COVID-19 UK & Beyond

[Chinahand]

PPE is a precious resource please use it that way is not an unreasonable thing to say at this time. Claiming this is blaming nhs staff is typical of the ctrl left’s distortion of language to instil outrage. 

[P.K.]

15 minutes ago, Chinahand said:

PPE is a precious resource please use it that way is not an unreasonable thing to say at this time. Claiming this is blaming nhs staff is typical of the ctrl left’s distortion of language to instil outrage. 

Hancock et al are refusing to release the number of staff that have died. There must be a reason for that. Other than to foster deep mistrust of them and the way they're handling things.

In any event it's hardly the left's distortion of language Mr C:

Susan Masters, director of nursing at the Royal College of Nursing voiced scepticism that Hancock’s pledges would end the supply problems that are causing alarm among staff, and denied nurses were misusing PPE.

Masters said: “These figures on deliveries are only impressive when nursing staff stop contacting me to say what they need to use wasn’t available. The calls are still coming through – people are petrified. They have seen colleagues die already.

“Things have improved in recent days and I credit the government with that. But the safety of nurses and care staff must not be compromised. They are pretty clear about what they need to do to stay safe and they will be angered by any suggestion they cause shortages by misusing kit.”

[Chinahand]

Who is suggesting what is being claimed in the last sentence of your quote, PK?  

Edited April 11, 2020 by Chinahand

[P.K.]

I don't really understand your question tbh. The quote comes verbatim, inevitably, from the trusty Grauniad:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/10/matt-hancock-urges-public-not-to-overuse-ppe

These days I don't tend to post up links if I can avoid it...

[Chinahand]

Taken from your precious Grauniad:

When some says this:

“We need everyone to treat PPE like the precious resource it is,” he said on Friday. “Everyone should use the equipment they clinically need, in line with the guidelines: no more and no less.”

Is not suggesting there are shortages caused by people misusing kit. This sentence is based on a false premise:

“Nurses and care staff ... will be angered by any suggestion they cause shortages by misusing kit.”

[quilp]

39 minutes ago, P.K. said:

The quote comes verbatim, inevitably, from the trusty Grauniad. 

These days I don't tend to post up links if I can avoid it...

PML... 

[the stinking enigma]

I dont really get these coronavirus figures. The uk is now the epicentre of the european outbreak, having the most deaths for a few days in a row now. Yet still only 1559 classed as serious or critical. Then I hear politicians saying the nhs can keep up so far. Every other hotspot has at least twice our amount in serious or critical care, germany 3 times that amount, Spain nearly 4. 

Considering the uk has the highest death rate right now I cant help but feel there is a link somewhere.

[the stinking enigma]

Also, pritti made a top notch politicians non apology earlier. Uplifting stuff

[TheTeapot]

It's either

a) - they're criminally inept

b) - they're lying fucks

[ballaughbiker]

Or a + b

[P.K.]

1 hour ago, Chinahand said:

Taken from your precious Grauniad:

When some says this:

“We need everyone to treat PPE like the precious resource it is,” he said on Friday. “Everyone should use the equipment they clinically need, in line with the guidelines: no more and no less.”

Is not suggesting there are shortages caused by people misusing kit. This sentence is based on a false premise:

“Nurses and care staff ... will be angered by any suggestion they cause shortages by misusing kit.”

Ahhh now I get it.

I think you are coming at this from the wrong direction.

The way they are kitted up now is a very big step away from what they started with. Which is how my GP niece was infected. Thanks Hancock. In other words there were major shortages of the right kit being at the right place. Now being sorted out after how many weeks?

Were I a frontline NHS wallah if the person who was responsible for those shortages came out with this:

“Everyone should use the equipment they clinically need, in line with the guidelines: no more and no less.”

then I quite rightly would be mightily pissed off with them. Because it's a blatant slur on my professionalism.

From someone who has been shown up to be very amateurish.....

Very understandable I would say.

[P.K.]

57 minutes ago, the stinking enigma said:

Also, pritti made a top notch politicians non apology earlier. Uplifting stuff

Apparently she's not been in the public eye because she's been getting an extra £10 k for "Smirking from home..."

[woolley]

Reposted from IOM thread. Probably more relevant here:

This blame game of politicians about the supply of PPE and the ills that flow from it is all rather stupid. It creates more heat than light and gets nobody anywhere, but let us take a dispassionate look at it.

We have a pandemic at the moment. Therefore, by definition, all of this kit is in short supply globally. It doesn't matter which country you are talking about, everyone is scratching around for it, with the possible exception of Germany because they manufacture it there, and they have slapped an export ban on it (so hard luck, EU chums, but fair dos; charity begins at home). There are certainly lessons here in having a strategic national supply capability at home - cheers, globalisation - but whether even that could provide sufficient PPE now is moot.

So who is responsible for PPE being in short supply? Given this unholy can of worms, how culpable are governments, and particularly the UK government in causing the shortage, and what could they have done differently to avoid it?

I don't actually believe any one group or collection of people is culpable and here's why.

In normal times, the NHS procurement agencies, and equivalents in healthcare providers abroad, would be responsible for keeping the stocks up. In the current abnormal times, what are appropriate levels of stock? Who decides? Politicians, procurement or medics? It would seem bizarre if politicians at cabinet level were to micromanage the NHS to such an extent given that they have no expertise in the field in any case. And when they have decided on levels of stock, which can only be a stab in the dark, they have to obtain it in what has become an unholy scrum with the rest of the world where every country is trying to hoover up everything in a gigantic panic buy, like the supermarket toilet roll wars but on a grand, grand scale.

In one of the links below, it is stated that Ireland's requirement for PPE will increase this year 16 fold by comparison with normal levels. So if, in the absence of better information, we apply that to the rest of the world, it is easy to see that whatever capacity there is for manufacture will have been swamped by demand in the very early days of the crisis. Nobody will get what they are asking for, so we have reports of front line staff treating patients unguarded all around the world. A very bad situation.

So should the stocks have been higher in the UK and elsewhere before the virus struck? Perhaps, with 20/20 hindsight, but how much higher and how much longer would that have lasted? You could not keep 16 times your normal annual usage in hand because it would be unnecessary virtually all of the time and wasteful because it goes out of date and would have to be dumped and replaced at regular intervals. Nobody does that.

There are further problems to compound the issue with supplies, and I believe you will hear more about these as time goes by. Because of the acute shortages, buyers are not being over fussy about where they look for stock. It's almost a case of wherever you are, whatever you've got, send it. Money no object - particularly US states who are ridiculously bidding against each other to foreign suppliers encouraged by Donald Trump. Naturally China, having sent the virus, is now in the forefront of supplying the PPE to guard against it. Much of the stuff that is arriving is sub-standard and totally unfit for purpose. In some cases it is worse than using nothing.

So is there anything you can see that Matt Hancock or the cabinet could have done differently given the circumstances? Other than producing a manufacturing base like Germany has out of thin air? Anything that they could have instructed their civil service advisors and scientists to enact? Don't just say fund the NHS better because that wouldn't have made a difference to any of the above. Clearly they would throw any amount of money at it right now if they could be sure of obtaining lasting PPE stocks.

One criticism I would make is that perhaps there needs to be a bit more honesty in telling it like it is. Rather than repeating stuff like "we are straining every sinew" or "the army is on the case and has moved x million pieces this week", perhaps they should level with people and say things like "There is a world demand for 10 billion pieces of this kit and a world capacity to manufacture 1 billion. We are doing our best and if any company can make these supplies please come forward now. We cannot guarantee to supply everything that is needed because we don't necessarily have it and we can't necessarily get it." I think that people prefer to be levelled with even if it's bad news, but I can understand why they wouldn't do so. They would not want to risk adding even more pressure to frightened, under strain NHS staff, so it's easier to make promises using calm words.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/coronavirus/how-a-lack-of-ppe-in-spanish-hospitals-is-leading-to-a-health-care-crisis-1.4217087

https://euobserver.com/coronavirus/147958

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/opposition-questions-hse-on-shortages-of-personal-protective-equipment-1.4212091

https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0403/1128300-ppe-covid-19-ireland/

https://www.irinsider.org/media-monitoring/2020/3/28/world-wide-shortage-of-personal-protective-equipment-during-pandemic

It is good to be able to take a look at things from an apolitical viewpoint. I would be genuinely interested to read any other views about how or if this could have been handled more effectively, and who should have done what, when. I don't mean banal political rhetoric.

[Uhtred]

I didn’t believe it was humanly possible to host a more chaotic, poorly run, car-crash of a press briefing than Howard Quayle’s nightmarish ‘Jet VAT’ effort...but full marks to Priti Patel for that horror show at the UK Covid briefing yesterday. At least it’s answered the question ‘Why doesn’t the Home Secretary host one’? I think we now fully understand why.

[Non-Believer]

12 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

I didn’t believe it was humanly possible to host a more chaotic, poorly run, car-crash of a press briefing than Howard Quayle’s nightmarish ‘Jet VAT’ effort...but full marks to Priti Patel for that horror show at the UK Covid briefing yesterday. At least it’s answered the question ‘Why doesn’t the Home Secretary host one’? I think we now fully understand why.

Agreed. Arrogant and abrasive are the adjectives I'd use.