Coronavirus - UK
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
From a nurse friend working on the frontline
"if he’d bothered to ring 111 like the rest of us and reported his wife had symptoms they would have told her to self isolate at home for 7 days and for him & the son to isolate for 14 days.
Far be it for me to stick up for Cummings ..... but what happens if both her / DC get incapacitated by Covid to the childcare for their son?
There is no reason to leave home with symptoms other than to attend hospital or for a Cv19 test.
So the son just has to fend for himself?
If an emergency crew were attending a known Cv19 case isolating at home they would wear appropriate PPE.
They would not expect to be dealing with an active case during a car crash because they should be self isolating at home. Neither would the AA/RAC or similar.
And that, is a good point.
My concern about this situation is that it has effectively undermined public confidence in any future lockdown that may become necessary if there is a second wave."
I think we all know this is a made up position by people which are in synch with their own political views. Same as my made up position of people using common sense.
Sorry, I'm just getting a bit bored of views from NHS workers. That sentence in itself is a bit rough but it's very easy to take the moral high ground when ultimately not one single one of them has been held to account for any of the fuck ups they have made throughout this crisis.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@pakman said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Crucial said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Siam said in Coronavirus - UK:
Anybody notice the media scrum not observing social distancing?
The very accusation they've levelled at Cummings?🙂
The media just love winding people up.I haven't seen them accusing Cummings of not social distancing, or if they have it is as an aside to him travelling around the country when people were asked not to.
He hasn't committed any great crime worthy of lynching, but in the eyes of many he looks self-entitled and justifying at a time when they have made sacrifices.
I described early on in another thread how a friend of mine over there had lost their father and the situation was may more 'complicated' than Cummings. His mother had to grieve alone. No visits from family to comfort her, was suffering the anguish that goes along with losing your partner of 40 odd years. Had a strong family support network that stayed at home, including her daughters. This was all because they followed the 'stay at home' instruction that Cummings thought had a low threshold of personal importance.
This friend of mine is understandably livid at the bloke, and at Boris for supporting him. He won't be the only one.That's not the press winding people up.That is the press seeking an apology on their behalf.
One of the biggest problems in all this is that most people haven't actually read the 'rules'. Child care is specified as an area where there will be times in which the default need not apply.
If the press had done their homework correctly and fact checked they wouldn't have ever made the story into the shitstorm it's become.Social distancing and self isolation are the key principles and DC most certainly complied with that.
So this isn't about substance, it's all about spin. DC is exceptional on dealing with substantial issues, but a rank amateur in dealing with the press.
From a nurse friend working on the frontline
"if he’d bothered to ring 111 like the rest of us and reported his wife had symptoms they would have told her to self isolate at home for 7 days and for him & the son to isolate for 14 days.
There is no reason to leave home with symptoms other than to attend hospital or for a Cv19 test.
If an emergency crew were attending a known Cv19 case isolating at home they would wear appropriate PPE.
They would not expect to be dealing with an active case during a car crash because they should be self isolating at home. Neither would the AA/RAC or similar.
My concern about this situation is that it has effectively undermined public confidence in any future lockdown that may become necessary if there is a second wave."
That may have been the advice the NHS would have given, but it doesn't reflect the regulations, which it seems he'd checked. He made sensible arrangements for looking after his child. The long drive did run an exceptionally low risk of an accident, which would have been an issue, but drove to isolation without stopping. If everyone acted so responsibly we'd all be better off.
In terms of second wave messaging, I do accept there's an impact. But maybe a bigger one is that the evidence is becoming indisputable that the under 50s, without a major existing health risk, could just get on with life and completely ignore the virus without increasing their personal risk more than a smidgeon.
At some point that knowledge is going to lead to serious resistance to a second general lockdown, if it were to be on the agenda.
-
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - UK:
Far be it for me to stick up for Cummings ..... but what happens if both her / DC get incapacitated by Covid to the childcare for their son?
Duh. Drop it off to the Auntie who we know nothing about. I mean she's a shit auntie because he drove 260 miles away from her. Or perhaps not able to look after his kid, but probably just a shit aunty.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - UK:
Lack of support? I think the last few days destroys that theory ... Boris is risking everything to support him.
Did no-one think to call him and check out the situation he was in, both personally and politically and review/provide advice on the situation when he came back?
It's a matter of looking after your staff when they are in a tricky situation and not being so cavalier with the public's perception and how they have gone along with the advice.
That's what pisses me off about Johnson and how this has been handled.>
It might possibly be that the childcare issue was a load of bollocks and no support was offered because none was asked for or needed. A simple thing for Cummings to do to deflect much would be to show the results of the tests on him and his wife. Negative or positive it would show that he had those fears. That is of course if they were actually tested.
There is so much about his story that does not add up but if his story is genuine so much that should be easy to prove. But he really gave us nothing.
The shitstorm would be over if people believed the story (media aside), the trouble is many people do not believe it. If you look at the polarised views on here, the differentiator is not about the rules or the morality of looking after one's child, it is believe or not.
I do not.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
From a nurse friend working on the frontline
"if he’d bothered to ring 111 like the rest of us and reported his wife had symptoms they would have told her to self isolate at home for 7 days and for him & the son to isolate for 14 days.There is no reason to leave home with symptoms other than to attend hospital or for a Cv19 test."
Mrs M's daughter is a paediatric nurse who runs the clinical side of a respite home.
They've had situations where parents of her patients have had Covid symptoms, and their strong advice has always been to do what's best for the child at all times and, If in doubt, put the child first. Follow the rules where you can, but the child's welfare is absolutely paramount.
-
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - UK:
The shitstorm would be over if people believed the story (media aside), the trouble is many people do not believe it. If you look at the polarised views on here, the differentiator is not about the rules or the morality of looking after one's child, it is believe or not.
It's less whether the story is believable but about Johnson's credibility, competence and how he manages No.10.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - UK:
The shitstorm would be over if people believed the story (media aside), the trouble is many people do not believe it. If you look at the polarised views on here, the differentiator is not about the rules or the morality of looking after one's child, it is believe or not.
It's less whether the story is believable but about Johnson's credibility, competence and how he manages No.10.
They are one and the same.
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
If it's a pack of lies, then he's not. And by passing it off he loses the credibility to manage No. 10
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - UK:
The shitstorm would be over if people believed the story (media aside), the trouble is many people do not believe it. If you look at the polarised views on here, the differentiator is not about the rules or the morality of looking after one's child, it is believe or not.
It's less whether the story is believable but about Johnson's credibility, competence and how he manages No.10.
They are one and the same.
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
If it's a pack of lies, then he's not. And by passing it off he loses the credibility to manage No. 10
You guys have both forgotten the salient point.
If it's the truth, does anybody believe it anyway?
People, including media, have made up their minds already. This whole thing is utterly pointless, apart from ensuring that those who are against Johnson, have more ammunition to throw at him.
And this is his own fault.
-
This post is deleted!
-
@Catogrande said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - UK:
Lack of support? I think the last few days destroys that theory ... Boris is risking everything to support him.
Did no-one think to call him and check out the situation he was in, both personally and politically and review/provide advice on the situation when he came back?
It's a matter of looking after your staff when they are in a tricky situation and not being so cavalier with the public's perception and how they have gone along with the advice.
That's what pisses me off about Johnson and how this has been handled.>
It might possibly be that the childcare issue was a load of bollocks and no support was offered because none was asked for or needed. A simple thing for Cummings to do to deflect much would be to show the results of the tests on him and his wife. Negative or positive it would show that he had those fears. That is of course if they were actually tested.
There is so much about his story that does not add up but if his story is genuine so much that should be easy to prove. But he really gave us nothing.
The shitstorm would be over if people believed the story (media aside), the trouble is many people do not believe it. If you look at the polarised views on here, the differentiator is not about the rules or the morality of looking after one's child, it is believe or not.
I do not.
I expect we could all agree that if he's shown to have lied at the conference he must go. The UK press will be calling in favours all over the place to try and catch him out.
Perhaps we should just tie him up and throw him in a pond.
If he drowns he's innocent!
-
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - UK:
You guys have both forgotten the salient point.
If it's the truth, does anybody believe it anyway?
People, including media, have made up their minds already.
I'm sure if Cummings had driven to see an Optican about his eyes, they'd convince themselves the Optician was somehow in on the plot. Bit like the QC who is trying to get hold of Johnson's private medical records to prove whether he was actually in hospital or not.
This whole thing is utterly pointless, apart from ensuring that those who are against Johnson, have more ammunition to throw at him.
> And this is his own fault.
100% . He been staggeringly inept.
-
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
Isn't the criticism of Cummings about his interpretation of the rules being against the spirit of the rules and not about the veracity of his account?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
Isn't the criticism of Cummings about his interpretation of the rules being against the spirit of the rules and not about the veracity of his account?
That's a good question! For what it's worth my take is that before the con it WAS about breaking the spirit.
But IMO he did enough to make it at least arguable that he didn't break the spirit.
But if he's told porkies he'll get his just desserts.
-
@pakman said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
Isn't the criticism of Cummings about his interpretation of the rules being against the spirit of the rules and not about the veracity of his account?
That's a good question! For what it's worth my take is that before the con it WAS about breaking the spirit.
But IMO he did enough to make it at least arguable that he didn't break the spirit.
But if he's told porkies he'll get his just desserts.
You thirsty and hungry mate?
-
@Victor-Meldrew Indeed.
Only time will tell if he gets to learn from his mistakes, right his wrongs and lead the country out of this.
At this point in time the chances of this looks extremely slim. It's staggering that he doesn't seem to be able to see that Cummings has to go for this to happen.
As much as I admire his middle finger to the media ... it's not sustainable to start a war with them. Despite what Trump has shown.
-
@Bones said in Coronavirus - UK:
@pakman said in Coronavirus - UK:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
Isn't the criticism of Cummings about his interpretation of the rules being against the spirit of the rules and not about the veracity of his account?
That's a good question! For what it's worth my take is that before the con it WAS about breaking the spirit.
But IMO he did enough to make it at least arguable that he didn't break the spirit.
But if he's told porkies he'll get his just desserts.
You thirsty and hungry mate?
Waiting in queue for my sandwich!!!
-
First ministerial resignation, albeit a junior one.
-
@MajorRage said in Coronavirus - UK:
. It's staggering that he doesn't seem to be able to see that Cummings has to go for this to happen.
And, when he had the chance to keep Cummings, via an inquiry/review he didn't take it
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - UK:
@MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - UK:
If it's the truth then Johnson is justified in supporting his man and his actions.
Isn't the criticism of Cummings about his interpretation of the rules being against the spirit of the rules and not about the veracity of his account?
Both IMHO, and I suspect others.