Coronavirus update - NO MORE RESTRICTIONS

[lisvaneblue]

More evidence of how badly the pandemic was handled in the UK - a couple of months ago, we were being told to wait until more comprehensive figures were available before criticising this country's response, well, the sort of data we were told was needed is now available and it still looks pretty pathetic doesn't it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53222182

Damming report, but it doesn't give any evidence how badly the pandemic was handled, although we all think we know why.

But the stats raise questions, why are England's results so much worse than Wales for example, when, at the peak 11 weeks, the UK had a uniform approach. Why is N Ireland best of the lot.....Within the UK some of the home nations results were not bad compared to other European nations, yet we had a UK wide approach.

Still a lot to be disclosed

[the other bob wilson]

Damming report, but it doesn't give any evidence how badly the pandemic was handled, although we all think we know why.

But the stats raise questions, why are England's results so much worse than Wales for example, when, at the peak 11 weeks, the UK had a uniform approach. Why is N Ireland best of the lot.....Within the UK some of the home nations results were not bad compared to other European nations, yet we had a UK wide approach.

Still a lot to be disclosed

The talk was we should wait for the excess deaths figure from other countries before drawing conclusions. Now, we have nearly three months of excess deaths data to consider and the figures show exactly the same as what they were showing when we were being told to hang on before coming to conclusions. All of the available evidence points the same way, so why should anyone think that there is still something out there which will lead to a complete reevaluation of how the UK handled the the first wave of the pandemic?

Looking at those tables, the three other UK nations have clearly done better than England, but none of them are that good really, they just mean Arlene Foster, Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford and their administrations have not been the complete disaster that Johnson and his cronies have.

[lisvaneblue]

The talk was we should wait for the excess deaths figure from other countries before drawing conclusions. Now, we have nearly three months of excess deaths data to consider and the figures show exactly the same as what they were showing when we were being told to hang on before coming to conclusions. All of the available evidence points the same way, so why should anyone think that there is still something out there which will lead to a complete reevaluation of how the UK handled the the first wave of the pandemic?

Looking at those tables, the three other UK nations have clearly done better than England, but none of them are that good really, they just mean Arlene Foster, Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford and their administrations have not been the complete disaster that Johnson and his cronies have.

Arlene Foster, Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford can't be congratulated because they have done better than Boris Johnson.

The figures relate to the 11 week peak around late March to early May when all home nations were under virtually the same restrictions. So there must be more to it than the blaming mis-administration, ( and the report does not look at what happened in each country, only the results.)

Was it related to flights into UK which were unrestricted, and a lot more flights in England than other home countries. Was it to do with public transport in areas like London. Was it to do with the larger number of nursing homes in England than elsewhere.

Lots of questions but too early to categorically say why UK outcomes so bad.

[the other bob wilson]

Arlene Foster, Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford can't be congratulated because they have done better than Boris Johnson.

The figures relate to the 11 week peak around late March to early May when all home nations were under virtually the same restrictions. So there must be more to it than the blaming mis-administration, ( and the report does not look at what happened in each country, only the results.)

Was it related to flights into UK which were unrestricted, and a lot more flights in England than other home countries. Was it to do with public transport in areas like London. Was it to do with the larger number of nursing homes in England than elsewhere.

Lots of questions but too early to categorically say why UK outcomes so bad.

I don't think saying the other three did better than England is congratulating them, especially when I say that "none of them are that good really".

How about going into lockdown later than other European countries and moving people from hospitals into care homes as reasons for our poor outcome?

[Jordi Culé]

Damming report, but it doesn't give any evidence how badly the pandemic was handled, although we all think we know why.

But the stats raise questions, why are England's results so much worse than Wales for example, when, at the peak 11 weeks, the UK had a uniform approach. Why is N Ireland best of the lot.....Within the UK some of the home nations results were not bad compared to other European nations, yet we had a UK wide approach.

Still a lot to be disclosed

I might be being a massive, naive arse here but I was sort of expecting our respective governments to be considering and examining these statistics right about now and coming up with some better solutions than the fuuckfest they’ve coordinated the last few months?