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

Coronavirus Impact

The Cold War ended 30 years ago. Finland chose to maintain their reserves, probably because of their experience, no other country chose to do this, but they could have chosen to. It was not luck, it was planning. A pandemic is a known risk, terrorism is another, environmental disaster another. The government is responsible for keeping us safe, its their main job, and they could choose to plan accordingly.
They also pay a lot more in tax than we do in the uk. If we are ready to accept higher taxes that are spent wisely in the protection of our country by the government then we should be better prepared for an event like this.
 
“We sit around the same table and go through how the society is prepared for different kinds of serious disruptions. We’re now faced with such a situation,” he commented to the newspaper. “We in Finland are lucky in the sense that we’ve continued this work since the post-war era and raised our preparedness to a good level.”

 
They also pay a lot more in tax than we do in the uk. If we are ready to accept higher taxes that are spent wisely in the protection of our country by the government then we should be better prepared for an event like this.

They are also consistently rated as the ‘happiest‘ country in the world.
 
As you state, pandemic is a risk as in environmental disaster and terrorist attack.
So let’s take one of those, terrorist attack,been pretty high on the agenda and arguably a greater continued threat. What do you expect the Govt to hold in stock for that? Presume a dirty bomb, should unlimited stocks of gas masks, chemical suits be kept and replenished, if not why not.
Why are massive amounts of blood plasma not kept in stores and continually replaced to cater for a natural disaster that requires blood?
Because it’s not feasible or affordable.
Organisations maintain stocks of equipment for normal use with small surge capacity, when a greater demand is needed you increase production and surge.
As for Cold War and Finland’s threat endI gotta 30 years ago, in yr dreams.
 
Finland maybe happiest country in the world but the suicide rate is one of highest in Europe so can’t be that happy
 
The UK Govt DID have a stockpile of PPE, for just that purpose ie a respiratory disease epidemic. It was all included in the Pandemic Flu Plan and I recall several times over several years people in government saying how well prepared the UK was for that type of emergency.

The trouble is, I suspect, that (a) the contingency plans assumed that only basic PPE would be needed (aprons etc, not the level 2 gear including gowns), and (b) distribution contingency planning was rudimentary only and not properly simulated/exercised; and (c) replenishment of initial stockpiles was never really contemplated - only the initial surge was looked at.

No way of knowing for sure until the Public Enquiry.
 
As you state, pandemic is a risk as in environmental disaster and terrorist attack.
So let’s take one of those, terrorist attack,been pretty high on the agenda and arguably a greater continued threat. What do you expect the Govt to hold in stock for that? Presume a dirty bomb, should unlimited stocks of gas masks, chemical suits be kept and replenished, if not why not.
Why are massive amounts of blood plasma not kept in stores and continually replaced to cater for a natural disaster that requires blood?
Because it’s not feasible or affordable.
Organisations maintain stocks of equipment for normal use with small surge capacity, when a greater demand is needed you increase production and surge.
As for Cold War and Finland’s threat endI gotta 30 years ago, in yr dreams.

The threat from terrorism is relatively low, compared to that posed by a pandemic, or antibiotic resistance. The government seems to spend vast amounts of money on anti terrorism, maybe a disproportionate amount. People can give blood at any time, I don’t think it can be stored for long? They spent a lot on the Thames barrier. Not so much on the Somerset levels. Their job is to manage these risks, if they are unprepared for a forseeable threat, it’s probably largely their fault.
 
Oh No ..... I have a sore throat.

Self-inflicted playing hide and seek with a Frenchie this morning. Walloped my adam's apple on the back of the settee. :sad
 
The UK Govt DID have a stockpile of PPE, for just that purpose ie a respiratory disease epidemic. It was all included in the Pandemic Flu Plan and I recall several times over several years people in government saying how well prepared the UK was for that type of emergency.

The trouble is, I suspect, that (a) the contingency plans assumed that only basic PPE would be needed (aprons etc, not the level 2 gear including gowns), and (b) distribution contingency planning was rudimentary only and not properly simulated/exercised; and (c) replenishment of initial stockpiles was never really contemplated - only the initial surge was looked at.

No way of knowing for sure until the Public Enquiry.

There was an article in the paper recently stating that the value of the reserves had massively decreased over recent years, but they could not relate the value to to the stock levels in the article.
 
Deleted - someone beat me to it.
 
The Copenhagen-based Happiness Research Institute points out that Finland tops the happiness list despite not having the highest GDP of the Nordic countries. It is the country’s social safety net combined with personal freedom and a good work-life balance that gives it the edge.
 
The Copenhagen-based Happiness Research Institute points out that Finland tops the happiness list despite not having the highest GDP of the Nordic countries. It is the country’s social safety net combined with personal freedom and a good work-life balance that gives it the edge.
I suppose that not having to worry about a pension will take a lot of stress out of life.
 
The Kingdom of Bhutan uses Gross National Happiness (GNH) as its primary yardstick, favoured over GDP. It's actually written into their constitution.
 
As you state, pandemic is a risk as in environmental disaster and terrorist attack.
So let’s take one of those, terrorist attack,been pretty high on the agenda and arguably a greater continued threat. What do you expect the Govt to hold in stock for that? Presume a dirty bomb, should unlimited stocks of gas masks, chemical suits be kept and replenished, if not why not.
Why are massive amounts of blood plasma not kept in stores and continually replaced to cater for a natural disaster that requires blood?
Because it’s not feasible or affordable.
Organisations maintain stocks of equipment for normal use with small surge capacity, when a greater demand is needed you increase production and surge.
As for Cold War and Finland’s threat endI gotta 30 years ago, in yr dreams.
The issue we have it that this is a global pandemic affecting a very great number of people in a short space of time. No amount of stock held in reserve would be enough for this particular issue ... terrorist attack .. probably enough .. slow moving flu infection circumnavigated the globe .. probably enough or can order more in ...
what I was suggesting was not that the government should have more stock but that they could perhaps have helped open the doors to stock for care providers. Perhaps they tried to do this but i don’t think so .. even the fast wheels seem to turn pretty slowly and this has been a fast paced rush. Early on in this crisis UK PPE manufacturers were telling govt they had capacity to increase supply if asked .. but no one asked them and time marched on.
It’s good to hear that your employer got in early and ordered PPE for staff, we did the same, but our needs are paltry and a Amazon delivery was sufficient. I am not sure the NHS or the care homes could have done the same .. usually finance systems mean using approved suppliers etc ... and I suspect they (like the rest of us) have been taken by surprise Re just how much is needed, how difficult PPE sourcing has become and how vulnerable their staff (and patients) are.
 
Because a lot of this equipment has ‘use before’ dates and it’s impossible to plan for a Pandemic for that reason. Without continually disposing of vast quantities of equipment and replenishing your stocks.
No, you roll the stock over to active use and replenish the back up, the military do it all the time
 
What is so important about the Webasto study is that for the first time it showed that most people who become sick go through a period of several days before feeling sick where they are just as highly contagious as they will be when symptoms finally appear. We missed the boat of widespread testing, isolating and tracking of contacts, so now everybody is on lockdown to stop the spread of the virus by contagious non-symptomatic people who are unaware of their status.

I think it's interesting that on the one hand there is widespread condemnation of what are seen as unnecessary trips by others, while at the same time people are unwilling to wear a mask that doesn't provide much self protection but offers some protection to others.
Can you explain how the Webasto outbreak benefitted from masks as I cannot seem to find any useful information on how the ?16 people infected would have benefitted. I am always open to new information
 
A quite pointed remark from the manager of a clothing factory the other day suggested the NHS might like to order from them in the future rather than from abroad.

Mike
I presume they would be making non-disposable gowns etc: that could be sterilised and re-used. Would the “ medical” laundries that are left be able to cope.? I doubt it.
 
“We sit around the same table and go through how the society is prepared for different kinds of serious disruptions. We’re now faced with such a situation,” he commented to the newspaper. “We in Finland are lucky in the sense that we’ve continued this work since the post-war era and raised our preparedness to a good level.”

And I’m sure they shared some of their Stockpile with their EU colleague Italy in their hour of need. Although I don’t remember there being any news reports of their generosity.
 
I presume they would be making non-disposable gowns etc: that could be sterilised and re-used. Would the “ medical” laundries that are left be able to cope.? I doubt it.
From experience finding suppliers of clothing suitable for use in a medical environment that could be washed at 60 degrees is not that straightforward.
 
It does show you the sort of people in charge at NHS Trust Headquarters, that a Trust Chairman phones the BBC for the phone number of Burberry..
 
Back
Top