Coronavirus

[STFC_Manc]

At the outset, people over 70 and people with pre-existing conditions were identified as vulnerable.  As such, a high priority should have been placed on:

Ensuring all facilities were locked down - no visitors
All staff were tested, daily
All residents are tested, maybe daily
Get the Army onsite to conduct regular cleaning and support logistics
PPE
Potentially isolate away from the facility anyone tested positive, including residents.  There may be some too weak to move - in which case facilities should have been prepared for in home isolation units.
Daily reporting from every facility to the Govt.

That's off the top of my head.  Not sure how much of that was in place?  The tested positive vs death rate in Swindon tells me all I need to know about the UK's testing capabilities though.  No way should only 400 or so people have tested positive so far with nearly 100 deaths.

With over 15,000 residential and nursing homes in England alone and 411,000 people in homes across England and Wales, I'm not sure that is possible.

[STFC_Manc]

The excess mortaility rate is an official figure, it comes from the Office of National Statistics (ONS), a govt agency. But it's different from the figure presented at the daily briefings because that figure is only deaths recorded in hospitals or care homes where Covid19 has been given as the cause of death so for example it excludes deaths at home where there hasn't been a positive test result.

Just for clarity, it's deaths from all settings not just hopistals and care homes with Covid19 named on the death certificate.

[4D]

If only the few on here with their greater knowledge were in charge. A walk in the park.

[BambooToTheFuture]

Hindsight is indeed a wonderful thing, so I popped back to the early pages to make sure I wasn't being smart after the event.  Thankfully I think I'm OK, Bamboo on the other hand - "May's Chip Shop paper" - if only  

I was of course referring to Theresa's new business venture  

In the grand scheme of things, that was early days of this but I can put my hands up and say I was wrong. Maybe my approach at the time, was looking at recent epidemic/pandemics and thinking this one would spread not so much (like SARS and MERS) or that it would be a weak/similar version of flu. But that was thought during an emerging time and you haven't read/heard me banging on about any Flu like similarities for some time now.

This next bit isn't directed at yourself btw RobT but just an observation of the human kind. I find it interesting that this species of ours, for the most part, is very quick to highlight the misgivings of others yet less so inclined to highlight the successes of others. We are all guilty of it but I wish we did them both with a more balanced judgement. Often we'll use previous history as our indicator to foretell another, even before they do/say something. Whilst that can be helpful for continued track records, can we not have the intelligence of mind (for less serious things) and wait until a person has acted or must we always judge beforehand? Is it, that it makes another feel better about themselves; to pronounce others faults? When they likely will have many of their own.

Which to put it more concisely; 'Let he without sin amongst us, cast the first stone'  

[singingiiiffy]

I was of course referring to Theresa's new business venture 

In the grand scheme of things, that was early days of this but I can put my hands up and say I was wrong. Maybe my approach at the time, was looking at recent epidemic/pandemics and thinking this one would spread not so much (like SARS and MERS) or that it would be a weak/similar version of flu. But that was thought during an emerging time and you haven't read/heard me banging on about any Flu like similarities for some time now.

This next bit isn't directed at yourself btw RobT but just an observation of the human kind. I find it interesting that this species of ours, for the most part, is very quick to highlight the misgivings of others yet less so inclined to highlight the successes of others. We are all guilty of it but I wish we did them both with a more balanced judgement. Often we'll use previous history as our indicator to foretell another, even before they do/say something. Whilst that can be helpful for continued track records, can we not have the intelligence of mind (for less serious things) and wait until a person has acted or must we always judge beforehand? Is it, that it makes another feel better about themselves; to pronounce others faults? When they likely will have many of their own.

Which to put it more concisely; 'Let he without sin amongst us, cast the first stone' 

this thread would be 2 pages long! 😂 the death league tables when every single expert has said a true country comparison can not be made until even a year after.

[Banker]

With over 15,000 residential and nursing homes in England alone and 411,000 people in homes across England and Wales, I'm not sure that is possible.

A lot of that would have been possible, certainly enough to significantly mitigate the impact.

There are many large companies/charities running multiple care homes. The CQC is the government regulator ultimately responsible for health & safety compliance within the sector, it has teeth.

This major threat intelligence had been evident since Feb; The initial US epicentre being a Washington State nursing home outbreak, reports from Madrid, Italy and Germany, red flags were flying throughout the world. There was time to prepare and protect the vulnerable in UK Care Homes, let's call it 'shielding'.

CQC could and should have been coordinating the effort; mandating the early locking down of all homes, temperature readings, testing and procuring staff/resident PPE from their suppliers directly. They sat on their hands for weeks allowing the virus to rip through the sector.

[STFC_Manc]

A lot of that would have been possible, certainly enough to significantly mitigate the impact.

There are many large companies/charities running multiple care homes. The CQC is the government regulator ultimately responsible for health & safety compliance within the sector, it has teeth.

This major threat intelligence had been evident since Feb; The initial US epicentre being a Washington State nursing home outbreak, reports from Madrid, Italy and Germany, red flags were flying throughout the world. There was time to prepare and protect the vulnerable in UK Care Homes, let's call it 'shielding'.

CQC could and should have been coordinating the effort; mandating the early locking down of all homes, temperature readings, testing and procuring staff/resident PPE from their suppliers directly. They sat on their hands for weeks allowing the virus to rip through the sector.

I was specifically answering the testing everyone every day or getting the army involved. 

As you mention lots of larger companies/charities they need to take some responsibility here, why didn't they isolate as you say?

[Banker]

I was specifically answering the testing everyone every day or getting the army involved.  

As you mention lots of larger companies/charities they need to take some responsibility here, why didn't they isolate as you say?

Ah OK, yes widescale testing is undoubtedly challenging, but it should have been made a priority alongside NHS testing right from the off, and it wasn't.

Some companies did lock down their homes early, others didn't for whatever reason; commercial, ignorance or otherwise. These companies aren't privy to the raw international intelligence, science and medical advice that government is, perhaps they were waiting for guidance which didn't come ?

My point is, collectively they could and should have been forced to assume early responsibility, to lockdown, acquire more PPE from their healthcare suppliers etc. from CQC who is best informed and with the authority to do so, but weren't.

[flammableBen]

Ah OK, yes widescale testing is undoubtedly challenging, but it should have been made a priority alongside NHS testing right from the off, and it wasn't.

Some companies did lock down their homes early, others didn't for whatever reason; commercial, ignorance or otherwise. These companies aren't privy to the raw international intelligence, science and medical advice that government is, perhaps they were waiting for guidance which didn't come ?

My point is, collectively they could and should have been forced to assume early responsibility, to lockdown, acquire more PPE from their healthcare suppliers etc. from CQC who is best informed and with the authority to do so, but weren't.

Years of transforming public care services in to privately run bastions of free-market efficiency is always going to leave them exposed to a situation where their duty of care goes directly against profitability. It can maybe work with regulators willing to redress the balance either through punishments or incentives to prioritise an underlying level of care - but that's unlikely in a political environment that has largely been for eradicating such interference over nearly 40 years.

[StfcRusty]

If only the few on here with their greater knowledge were in charge. A walk in the park.

Yep, let’s close the thread down. Actually let’s close the site down after all we don’t know what it’s like to play professional football, or manage a pro team or own a pro club so any critical analysis of those who do is ridiculous.

[JBZ]

Yep, let’s close the thread down. Actually let’s close the site down after all we don’t know what it’s like to play professional football, or manage a pro team or own a pro club so any critical analysis of those who do is ridiculous.

No, just offer commentary on subject matter on which many have an informed view- beer, 'birds' and an irrational dislike for certain football clubs.

[swindonmaniac]

i still cant get my head around this excess death figure being extremely higher than the official death count and why other countries arent as excessive.

Maybe it's because we are the only country using correct figures.

[pauld]

If only the few on here with their greater knowledge were in charge. A walk in the park.

If only the govt had followed the plans laid out to prepare for a pandemic, implemented the recommendations of the report into the failures from the Cygnus exercise and used the substantial warning we had from other countries' experience. Instead we had clever-dick Dominic Cummings with "Herd immunity, protect the economy and a few thousand pensioners may die"

[RobertT]

On the Care Homes, the same problem has been seen here.  They have been left to fend for themselves as private entities and have largely failed because they have no idea how to.  As we see places reopening, has that lesson been learned?  Surely that is a fair question of current government competence?

[REDBUCK]

Unfortunately you have no real way of telling how adopting in this country a theoretical report / plan would have worked out against the actual unknown virus.