wonder who is running the logistics for getting the inoculations carried out, if it is the DoH then Hancock deserves some plaudits for seemingly turning things around, but I somehow suspect it is the NHS that are largely doing the majority of the work,
.

[Samo]

Incredibly reassuring news coming out of the USA as their AstraZeneca trial results have been published. Not only does it provide efficacy against Covid-19 of 79%, but it is 100% effective at preventing people from falling seriously ill.

32000 volunteers took part - 20% of them over 65 - and were given two doses over a 4 week period. It shows that the vaccine is as effective at protecting the elderly as it does the young.

Massive news.

[doctor_grey]

Not that anyone needs a reminder Covid is still a deadly disease, but a couple of days ago a fairly young guy comes into A&E with common flu-like symptoms, but just very severe and with some difficulty breathing.  Tested positive for Covid, but his bloods showed nothing else unusual and his medical record was quite good.  Put in isolation, we gave him a series of medications including remdesivir.  Last night just days after coming in he died alone, no family, no friends, no one with him except the nurse wearing her biohazard suit.  He wasn't even my patient directly, but was checking on him periodically. This is what each of us is fighting whether one is on the so-called front lines or simply living through it.  

Over the course of a long career which includes being in serious conflict areas, I still can't forget any patient I ever lost.  I have to work today, going now actually.  But tonight I drink.  Heavily.  

I am not remotely special in this.  Any good medical professional who tries to keep his or her sense of life will feel the same.  Writing it here because although my family is very supportive, I needed to write something down and this is the only thing I could think of.   Hang it there all.

Thanks,

Grey

[Mind the windows Tino.]

 

I am not remotely special in this.  

You're special to us, champ.

Keep fighting the good fight armed with enormous amounts of gratitude from the rest of us.

[Luckless Pedestrian]

Well said.

[jimbopip]

 

I am not remotely special in this.  

You're special to us, champ.

Keep fighting the good fight armed with enormous amounts of gratitude from the rest of us.

Speaks for all of us.

[doctor_grey]

Thanks gents! Such a shame for the young guy and his family.  I really appreciate the comments.
Now far into my Bourbon, Scotch, and beer.....

[jimbopip]

Doc, instead of Mr Thoroughgood may I recommend Elmore James "The Sky Is Crying"?

[doctor_grey]

Thanks gents! Such a shame for the young guy and his family.  I really appreciate the comments.
Now far into my Bourbon, Scotch, and beer.....

I never heard that version before. Really good. You know, it's the humanity of it all, which really brings it all home.

After feeling like crap for a few days, I get dragged out to my son's men's game on Saturday afternoon. So I am running as a touch judge. Everyone knew I needed an attitude realignment and our team was up 35-7 at halftime. So the coach (an old mate) decides I need to get my Poopie together and told me to go in. On the flank. Of course, I am far too old for teams in their 20s and 30s, but in I go for the type of attitude adjustment which only Rugby can provide. After initially being used by the other team as a way to clean the dirt off the bottom of their boots which everyone found very entertaining, I started to fell my self again and started cheating like mad (which is really all I have left) Made my tackles, hit the rucks, caused a turnover, cursed at our scrum-half for taking too long (tradition), and even set up two tries by our forwards. Back in A&E on a short Saturday night shift all bandages and blood. The incoming patients didn't know if I was a patient or a doc (or a vagrant off the streets).

Thanks again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jimbopip]

There's a coincidence : I was settling down to a lazy Saturday afternoon when a former teammate, JynxyJoe, phoned to say he was on the way to watch their match and did I fancy joining him. On the way we talked about coming to terms with not playing. Jynxy does triathlons now. He said he had taken far too many head knocks and wouldn't risk any more. I had to agree and realised I wasn't too far behind him.
This may have coloured how I watched the game.
Five minutes in our 13 tackles their tight head and doesn't get up. Head in the wrong place and probably concussed. Taken off straight away.
Ten minutes in the opposition 4 is off walking along the touchline gingerly testing his knee. Then he tried a gentle jog and it buckled .
Fifteen minutes and the opposition hooker is red carded for a head butt on our 7 who is off with a broken nose.
Almost immediately their 10 lands awkwardly and comes off cradling his arm.
Two minutes later we score under the posts while on the far touchline the winger who made the break is immobile with a twisted ankle/knee.
A couple of minutes later Bigson takes the ball into contact and gets a shoulder driven up under his ribs. He staggered off the pitch and vomited promiscuously. Lay down , vomited. Lay down again. Got up vomited. Then insisted on going back on!
By half time five young men were injured. Also Bigson who went back on when he shouldn't have.
Jynxy had to leave at half time so I have no idea how many breaks, strains and concussions there were by the end.
I love the game but sometimes I feel guilty watching it.

[doctor_grey]

Played 5 club games already including yesterday.  Everyone on both sides has to bring evidence of vaccination or negative Covid tests.   But given that paperwork together then it is hammer and tongs for 80 minutes.  Got MOTM of the second side match (not the Morris Sxons) and was duly doused with a lot of beer.  I really am too old for this, but pulled a game out of the archives which  didn't  know I still had.  And my older son played and was terrific.  No major injuries so far. If nothing else, this is sign to keep the vaccines going as fast as possible.  

By the way, nothing  seriously broken yet. and I fee great.  Keep the Vaccines going at top speed.

[BamBam]

Posted on the politics thread, but will stick it here too as it seems relevant.

Any thoughts on the evidence given to the Health Committee by Dominic Cummings this morning?

[lostinwales]

Posted on the politics thread, but will stick it here too as it seems relevant.

Any thoughts on the evidence given to the Health Committee by Dominic Cummings this morning?

Just trying to catch up now. Ian Dunt on tw@tter is doing a commentary that is very good.

[BamBam]

I was going to add a link to Dunt's commentary but thought he was probably a bit openly anti Tory! The pop culture references are a particular highlight for me

[lostinwales]

I was going to add a link to Dunt's commentary but thought he was probably a bit openly anti Tory! The pop culture references are a particular highlight for me

Anti-tory shouldn't come into it. Pro tory should be as keen to get rid of Johnson+ co as everyone else - he's got very little to do with the traditional conservative party other than it shares the name of the party he leads.

[jimbopip]

Initial responses; Hancock is a dead man walking, Johnson will struggle to stay as PM... but probably will get away with it.
For me the interesting thing will be when the others respond. Hancock will try to clear himself which will drag in senior civil servants. Johnson will try to rubbish everything he said which again will drag in lots of other people.
Once the blame game starts it'll develop its own momentum. It reminds me of the old saying, "We all stick together or we all hang separately "

[jimbopip]

This could be the most wounding thing for Johnson;

Downing Street and the government are facing some really serious allegations.

Among them, are whether the PM made comments about seeing "bodies pile high" rather than take the country into a third lockdown.

The BBC reported the comments in April - but the prime minister denied making them in Parliament.

Cummings - however - has told MPs he DID hear the prime minister make the comments.

"I heard that in the prime minister's study" he said.

Boris Johnson is now likely to face more questions about whether he made the remarks - and if he misled Parliament by denying them.


Without a doubt this would mean that he intentionally misled/lied to Parliament. In normal times , with any other PM this would be the end of the road.

[Duty281]

Numerous Prime Ministers (all of them?) have misled Parliament over the decades and nothing has happened to them.

We'll never know the truth of the 'pile high' comment because it's a case of he-said-she-said (unless someone owns up).

[jimbopip]

Numerous Prime Ministers (all of them?) have misled Parliament over the decades and nothing has happened to them.Yes they have, but if they are proven to be deliberately misleading/lying to the House that is a different matter from, for instance, saying,  "I honestly believe policy A is in the best interests of the country" and then it turns out it isn't. It's only deliberately misleading the House (and a punishable offence) if it can be proven that the PM is saying exactly the opposite outside the House. In this case Johnson was asked in the House if he made that "pile the bodies" statement and he categorically denied it. There are a number of people who have said they heard it, now Cummings has gone on record Johnson either takes him to court or it will be accepted as truth. The BBC printed the story weeks ago and stated they had sources who witnessed it. now that it is on public record there will be no shortage of people putting their heads above the parapet.

We'll never know the truth of the 'pile high' comment because it's a case of he-said-she-said (unless someone owns up) Just out of curiosity....what do you believe?.

[lostinwales]

There is misleading parliament/ whoever and getting caught doing so. The individual circumstances are different, but few, if any, of those circumstances have lead to the deaths of 10's of thousands of our population.

In this case we now have a situation where, ultimately, either the PM lied or his (ex) senior adviser lied, which does go back to Johnsen competency or lack of. But as I said elsewhere the expectations of this government are so low they could still brazen it out.

[Duty281]

Numerous Prime Ministers (all of them?) have misled Parliament over the decades and nothing has happened to them.Yes they have, but if they are proven to be deliberately misleading/lying to the House that is a different matter from, for instance, saying,  "I honestly believe policy A is in the best interests of the country" and then it turns out it isn't. It's only deliberately misleading the House (and a punishable offence) if it can be proven that the PM is saying exactly the opposite outside the House. In this case Johnson was asked in the House if he made that "pile the bodies" statement and he categorically denied it. There are a number of people who have said they heard it, now Cummings has gone on record Johnson either takes him to court or it will be accepted as truth. The BBC printed the story weeks ago and stated they had sources who witnessed it. now that it is on public record there will be no shortage of people putting their heads above the parapet.

We'll never know the truth of the 'pile high' comment because it's a case of he-said-she-said (unless someone owns up) Just out of curiosity....what do you believe?.

1) Numerous Prime Ministers have misled the House of Commons through doing as you describe. Blair with Iraq. Heath with the matter of EEC accession. Thatcher and the Westland affair. There wasn't some golden age where, if senior politicians lied, they were pulled up on it and dealt with. Politicians have always lied and got away with it.

2) I have an absence of belief, currently, because no real evidence has been asserted for it. It's just a case of Cummings and 'other sources' saying Johnson did say it; while Johnson, ministers including Gove and 'other sources' say he didn't say it. Other people said Johnson said something slightly different. It's all tedious tittle-tattle.

[Samo]

Man known for telling lies says other man known for telling lies has told some lies. Its hard to know who to believe, although I will say Cummings is a lot more convincing when he's not trying to protect his own arse.

The absolute Frak state of British politics. How far we have fallen.

[Pr4wn]

Numerous Prime Ministers (all of them?) have misled Parliament over the decades and nothing has happened to them.Yes they have, but if they are proven to be deliberately misleading/lying to the House that is a different matter from, for instance, saying,  "I honestly believe policy A is in the best interests of the country" and then it turns out it isn't. It's only deliberately misleading the House (and a punishable offence) if it can be proven that the PM is saying exactly the opposite outside the House. In this case Johnson was asked in the House if he made that "pile the bodies" statement and he categorically denied it. There are a number of people who have said they heard it, now Cummings has gone on record Johnson either takes him to court or it will be accepted as truth. The BBC printed the story weeks ago and stated they had sources who witnessed it. now that it is on public record there will be no shortage of people putting their heads above the parapet.

We'll never know the truth of the 'pile high' comment because it's a case of he-said-she-said (unless someone owns up) Just out of curiosity....what do you believe?.

1) Numerous Prime Ministers have misled the House of Commons through doing as you describe. Blair with Iraq. Heath with the matter of EEC accession. Thatcher and the Westland affair. There wasn't some golden age where, if senior politicians lied, they were pulled up on it and dealt with. Politicians have always lied and got away with it.

2) I have an absence of belief, currently, because no real evidence has been asserted for it. It's just a case of Cummings and 'other sources' saying Johnson did say it; while Johnson, ministers including Gove and 'other sources' say he didn't say it. Other people said Johnson said something slightly different. It's all tedious tittle-tattle.

No disrespect, but your answer to number 2 typifies your usual cop-out politician-style answer.

[lostinwales]

There is significant circumstantial evidence around some of the claims. I wouldn't trust everything that man says, but it doesn't mean he's always lying, and if he is a habitual liar why was appointed to that role.

[Duty281]

Numerous Prime Ministers (all of them?) have misled Parliament over the decades and nothing has happened to them.Yes they have, but if they are proven to be deliberately misleading/lying to the House that is a different matter from, for instance, saying,  "I honestly believe policy A is in the best interests of the country" and then it turns out it isn't. It's only deliberately misleading the House (and a punishable offence) if it can be proven that the PM is saying exactly the opposite outside the House. In this case Johnson was asked in the House if he made that "pile the bodies" statement and he categorically denied it. There are a number of people who have said they heard it, now Cummings has gone on record Johnson either takes him to court or it will be accepted as truth. The BBC printed the story weeks ago and stated they had sources who witnessed it. now that it is on public record there will be no shortage of people putting their heads above the parapet.

We'll never know the truth of the 'pile high' comment because it's a case of he-said-she-said (unless someone owns up) Just out of curiosity....what do you believe?.

1) Numerous Prime Ministers have misled the House of Commons through doing as you describe. Blair with Iraq. Heath with the matter of EEC accession. Thatcher and the Westland affair. There wasn't some golden age where, if senior politicians lied, they were pulled up on it and dealt with. Politicians have always lied and got away with it.

2) I have an absence of belief, currently, because no real evidence has been asserted for it. It's just a case of Cummings and 'other sources' saying Johnson did say it; while Johnson, ministers including Gove and 'other sources' say he didn't say it. Other people said Johnson said something slightly different. It's all tedious tittle-tattle.

No disrespect, but your answer to number 2 typifies your usual cop-out politician-style answer.

It would be strange to believe something for which there's no real evidence for and for which I have no first-hand knowledge of. Obviously, some people want to partake in the latest manufactured outrage, and/or take something at face value which fits their biases, but I'd rather not.

[BamBam]

And other people refuse to take at face value something that doesn’t suit their biases

[Duty281]

And other people refuse to take at face value something that doesn’t suit their biases

Taking anything at face value is rarely a good idea.

[JuliusHMarx]

And other people refuse to take at face value something that doesn’t suit their biases

Taking anything at face value is rarely a good idea.

Unless it's a Phil Collins LP.

[Samo]

And other people refuse to take at face value something that doesn’t suit their biases

Taking anything at face value is rarely a good idea.

Unless it's a Phil Collins LP.

You certainly know what you're getting, thats for sure.

[doctor_grey]

I think it is not so much what was said as the reinforcing the idea of how badly this was handled and the misinformation which appeared to accompany each decision. Though, granted, last February, March, April no one could have gotten it right. Afterwards, is completely different. And the way any mistake was glossed over or the point obfuscated or attention simply diverted for media appearance's sake. Johnson makes me think he even got married just to divert the headlines from Cummings testimony.

Just re-read what I wrote and I guess it is pretty clear how I feel about our PM. Oh well.

[doctor_grey]

This is worth a read. I know the NYT is behind a paywall, but I think everyone gets a few articles free. Great article talking about brand new doctors who were thrown into the pandemic in hospitals around NYC. It was a rough time for hardened medical folk, but for the new grads, it was worse.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/04/opinion/covid-new-doctors-healthcare-workers.html

[BamBam]

"Pandemic procurement" was used to break the law so Michael Gove could award a contract to his associates https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57413115

But quick! Look over there! Kneeling footballers, 10 year old racist tweets by cricketers and pictures of the Queen being removed by students are what we should really be talking about!

[lostinwales]

Hancock was investigated for the PPE contract that went to, who was it? his sister? (and a company he had a minority share in). Lots of stories of people with links to the Tories and a phone number for factory in China getting large sums of money thrown at them...

I think the early stages were always going to be problematic, but even allowing for that it was a failure and one that would be a lot easier to accept had the government fessed up. Instead we still get conflicting statements - take care homes for instance- testing / not testing and the kind of protective ring which killed thousands.

There were warning signs from overseas and there were easy wins. Air travel could have been cut down and managed so much better. I do appreciate that the virus had already got here, but we were happy to ship in more infected people with minimal testing back then and we seem to be still happy to do so still, given how the Indian variant has got a foothold.

[Pr4wn]

"Pandemic procurement" was used to break the law so Michael Gove could award a contract to his associates https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-57413115

But quick! Look over there! Kneeling footballers, 10 year old racist tweets by cricketers and pictures of the Queen being removed by students are what we should really be talking about!

Oxford students vote to remove a picture that their university owns from a room that only they use. Shocking stuff.

[lostinwales]

I struggle to get on board with the whole concept of 'culture wars' but we do seem to be overwhelmed with stories that are quite frankly just total BS. At the same time the important stuff is all to easy to lose sight of.

[Sponsored content]