Buy all your VW California Accessories at the Club Shop Visit Shop


Coronavirus Impact

CaliBear

CaliBear

VIP Member
Messages
88
Location
Northamptonshire
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 150
Pubs and restaurants CAN run a takeaway service if they want, and a lot of them are.

More broadly, I think the government all along has been trying to balance harm to individuals against harm to the economy, but they haven't been 100% transparent about that.
I know but most have shut due to external pressure from media and not helped by Boris announcing stricter controls on Monday and then most businesses took this as them being non essential and shut. Tuesday the government back tracked and has since been more specific with it's guidance as in the linked GOV website. The point I was poorly trying to make is that things have closed without needing to (due to poor information) and that the media is making it look like anyone out going to work that isn't clearly working for the NHS should be strung up as they could be spreading the virus. Several suppliers and sites have shut because of this poor information, losing much needed income. If the government had isolated the vulnerable groups from the start then maybe things might not have been as bad?
 
CaliBear

CaliBear

VIP Member
Messages
88
Location
Northamptonshire
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 150
I know but most have shut due to external pressure from media and not helped by Boris announcing stricter controls on Monday and then most businesses took this as them being non essential and shut. Tuesday the government back tracked and has since been more specific with it's guidance as in the linked GOV website. The point I was poorly trying to make is that things have closed without needing to (due to poor information) and that the media is making it look like anyone out going to work that isn't clearly working for the NHS should be strung up as they could be spreading the virus. Several suppliers and sites have shut because of this poor information, losing much needed income. If the government had isolated the vulnerable groups from the start then maybe things might not have been as bad?
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-address-to-the-nation-on-coronavirus-23-march-2020
He clearly states only to go to work where it is absolutely necessary and cannot be done from home! So that's where the confusion had started.
 
Velma's Dad

Velma's Dad

Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
1,890
Location
Buckinghamshire
Vehicle
T5 SE 180
I know but most have shut due to external pressure from media and not helped by Boris announcing stricter controls on Monday and then most businesses took this as them being non essential and shut. Tuesday the government back tracked and has since been more specific with it's guidance as in the linked GOV website. The point I was poorly trying to make is that things have closed without needing to (due to poor information) and that the media is making it look like anyone out going to work that isn't clearly working for the NHS should be strung up as they could be spreading the virus. Several suppliers and sites have shut because of this poor information, losing much needed income. If the government had isolated the vulnerable groups from the start then maybe things might not have been as bad?
Yes you are probably right. On your last point, I personally suspect that when the Public Enquiry on this whole episode reports - in maybe five years' time - there will be a lot of focus on whether the much-vaunted UK Pandemic Flu contingency strategy (last revised in 2011, I think) was fundamentally fit for purpose, or not.

I'm certainly not a public health expert but from my quick read of the contingency plan (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213717/dh_131040.pdf) there is practically no mention of rigorous testing and contact tracing to contain the outbreak, but instead (from my read anyway) an acceptance that the virus would become established in the population and the government's response would be the 'mitigation' model that they initially tried to apply, without strict 'lockdown' type suppression measures; until told that 250,000 people would thereby die - a figure well within the range of the contingency plan assumptions by the way which envisaged up to 750,000 excess deaths, but a prospect that it turns out is unconscionable and politically inconceivable in the real world.

The contingency plan also makes no mention that I can see of the need for a huge expansion in ICU capacity, and specifically of ventilators.

Always very dangerous to try to draw conclusions during a live emergency, but I have to wonder what will eventually come out in the wash about all this, when compared against what was done in China, South Korea etc.
 
CaliBear

CaliBear

VIP Member
Messages
88
Location
Northamptonshire
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 150
Yes you are probably right. On your last point, I personally suspect that when the Public Enquiry on this whole episode reports - in maybe five years' time - there will be a lot of focus on whether the much-vaunted UK Pandemic Flu contingency strategy (last revised in 2011, I think) was fundamentally fit for purpose, or not.

I'm certainly not a public health expert but from my quick read of the contingency plan (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213717/dh_131040.pdf) there is practically no mention of rigorous testing and contact tracing to contain the outbreak, but instead (from my read anyway) an acceptance that the virus would become established in the population and the government's response would be the 'mitigation' model that they initially tried to apply, without strict 'lockdown' type suppression measures; until told that 250,000 people would thereby die - a figure well within the range of the contingency plan assumptions by the way which envisaged up to 750,000 excess deaths, but a prospect that it turns out is unconscionable and politically inconceivable in the real world.

The contingency plan also makes no mention that I can see of the need for a huge expansion in ICU capacity, and specifically of ventilators.

Always very dangerous to try to draw conclusions during a live emergency, but I have to wonder what will eventually come out in the wash about all this, when compared against what was done in China, South Korea etc.
I agree, hopefully the government will learn for next big event.
 
GrannyJen

GrannyJen

goody goody 2shoes
Moderator
Top Poster
Lifetime VIP Member
Messages
7,849
Location
West Sussex
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204 4Motion
Yes you are probably right. On your last point, I personally suspect that when the Public Enquiry on this whole episode reports - in maybe five years' time - there will be a lot of focus on whether the much-vaunted UK Pandemic Flu contingency strategy (last revised in 2011, I think) was fundamentally fit for purpose, or not.

I'm certainly not a public health expert but from my quick read of the contingency plan (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213717/dh_131040.pdf) there is practically no mention of rigorous testing and contact tracing to contain the outbreak, but instead (from my read anyway) an acceptance that the virus would become established in the population and the government's response would be the 'mitigation' model that they initially tried to apply, without strict 'lockdown' type suppression measures; until told that 250,000 people would thereby die - a figure well within the range of the contingency plan assumptions by the way which envisaged up to 750,000 excess deaths, but a prospect that it turns out is unconscionable and politically inconceivable in the real world.

The contingency plan also makes no mention that I can see of the need for a huge expansion in ICU capacity, and specifically of ventilators.

Always very dangerous to try to draw conclusions during a live emergency, but I have to wonder what will eventually come out in the wash about all this, when compared against what was done in China, South Korea etc.
reading that plan I now feel quite depressed.

The blasé acceptance of socially and politically unacceptable levels of deaths and no mention of any of the actions that have been shown to be essential elsewhere. Up to now I actually thought that "being guided by the science" was a comfort and far better than being guided by political populism. I now find it quite unsettling.
 
T6 CFO

T6 CFO

Mike
Top Poster
VIP Member
Messages
3,425
Location
Bristol
Vehicle
T6 Ocean 204 4Motion
Whatever the final outcome the blame game and finger pointing will be in full force in the media and Parliament.

Fortunately the experts will be getting there heads together and improving on the emergency strategy for the future.



Mike
 
Top