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 Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love that 'soap opera' quip! Unfortunately we get what we vote for? I rarely complain as I feel I have no right(never having voted as a positive protest) However as I now have the time. Although not the million pound trust fund which seems obligatory nowadays to be in the cabinet? I was actually thinking of standing for parliament as a completely independent. Unfortunately it seems to me that however well meaning each individual member is as soon as they get to parliament they're swept into the main party policy regardless of the actual constituents needs and wishes? Anybody else any thoughts on these lines??? Or am I laying myself open to abuse here? "Personally I think your thoughts on standing are laudable, however I believe the challenges are significant and deep rooted. Martin Bell (the man in the white suit) took the independent route you are considering and he left parliament disillusioned and frustrated. Changing an institution requires unparalleled effort, circumstances and luck .... personally I would start small (local council perhaps) and test the waters as you go .... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Love that 'soap opera' quip! Unfortunately we get what we vote for? I rarely complain as I feel I have no right(never having voted as a positive protest) However as I now have the time. Although not the million pound trust fund which seems obligatory nowadays to be in the cabinet? I was actually thinking of standing for parliament as a completely independent. Unfortunately it seems to me that however well meaning each individual member is as soon as they get to parliament they're swept into the main party policy regardless of the actual constituents needs and wishes? Anybody else any thoughts on these lines??? Or am I laying myself open to abuse here?
Personally I think your thoughts on standing are laudable, however I believe the challenges are significant and deep rooted. Martin Bell (the man in the white suit) took the independent route you are considering and he left parliament disillusioned and frustrated. Changing an institution requires unparalleled effort, circumstances and luck .... personally I would start small (local council perhaps) and test the waters as you go ...."Local is much better and have much more of an influence. I use to have 3 independent councillors for my ward. However the Labour council didn't like it. Got two to convert to Labour (you can only guess how) and at the next local election they made sure they got all three Labour councillors. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. " No point going without symptoms | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. No point going without symptoms"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. No point going without symptoms" Although it is worth being tested if you don’t have symptoms especially if have been in an environment where others have the virus or have symptoms - you may be asymptomatic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer in PMQs today asked Raab why if there is capacity for 40K tests/day, only 18K on Monday and 19K on Tuesday were carried out? Importantly this is within a wider context that Hancock promised 100K tests/day capacity at end of April (8 days time). Raab evaded to answer directly on two challenges. Frankly the message from the soap opera politicians and puppet media is entirely different to what is actually happening in the front line. I’m not in the care sector but if I was my anger and frustration with not being able to get tested, when there is at least ‘some’ capacity to do so would be off the clock ....." Did Matt Hancock 'promise' 100,000 tests a day or did he set it as a target (albeit a stretching one) A target which he hoped to achieve OR a declaration that something will happen (a 'promise') A nuanced but not unimportant difference. I don't recall him 'promising' any such thing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer in PMQs today asked Raab why if there is capacity for 40K tests/day, only 18K on Monday and 19K on Tuesday were carried out? Importantly this is within a wider context that Hancock promised 100K tests/day capacity at end of April (8 days time). Raab evaded to answer directly on two challenges. Frankly the message from the soap opera politicians and puppet media is entirely different to what is actually happening in the front line. I’m not in the care sector but if I was my anger and frustration with not being able to get tested, when there is at least ‘some’ capacity to do so would be off the clock ..... Did Matt Hancock 'promise' 100,000 tests a day or did he set it as a target (albeit a stretching one) A target which he hoped to achieve OR a declaration that something will happen (a 'promise') A nuanced but not unimportant difference. I don't recall him 'promising' any such thing. " He did say it was a target. Some said it was ambitious, but a target nonetheless. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As a NHS doctor said a couple of weeks ago. If a NHS worker at a hospital wants a test they can get it done there. 40k test a day avaliable but if peopLe don't go to get tested they don't get 40k tests done. It only works if people go. It's open for many key workers as well now. Mobile units are good but if everyone is expecting a unit to turn up at everybody's house they are living in cuckoo land." Neither do they expect to have to make a 3hr trip to do it. Also lots of carers don't drive, if they're symptomatic they can't go in a taxi. Hopefully the army will sort the logistics out | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. " this... everyone with symptoms should be able to go | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. No point going without symptoms" Are you serious? Do you not understand the fundamental problem with this virus after all these discussions on it. R=2.5 precisely because people infect others before they know they have it. How do people still not understand this  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. this... everyone with symptoms should be able to go " People should be going anyway, no questions asked. Imagine I stock the vegetables at Tesco. I get infected. It could easily be 5 days before I even get symptoms. I've been spreading the virus over those vegetables for 5 days now. Then think how many less people are compromised if I go for precautionary tests and stop touching the vegetables after just 2 days instead of 5. We need to think in terms of R1. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No point going without symptoms" Took the words out of my mouth...the tests are in affect to 1.. confirm a sick member of staff has it..to allow their family/household members to isolate correctly...of 2..is self isolation (NHS staff etc) due to a household member being ill...to confirm if they actually have CovId19 nor not...as if they don't..the key worker does not have to isolate and is safe for work... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"As a NHS doctor said a couple of weeks ago. If a NHS worker at a hospital wants a test they can get it done there. 40k test a day avaliable but if peopLe don't go to get tested they don't get 40k tests done. It only works if people go. It's open for many key workers as well now. Mobile units are good but if everyone is expecting a unit to turn up at everybody's house they are living in cuckoo land." The nearest testing place for someone in leicester is nottingham!!! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer in PMQs today asked Raab why if there is capacity for 40K tests/day, only 18K on Monday and 19K on Tuesday were carried out? Importantly this is within a wider context that Hancock promised 100K tests/day capacity at end of April (8 days time). Raab evaded to answer directly on two challenges. Frankly the message from the soap opera politicians and puppet media is entirely different to what is actually happening in the front line. I’m not in the care sector but if I was my anger and frustration with not being able to get tested, when there is at least ‘some’ capacity to do so would be off the clock ..... Did Matt Hancock 'promise' 100,000 tests a day or did he set it as a target (albeit a stretching one) A target which he hoped to achieve OR a declaration that something will happen (a 'promise') A nuanced but not unimportant difference. I don't recall him 'promising' any such thing. " You are right to challenge on a matter of accuracy .... 100K is a target not a promise, however I disagree there is a not unimportant difference. If a head of state politician publicly announced a target it is as good as a promise to the population he or she Is governing. This is reinforced further when the PM some weeks earlier was blowing smoke by saying they would achieve 250K! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer in PMQs today asked Raab why if there is capacity for 40K tests/day, only 18K on Monday and 19K on Tuesday were carried out? Importantly this is within a wider context that Hancock promised 100K tests/day capacity at end of April (8 days time). Raab evaded to answer directly on two challenges. Frankly the message from the soap opera politicians and puppet media is entirely different to what is actually happening in the front line. I’m not in the care sector but if I was my anger and frustration with not being able to get tested, when there is at least ‘some’ capacity to do so would be off the clock ..... Did Matt Hancock 'promise' 100,000 tests a day or did he set it as a target (albeit a stretching one) A target which he hoped to achieve OR a declaration that something will happen (a 'promise') A nuanced but not unimportant difference. I don't recall him 'promising' any such thing. You are right to challenge on a matter of accuracy .... 100K is a target not a promise, however I disagree there is a not unimportant difference. If a head of state politician publicly announced a target it is as good as a promise to the population he or she Is governing. This is reinforced further when the PM some weeks earlier was blowing smoke by saying they would achieve 250K!" If you're going to lie, you might as well tell a big one | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer in PMQs today asked Raab why if there is capacity for 40K tests/day, only 18K on Monday and 19K on Tuesday were carried out? Importantly this is within a wider context that Hancock promised 100K tests/day capacity at end of April (8 days time). Raab evaded to answer directly on two challenges. Frankly the message from the soap opera politicians and puppet media is entirely different to what is actually happening in the front line. I’m not in the care sector but if I was my anger and frustration with not being able to get tested, when there is at least ‘some’ capacity to do so would be off the clock ..... Did Matt Hancock 'promise' 100,000 tests a day or did he set it as a target (albeit a stretching one) A target which he hoped to achieve OR a declaration that something will happen (a 'promise') A nuanced but not unimportant difference. I don't recall him 'promising' any such thing. You are right to challenge on a matter of accuracy .... 100K is a target not a promise, however I disagree there is a not unimportant difference. If a head of state politician publicly announced a target it is as good as a promise to the population he or she Is governing. This is reinforced further when the PM some weeks earlier was blowing smoke by saying they would achieve 250K! If you're going to lie, you might as well tell a big one " And then put it on the side of a bus …. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer in PMQs today asked Raab why if there is capacity for 40K tests/day, only 18K on Monday and 19K on Tuesday were carried out? Importantly this is within a wider context that Hancock promised 100K tests/day capacity at end of April (8 days time). Raab evaded to answer directly on two challenges. Frankly the message from the soap opera politicians and puppet media is entirely different to what is actually happening in the front line. I’m not in the care sector but if I was my anger and frustration with not being able to get tested, when there is at least ‘some’ capacity to do so would be off the clock ..... Did Matt Hancock 'promise' 100,000 tests a day or did he set it as a target (albeit a stretching one) A target which he hoped to achieve OR a declaration that something will happen (a 'promise') A nuanced but not unimportant difference. I don't recall him 'promising' any such thing. You are right to challenge on a matter of accuracy .... 100K is a target not a promise, however I disagree there is a not unimportant difference. If a head of state politician publicly announced a target it is as good as a promise to the population he or she Is governing. This is reinforced further when the PM some weeks earlier was blowing smoke by saying they would achieve 250K! If you're going to lie, you might as well tell a big one And then put it on the side of a bus …." Yeah, it's a good job the NHS has an extra £350m a week otherwise they'd be running out of PPE now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. " Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there?" Exactly! ….. call me cynical but locating testing centres at 'strategic' locations, as opposed to taking the testing to the hospitals and care homes directly (mobile testing etc.) appears very much like the government not encouraging those that can be tested (40K) to partake … So why the almost deliberate act of inconvenience on behalf of UK Gov? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. " It was explained yesterday at the briefing that the tests are not for screening people, but to test those with symptoms. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. No point going without symptoms Although it is worth being tested if you don’t have symptoms especially if have been in an environment where others have the virus or have symptoms - you may be asymptomatic. " Unless you're getting tested daily it's a waste | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there?" If they built it at your front door what about the person that lives 80 miles away ? Get a bus or train | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there? If they built it at your front door what about the person that lives 80 miles away ? Get a bus or train" So you want people with symptoms to get on public transport to go and get tested? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there? If they built it at your front door what about the person that lives 80 miles away ? Get a bus or train So you want people with symptoms to get on public transport to go and get tested?" No...... but what about volunteers to take them. I would. Has to be at weekend as I am currently busy with work. Do these collection centres operate at the weekend or in the evening. Is there anyone near me that that wants picking up and taking to nearest centre. I'll wear my snood (no proper mask. sorry) over my face and you can sit in the back. I'm serious. If I was furloughed I would be volunteering to do this but sadly the best thing I can do right now is stay at home and carry on working. I'm not sure some people on here realize how important that is too. Someone has to step forward and go that extra mile IMO. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is testing the non symptomatic any use? At the moment 75% of the tests are negative (555,000 tests 133,000 positives), and most of these are being done at hospitals on people with symptoms. You could have a test at 9am, go to the shop on way home and unkowingly get infected, 24 hours later get a negative result from your initial test. You are now wandering around spreading infection thinking you are ok." If they are close contacts, even if they are asymptomatic, they should be tested. Some even test the asymptomatic casual contacts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there? If they built it at your front door what about the person that lives 80 miles away ? Get a bus or train So you want people with symptoms to get on public transport to go and get tested? No...... but what about volunteers to take them. I would. Has to be at weekend as I am currently busy with work. Do these collection centres operate at the weekend or in the evening. Is there anyone near me that that wants picking up and taking to nearest centre. I'll wear my snood (no proper mask. sorry) over my face and you can sit in the back. I'm serious. If I was furloughed I would be volunteering to do this but sadly the best thing I can do right now is stay at home and carry on working. I'm not sure some people on here realize how important that is too. Someone has to step forward and go that extra mile IMO." But nobody is stepping up to do that, we have a government that is quite rightly telling people to stay in their homes, especially if they are symptomatic one hand but on the other it is not making testing readily available to people who are in need of it. They simply can't have it both ways and you certainly can't expect people to put themselves at risk by driving symptomatic people there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The obvious problem seems to be that most people aren't allowed the tests! It's only a proportion of NHS staff and maybe some other front line workers. If you've been stacking the vegetables at Asda all day, you're not allowed to rock up for a test as a precaution which is exactly what we should be doing. This is all just defection so the government can say it's peoples fault for not getting tested and they would have hit 100k if people had turned up. Problem is that if the nearest testing centre is 80 miles away and you do t have a car how do you get there? If they built it at your front door what about the person that lives 80 miles away ? Get a bus or train So you want people with symptoms to get on public transport to go and get tested?" If you have symptoms you self isolate, you DON'T GO | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I can only speak locally. There is a drive in testing centre by J6 of m5. It is within 1 mile of Worcester Royal Hospital. I drove past the other day as I was heading home after giving blood. It was deserted....staff stood around waiting. I appreciate that some in care industry may not have facilities close to them....but even when they are they are not always being used. Just saying there are two sides to this, as with any debate...." Does anyone know if healthcare workers have to get tested in their own time? If they have families it maybe a difficult to juggle work and families and driving to get tested And one more, if they are in healthcare could they take the samples themselves and have drop off points? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Obviously the best time to get tested is before symptoms develop, but if you're a key worker surely that means you'd have to get tested every day if exposed to possible infection. So I don't see mass testing as a plausible tool anyway. " Are you being serious? mass testing is the only solution until a vaccine is found and used | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Obviously the best time to get tested is before symptoms develop, but if you're a key worker surely that means you'd have to get tested every day if exposed to possible infection. So I don't see mass testing as a plausible tool anyway. " Try to think in terms of R1. Testing them every day might be the perfect solution but even testing once a week would still contribute greatly to R1. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I feel the biggest barrier is the distance to testing spots. The problem with testing people without symptoms is that it is only valid in that moment. They could drive away and catch it five minutes later somewhere else and they can’t repeat that every day. " Probability of catching it in 5 minutes is different to the probability of catching it in a week. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I feel the biggest barrier is the distance to testing spots. The problem with testing people without symptoms is that it is only valid in that moment. They could drive away and catch it five minutes later somewhere else and they can’t repeat that every day. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I can only speak locally. There is a drive in testing centre by J6 of m5. It is within 1 mile of Worcester Royal Hospital. I drove past the other day as I was heading home after giving blood. It was deserted....staff stood around waiting. I appreciate that some in care industry may not have facilities close to them....but even when they are they are not always being used. Just saying there are two sides to this, as with any debate...." I don't know that facility but care services staff have been over-worked for years. They may get 20 minutes per appointment, with the next one several miles away. As this virus has progressed, it's placed greater overload on the service, with people discharged from hospital also needing care. Many staff are sick and isolating. Staff frequently have no rest breaks, as schedules are too punishing and unrealistic. The poor staff would potentially be eager for testing but with 12 hours shifts, homes and families in them to be cared for, it's no surprise if they struggle to make a journey of an hour plus each way, to get a test. Most appointment times are unrealistically short and vulnerable clients are given personalised caring support, not a production line equivalent, that can't include whether someone's fallen over or their dementia is particularly challenging for them on any given visit. Care homes are likewise over-burdened. MPs would do well to spend a day a week doing care work in their constituencies. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Obviously the best time to get tested is before symptoms develop, but if you're a key worker surely that means you'd have to get tested every day if exposed to possible infection. So I don't see mass testing as a plausible tool anyway. Are you being serious? mass testing is the only solution until a vaccine is found and used " Of course I'm being serious - a key worker could possibly be in direct/ indirect contact with hundreds if not thousands of people per day - even if tested once a week that's still an awful lot of time for transmission. I don't know how many people are still working but it must be in the millions - so testing once per week isn't viable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
