The big Coronavirus thread
Comments
-
Stevo_666 said:
You spend a fair bit of time over there Brian - any thoughts on why the high infection levels?briantrumpet said:kingstonian said:briantrumpet said:Even if France has just passed its peak, with the Paris region's numbers declining, parts of the rest are still increasing - Haute Loire looks impressive at over 4700/100k.
UK figures look to have had quite a bump in the regions, but maybe heading down a bit now. From the low number in UK ICUs presently, I guess that the numbers of deaths is going to continue to drop. Good news. Though France's hospitalised numbers are still climbing... not good news.
Chatted with a friend about it yesterday - her family is in the western end of the Loire. She said pretty much everyone she knows in that part of France either has Covid at the moment or has had it in January.
Interesting why it has spread in France quite so spectacularly, even in comparison to the UK. Oh well, good news once it drops off, as long as the hospitals don't get overwhelmed.
Absolutely none at all. Baffled.
I suppose, if I was forced to say something, it might be along the lines of their delta wave wasn't as high, because of more mask wearing and the pass sanitaire, so maybe they have less natural immunity, but I would expect that to be shot down in flames by someone with more expertise than a couple of degrees in music.
Or maybe they've gone back to kissing everyone.0 -
Is there some difference between the ways countries count re-infections?0
-
TBH that last bit was my theory but I thought I might get flamed for saying itbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
You spend a fair bit of time over there Brian - any thoughts on why the high infection levels?briantrumpet said:kingstonian said:briantrumpet said:Even if France has just passed its peak, with the Paris region's numbers declining, parts of the rest are still increasing - Haute Loire looks impressive at over 4700/100k.
UK figures look to have had quite a bump in the regions, but maybe heading down a bit now. From the low number in UK ICUs presently, I guess that the numbers of deaths is going to continue to drop. Good news. Though France's hospitalised numbers are still climbing... not good news.
Chatted with a friend about it yesterday - her family is in the western end of the Loire. She said pretty much everyone she knows in that part of France either has Covid at the moment or has had it in January.
Interesting why it has spread in France quite so spectacularly, even in comparison to the UK. Oh well, good news once it drops off, as long as the hospitals don't get overwhelmed.
Absolutely none at all. Baffled.
I suppose, if I was forced to say something, it might be along the lines of their delta wave wasn't as high, because of more mask wearing and the pass sanitaire, so maybe they have less natural immunity, but I would expect that to be shot down in flames by someone with more expertise than a couple of degrees in music.
Or maybe they've gone back to kissing everyone.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
uk let delta burn through the population, fr (and others) didn'tbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
You spend a fair bit of time over there Brian - any thoughts on why the high infection levels?briantrumpet said:kingstonian said:briantrumpet said:Even if France has just passed its peak, with the Paris region's numbers declining, parts of the rest are still increasing - Haute Loire looks impressive at over 4700/100k.
UK figures look to have had quite a bump in the regions, but maybe heading down a bit now. From the low number in UK ICUs presently, I guess that the numbers of deaths is going to continue to drop. Good news. Though France's hospitalised numbers are still climbing... not good news.
Chatted with a friend about it yesterday - her family is in the western end of the Loire. She said pretty much everyone she knows in that part of France either has Covid at the moment or has had it in January.
Interesting why it has spread in France quite so spectacularly, even in comparison to the UK. Oh well, good news once it drops off, as long as the hospitals don't get overwhelmed.
Absolutely none at all. Baffled.
I suppose, if I was forced to say something, it might be along the lines of their delta wave wasn't as high, because of more mask wearing and the pass sanitaire, so maybe they have less natural immunity, but I would expect that to be shot down in flames by someone with more expertise than a couple of degrees in music.
Or maybe they've gone back to kissing everyone.
of the two, i'd favour the uk in this instance: the vaccinated were mostly protected, the nhs could handle the admissions, it increased herd immunity in the run up to winter, and as for the the unvaccinated, tough, by the time omicron came along the easy kills had already been made
no idea whether this was a deliberate, i'd guess more luck than judgement given the uk government's record
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
sungod said:
uk let delta burn through the population, fr (and others) didn'tbriantrumpet said:Stevo_666 said:
You spend a fair bit of time over there Brian - any thoughts on why the high infection levels?briantrumpet said:kingstonian said:briantrumpet said:Even if France has just passed its peak, with the Paris region's numbers declining, parts of the rest are still increasing - Haute Loire looks impressive at over 4700/100k.
UK figures look to have had quite a bump in the regions, but maybe heading down a bit now. From the low number in UK ICUs presently, I guess that the numbers of deaths is going to continue to drop. Good news. Though France's hospitalised numbers are still climbing... not good news.
Chatted with a friend about it yesterday - her family is in the western end of the Loire. She said pretty much everyone she knows in that part of France either has Covid at the moment or has had it in January.
Interesting why it has spread in France quite so spectacularly, even in comparison to the UK. Oh well, good news once it drops off, as long as the hospitals don't get overwhelmed.
Absolutely none at all. Baffled.
I suppose, if I was forced to say something, it might be along the lines of their delta wave wasn't as high, because of more mask wearing and the pass sanitaire, so maybe they have less natural immunity, but I would expect that to be shot down in flames by someone with more expertise than a couple of degrees in music.
Or maybe they've gone back to kissing everyone.
of the two, i'd favour the uk in this instance: the vaccinated were mostly protected, the nhs could handle the admissions, it increased herd immunity in the run up to winter, and as for the the unvaccinated, tough, by the time omicron came along the easy kills had already been made
no idea whether this was a deliberate, i'd guess more luck than judgement given the uk government's record
Shout out to Haute Garonne, which has broken the 5000/100k barrier.0 -
So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.0
-
I think I heard that the reason was that that, should those in the NHS refusing to take the vaccination were to leave or were forced out, the NHS would be left very short (or much sorter than they already are) of staff. It's the realisation of this taht has led to the U Turn.Pross said:So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.
Wilier Izoard XP0 -
Firing someone for not having the jab who can probably prove they have had every variant and a high degree of natural immunity due to their work place is stepping on very thin ice.laurentian said:
I think I heard that the reason was that that, should those in the NHS refusing to take the vaccination were to leave or were forced out, the NHS would be left very short (or much sorter than they already are) of staff. It's the realisation of this taht has led to the U Turn.Pross said:So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.
0 -
This was why it made to sense. In their planning assumptions they must have looked at the impact of 10% not getting jabbed so why the change of mind?mully79 said:
Firing someone for not having the jab who can probably prove they have had every variant and a high degree of natural immunity due to their work place is stepping on very thin ice.laurentian said:
I think I heard that the reason was that that, should those in the NHS refusing to take the vaccination were to leave or were forced out, the NHS would be left very short (or much sorter than they already are) of staff. It's the realisation of this taht has led to the U Turn.Pross said:So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.
0 -
there is no way you can win a legal case by saying that you expected Boris to keep his word and that by doing so you made a loss.Pross said:So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.
0 -
If you believe Cummings (so 50/50) it's governance by telegraph opinion column.surrey_commuter said:
This was why it made to sense. In their planning assumptions they must have looked at the impact of 10% not getting jabbed so why the change of mind?mully79 said:
Firing someone for not having the jab who can probably prove they have had every variant and a high degree of natural immunity due to their work place is stepping on very thin ice.laurentian said:
I think I heard that the reason was that that, should those in the NHS refusing to take the vaccination were to leave or were forced out, the NHS would be left very short (or much sorter than they already are) of staff. It's the realisation of this taht has led to the U Turn.Pross said:So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.
0 -
rick_chasey said:
If you believe Cummings (so 50/50) it's governance by telegraph opinion column.surrey_commuter said:
This was why it made to sense. In their planning assumptions they must have looked at the impact of 10% not getting jabbed so why the change of mind?mully79 said:
Firing someone for not having the jab who can probably prove they have had every variant and a high degree of natural immunity due to their work place is stepping on very thin ice.laurentian said:
I think I heard that the reason was that that, should those in the NHS refusing to take the vaccination were to leave or were forced out, the NHS would be left very short (or much sorter than they already are) of staff. It's the realisation of this taht has led to the U Turn.Pross said:So the latest u turn is the mandatory jabs for NHS staff. Does anyone else think this was always going to be the case but that the threat was made to boost take up rates as much as possible? I can see some of those who got jabbed when they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs making some legal challenge now.
Apart from Johnson resigning.0 -
-
I have a post covid kicker, flu or something else. Not fun. Maybe I overdid the freedom weekend. This is my second attempt to take holiday.0
-
£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
I'm much less concerned about overpaying (but that's a lot), but buying stuff that's not useable is worse than not buying it at all in every way imaginable.TheBigBean said:
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
Unless half an order was unusable or a specific tender resulted in some unusable items and some usable ones e.g. the ventilator challenge (not PPE though).kingstongraham said:
I'm much less concerned about overpaying (but that's a lot), but buying stuff that's not useable is worse than not buying it at all in every way imaginable.TheBigBean said:
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
Why the write down in value? PPE doesn't go off does it?- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
Did they have to overpay to get it when they needed it?pangolin said:Why the write down in value? PPE doesn't go off does it?
0 -
They overpaid (understandably), then had to write down the value of what was left to market prices. How that comes to 38% of all the spending is kind of mind blowing - I don't know how much of it was left unused but:First.Aspect said:
Did they have to overpay to get it when they needed it?pangolin said:Why the write down in value? PPE doesn't go off does it?
Given the scale of the ongoing issues with PPE, the Department will need to stay involved. It has tasked SCCL with selling, donating and recycling PPE to reduce the amount of PPE stored in shipping containers and other temporary locations. This PPE is not accessible and will deteriorate if kept in poor storage conditions. The Department have informed us that it is currently spending in the region of £500k per day on the storage of PPE.0 -
Not under a year though surely? I could be completely wrong, just seems odd. The comments about overpaying then adjusting to new market value make sense.rjsterry said:
Yes. Not literally, but it will have expiry dates.pangolin said:Why the write down in value? PPE doesn't go off does it?
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono0 -
I'm inclined to give them some leeway on this, it's easy to forget the massive pressure they were under to get PPE by any means possible back then.kingstongraham said:
I'm much less concerned about overpaying (but that's a lot), but buying stuff that's not useable is worse than not buying it at all in every way imaginable.TheBigBean said:
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
1 -
I saw a minister telling the Commons today that they were redistributing some to schools _ as they've been told to stop masks not sure what they are supposed to do with it. Arts and crafts maybe?0
-
This is cakestop man. What are they doing getting a pass on this.Pross said:
I'm inclined to give them some leeway on this, it's easy to forget the massive pressure they were under to get PPE by any means possible back then.kingstongraham said:
I'm much less concerned about overpaying (but that's a lot), but buying stuff that's not useable is worse than not buying it at all in every way imaginable.TheBigBean said:
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
0 -
Many of the people moaning about this were probably moaning about the lack of PPE back in 2020.Pross said:
I'm inclined to give them some leeway on this, it's easy to forget the massive pressure they were under to get PPE by any means possible back then.kingstongraham said:
I'm much less concerned about overpaying (but that's a lot), but buying stuff that's not useable is worse than not buying it at all in every way imaginable.TheBigBean said:
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Correct. This was always going to have to be written down as everyone was paying over the odds in 2020.Stevo_666 said:
Many of the people moaning about this were probably moaning about the lack of PPE back in 2020.Pross said:
I'm inclined to give them some leeway on this, it's easy to forget the massive pressure they were under to get PPE by any means possible back then.kingstongraham said:
I'm much less concerned about overpaying (but that's a lot), but buying stuff that's not useable is worse than not buying it at all in every way imaginable.TheBigBean said:
Presumably bought in April to May 2020.kingstongraham said:
25% not up to scratch?TheBigBean said:
Not that bad all things considered.kingstongraham said:£12.1 bn spent on PPE in 2020/21. Year end accounts estimate a loss of value of £8.7 bn - of which over £3 bn was PPE bought of a standard that the health service can't use, and £4.7 bn was a write down in value of inventory at year end.
It seems like The Mail and the Express are the most outraged though looking at the headlines this morning.0
