Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right. The government had plans for a flu pandemic, which would have killed large numbers of people fairly quickly. A lot of the planning the government had in place involved where to stack the bodies, and how to keep track of all the deaths. What they weren't expecting was a virus that made people very ill, but mostly didn't kill them, meaning that hospitals were overwhelmed with patients that needed looking after for extended periods." I agree there are differences. But if one is planning for that outcome, you also hope there would be greater speed in lock down decisions etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right. The government had plans for a flu pandemic, which would have killed large numbers of people fairly quickly. A lot of the planning the government had in place involved where to stack the bodies, and how to keep track of all the deaths." "What they weren't expecting was a virus that made people very ill, but mostly didn't kill them, meaning that hospitals were overwhelmed with patients that needed looking after for extended periods.I agree there are differences. But if one is planning for that outcome, you also hope there would be greater speed in lock down decisions etc." When a major flu pandemic hits, it can't be stopped, so the plans are all about controlling the spread. The plans we had assumed that people would be taken to the "Nightingales" to keep them comfortable while they died, and that the normal hospitals would be free to treat normal patients. The lockdown plans were also based on death rates area by area, and attempting to keep services running. The pandemic we got was very different in that not many people died, so the plan to use death rates to control spread simply didn't work. The ministers then had to come up with a new plan to effectively control the spread, without having had any time to strategize. We also had a surprisingly high rate of asymptomatic infection, which meant that there were more carriers than would normally be expected. I'm not going to suggest that the government did a good job, but I am going to say that no one would have been able to do a good job with the lack of appropriate plans, and a situation that had never been seen before. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right. The government had plans for a flu pandemic, which would have killed large numbers of people fairly quickly. A lot of the planning the government had in place involved where to stack the bodies, and how to keep track of all the deaths. What they weren't expecting was a virus that made people very ill, but mostly didn't kill them, meaning that hospitals were overwhelmed with patients that needed looking after for extended periods.I agree there are differences. But if one is planning for that outcome, you also hope there would be greater speed in lock down decisions etc. When a major flu pandemic hits, it can't be stopped, so the plans are all about controlling the spread. The plans we had assumed that people would be taken to the "Nightingales" to keep them comfortable while they died, and that the normal hospitals would be free to treat normal patients. The lockdown plans were also based on death rates area by area, and attempting to keep services running. The pandemic we got was very different in that not many people died, so the plan to use death rates to control spread simply didn't work. The ministers then had to come up with a new plan to effectively control the spread, without having had any time to strategize. We also had a surprisingly high rate of asymptomatic infection, which meant that there were more carriers than would normally be expected. I'm not going to suggest that the government did a good job, but I am going to say that no one would have been able to do a good job with the lack of appropriate plans, and a situation that had never been seen before." do you know the flu plan to stop the spread ? Tho tbh, I have little sympathy for we were only planning for flu, when we've seen plenty of viruses eg SARs. And seeimg first hand how ready Singapore was. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"He's right. The government had plans for a flu pandemic, which would have killed large numbers of people fairly quickly. A lot of the planning the government had in place involved where to stack the bodies, and how to keep track of all the deaths. What they weren't expecting was a virus that made people very ill, but mostly didn't kill them, meaning that hospitals were overwhelmed with patients that needed looking after for extended periods.I agree there are differences. But if one is planning for that outcome, you also hope there would be greater speed in lock down decisions etc. When a major flu pandemic hits, it can't be stopped, so the plans are all about controlling the spread. The plans we had assumed that people would be taken to the "Nightingales" to keep them comfortable while they died, and that the normal hospitals would be free to treat normal patients. The lockdown plans were also based on death rates area by area, and attempting to keep services running. The pandemic we got was very different in that not many people died, so the plan to use death rates to control spread simply didn't work. The ministers then had to come up with a new plan to effectively control the spread, without having had any time to strategize. We also had a surprisingly high rate of asymptomatic infection, which meant that there were more carriers than would normally be expected. I'm not going to suggest that the government did a good job, but I am going to say that no one would have been able to do a good job with the lack of appropriate plans, and a situation that had never been seen before.do you know the flu plan to stop the spread ? Tho tbh, I have little sympathy for we were only planning for flu, when we've seen plenty of viruses eg SARs. And seeimg first hand how ready Singapore was. " Look at the .gov website. It suggests modelling predicted between 20,000 and 750,000 deaths for a new flu pandemic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Government ignored the recommendations that came out of Operation Cygnus in 2016." .gov states it took them on board. What's your source? I certainly don't think you're wrong as it was a shit show re PPE, shaking hands and floppy hair  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
