Lons
Established Member
Droogs":23a52ge4 said:
I didn't know Droogs, I've never been involved in the military and hadn't done any research just wrongly assumed there would be enlisted medical staff.
I know better now though so thanks for that.
Hancock's Half Hour
- Thread starter Chris152
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
I didn't know Droogs, I've never been involved in the military and hadn't done any research just wrongly assumed there would be enlisted medical staff.
I know better now though so thanks for that.
All true … but (and it is a huge "but"), I don't think that anyone can seriously doubt that the mil. med. services are infinitely better managed than NHS personnel and being military, flexibility and adaptability belong to their defining characteristics. I would also suggest that while they are not specifically trained for hospital service (although I believe that they do attachments to A & E departments), they are fluent in the "language" of medical care and it would take very few NHS pers (and as you point out there are enough of those with some military experience) per military unit to very rapidly get them up and running.Droogs":2nohj8rn said:
I also find it hard to imagine that there is a fundamentally massive difference between a military hospital in e.g. Afghanistan and a typical NHS Hospital. Sterile is sterile whatever the medical facility. I can't imagine it taking a trained medic too long to adapt from treating battle casualties to dealing with infected and infectious patients. I reckon that there would be voices from the higher echelons of the NHS talking up the difficulties of such a step but that would be because they have an interest in making it look as if they are uniquely capable of doing certain things.
In any event, the idea of the Nightingale Hospitals in a pandemic is surely an excellent one. There has been widespread reporting that normal NHS treatment has ground to a halt because of the pandemic. Surely it would have been better to get the Nightingales up and running with a number of NHS personnel detached to them to work with the mil meds so that all covid cases could have been sent directly there and all the while normal treatment would have carried on in NHS hospitals, possibly at lower rates of activity but nonetheless still in action. I think that has to be the default plan for any future pandemic.
We will have to wait for the results of an enquiry/review of what has happened but I'd be amazed if NHS management and Whitehall didn't come out of it looking very bad indeed. (Actually I wouldn't be surprised because there are enough tw*ts in the establishment prepared to stifle the truth in any crisis.)
You might be mixing me up with the people you have been rowing with. I haven't got involved in those disputes and haven't actually got a strong view one way of the other of being in your company.Rorschach":3e8wnr1q said:
FWIW I think that it is very hard to judge the "tone" in which things are said on the internet, so you get people getting very hot and bothered about people with whom they would probably get on in real life. I'd be surprised if that didn't apply to you and your critics.
Andy Kev.":3rqt7ig5 said:
I don't doubt that its well run, most of the public sector is despite the flak it gets (and the private sector largely hides from behind lesser transparency requirements). It is helped by having £500m to spend on primary care and management (with the NHS providing the secondary care budget) and a much higher staff
atient ratio than in the NHS. No begrudging any of that from me. .gov.uk":3rqt7ig5 said:
That's not far off 1:10, whereas the NHS is more like 1:45.
It seems to me that two aspects of the NHS have to be considered quite separately. One is the actual medical treatment, which generally seems to be pretty good and can probably hold its head up amongst the medical services of all developed nations.
The other is the management/organisation/logistics/procurement which like much of the public sector seems to be capable of improvement (to put it mildly). The private sector tends to be different in that if e.g someone signs a contract for the supply of bog rolls at prices greatly in excess of what it would cost to buy them from the supermarket, that person's head is highly likely to roll.
As for crisis management, it might even make sense to say, "OK, we don't demand this of the NHS, so we'll develop a contingency plan based on lessons learned from this pandemic and task and equip the mil. med. services with initial implementation with a view to quickly establishing a hybrid NHS/mil set up. No role for NHS Managers but NHS doctors to take the lead in clinical matters."
One of the beauties of such an approach is that this rapid response would be regularly exercised by the forces - they like doing exercises. We would end up with a ready-to-go response with the NHS only having to bother about what it is good at i.e. clinical treatment.
Incidentally, you may have missed my invitation on p 40 of this thread to you to provide some sort of evidence for your assertions about Toby Young.
The other is the management/organisation/logistics/procurement which like much of the public sector seems to be capable of improvement (to put it mildly). The private sector tends to be different in that if e.g someone signs a contract for the supply of bog rolls at prices greatly in excess of what it would cost to buy them from the supermarket, that person's head is highly likely to roll.
As for crisis management, it might even make sense to say, "OK, we don't demand this of the NHS, so we'll develop a contingency plan based on lessons learned from this pandemic and task and equip the mil. med. services with initial implementation with a view to quickly establishing a hybrid NHS/mil set up. No role for NHS Managers but NHS doctors to take the lead in clinical matters."
One of the beauties of such an approach is that this rapid response would be regularly exercised by the forces - they like doing exercises. We would end up with a ready-to-go response with the NHS only having to bother about what it is good at i.e. clinical treatment.
Incidentally, you may have missed my invitation on p 40 of this thread to you to provide some sort of evidence for your assertions about Toby Young.
Jake":1dchc6oq said:
That number is way off the mark, a large proportion of military doctors and nurses work within the NHS during peacetime. A family member is currently being treated by a surgeon who is a Lt. Col in an NHS hospital and we have lots of RN doctors and particularly nurses here too.
rafezetter
Troll Hunter
Rorschach":12f4ohim said:
TB - I'm pretty sure every tax payer has skin in the game; do I need to elaborate any more ?
However rorschach's "still wrong " streak is alive and well.
As a self employed person who's entire business is inside peoples homes, so far I have lost about £4,000 in revenue not to mention eating into my hard sacrifice savings (no holidays for years, and scant few takeaways or nights out, last year I had maybe 4 or 5 "nights out" where I went to the cinema then had a cheap meal someplace after) ; yet as you have noticed I've been very vocal about keeping the lockdown.
I'm probably down by about £6,000 so far - peanuts for most people I'm sure, but for me this year was going to be my best, most profitable year, and while I'm not dead yet, the pickup will be slower, because there's going to be less money around for the kind of work I do.
As for the lockdown "not working" I'm pretty certain there are people who have recently contracted C19 in Leicester who would disagree.
Eaten any Walkers Crisps recently rorschach?
It's also interesting that you say "Their jobs will either continue after this is over, while they complain about how awful the country is now after lockdown"....
Because iirc not so long ago you said how the lockdown was causing all manner of doom and gloom and jobs and businesses the world over are all going to collapse around thier ears and this was the reason why the lockdown should be lifted wholesale.
As MikeG said - regularly your posts aren't even consistent with EACH OTHER.
It's clear that you seemingly understand that BOTH are true (I could be wrong), but you only ever make posts giving ONE SIDE of that equation, whichever one fits the agenda of that post.
rafezetter
Troll Hunter
Chris152":y831e1p2 said:
Yes.
I think l that rorschach beleives that the entire human race will contract C19 at some point in the coming months / next year and that it's a complete inevitability we can't do ANYTHING about.
I'm pretty sure "resigning to the fate of a pandemic" ceased when medical science realised that vaccines were an actual thing that worked; googe-fu says "in 1796 by Edward Jenner for Smallpox" - so err 224 years ago. Yeah. I'm shaking my head here too why rorschach thinks modern medicine isn't up to the task.
Maybe he hasn't heard of them, maybe "rorschach" is actually several different people making conflicting posts; which would go some way towards explaining his (her/they/them?) constant vassilating on the subject or he's just being argumentative for teh lulz, I honestly can't tell anymore.
rafezetter
Troll Hunter
Rorschach":2qjzqn8p said:
Oh wow - where do I even begin?
1 - didn't become a danger BECAUSE OF THE LOCKDOWN.
2 - "not a big deal" well depends on who you ask, ask MikeG (if he wasn't ignoring you), he's got some choice words for you, but in general "BECAUSE OF LOCKDOWN" is the defacto answer here, there and pretty much every other place as well.
3 - Italy may well be "open for tourism" - but then Leicester was "open for business" and look what happened there just this week.
4 - NZ no longer C19 free - much to the embarassment of the PM
5 - I'm pretty certain that once tourism starts up again en masse, there will be more outbreaks - I'd like to be wrong, but you know "coz people being people" is a pretty safe bet.
What's your comments on the Leicester situation rorschach - what's your comments going to be if one of those people dies as a result?
Maybe I'll point a member of the family in your direction and you can have a face to face with the relative of someone who died needlessly from C19 because you think the lockdown is a waste of time. That would be interesting to watch.
I saw this on Fb earlier, and thought it pretty sobering.
Imagine you were born in 1900.
When you're 14, World War I begins and ends when you're 18 with 22 million dead.
Soon after a global pandemic, the Spanish Flu, appears, killing 50 million people. And you're alive and 20 years old.
When you're 29 you survive the global economic crisis that started with the collapse of the New York Stock Exchange, causing inflation, unemployment and famine.
When you're 33 years old the nazis come to power.
When you're 39, World War II begins and ends when you're 45 years old with a 60 million dead. In the Holocaust 6 million Jews die.
When you're 52, the Korean War begins.
When you're 64, the Vietnam War begins and ends when you're 75.
A child born in 1985 thinks his grandparents have no idea how difficult life is, but they have survived several wars and catastrophes.
Today we have all the comforts in a new world, amid a new pandemic. But we complain because we need to wear masks. We complain because we must stay confined to our homes where we have food, electricity, running water, wifi, even Netflix! None of that existed back in the day. But humanity survived those circumstances and never lost their joy of living.
A small change in our perspective can generate miracles. We should be thankful that we are alive. We should do everything we need to do to protect and help each other.
Imagine you were born in 1900.
When you're 14, World War I begins and ends when you're 18 with 22 million dead.
Soon after a global pandemic, the Spanish Flu, appears, killing 50 million people. And you're alive and 20 years old.
When you're 29 you survive the global economic crisis that started with the collapse of the New York Stock Exchange, causing inflation, unemployment and famine.
When you're 33 years old the nazis come to power.
When you're 39, World War II begins and ends when you're 45 years old with a 60 million dead. In the Holocaust 6 million Jews die.
When you're 52, the Korean War begins.
When you're 64, the Vietnam War begins and ends when you're 75.
A child born in 1985 thinks his grandparents have no idea how difficult life is, but they have survived several wars and catastrophes.
Today we have all the comforts in a new world, amid a new pandemic. But we complain because we need to wear masks. We complain because we must stay confined to our homes where we have food, electricity, running water, wifi, even Netflix! None of that existed back in the day. But humanity survived those circumstances and never lost their joy of living.
A small change in our perspective can generate miracles. We should be thankful that we are alive. We should do everything we need to do to protect and help each other.
Attachments
Terry - Somerset
Established Member
Being a pragmatist rather than a dreamer I prefer debates to be informed by facts and data, not subject to guesses, opinions, bias etc.
There is clear evidence that CV-19 has a normal transmission rate of 2.5-3.0. At the start of the outbreak before lockdown the number of infected was doubling every 3 days. Asserting that somehow it has run its course and there is now no more risk is profoundly complacent or foolish or ignorant.
Suggesting that there is no threat to the NHS does not bear any scrutiny. Public dismay at the events in care homes would be trivial compared to the consequences of the NHS being overwhelmed.
The virus impacts particularly on the elderly and vulnerable. Those who are younger and healthier have very much less severe symptoms (generally). We do not have perfect knowledge by any means - but relying upon personal bias and guesswork does not help identify a solution.
We use knowledge to define the future strategy to combat the virus, and minimise economic damage. At the extremes:
- back to business as usual - let it rip - get through it and over it
- lockdown maintained - unaffordable and/or unreasonable burden
For communities or societies to work either policies need to have a balanced regard for all groups, or a police state or dictatorship prevails and enforces policy.
I prefer the former which demands tolerance of differing views. Whilst personally I may find the idea of care homes (gods waiting room) and all they entail repugnant, I fully accept my views are not universally shared. Equally if I go back 40 years I would fully understand the dilemma facing young adults who are quite likely at the start of career, family, financially stretched etc.
The policies adopted MUST have some regard for the needs of both groups!
There is clear evidence that CV-19 has a normal transmission rate of 2.5-3.0. At the start of the outbreak before lockdown the number of infected was doubling every 3 days. Asserting that somehow it has run its course and there is now no more risk is profoundly complacent or foolish or ignorant.
Suggesting that there is no threat to the NHS does not bear any scrutiny. Public dismay at the events in care homes would be trivial compared to the consequences of the NHS being overwhelmed.
The virus impacts particularly on the elderly and vulnerable. Those who are younger and healthier have very much less severe symptoms (generally). We do not have perfect knowledge by any means - but relying upon personal bias and guesswork does not help identify a solution.
We use knowledge to define the future strategy to combat the virus, and minimise economic damage. At the extremes:
- back to business as usual - let it rip - get through it and over it
- lockdown maintained - unaffordable and/or unreasonable burden
For communities or societies to work either policies need to have a balanced regard for all groups, or a police state or dictatorship prevails and enforces policy.
I prefer the former which demands tolerance of differing views. Whilst personally I may find the idea of care homes (gods waiting room) and all they entail repugnant, I fully accept my views are not universally shared. Equally if I go back 40 years I would fully understand the dilemma facing young adults who are quite likely at the start of career, family, financially stretched etc.
The policies adopted MUST have some regard for the needs of both groups!
Chris152":3klr54px said:
You make some very good points in your post Chris but it would be remiss of me not to point this out. Almost as many non-Jews were killed in the holocaust, best estimates today are at 11 million total deaths (of which approx 6 million were Jews). We do the world a great disservice to not acknowledge this.
With ref to Chris's FB quote above: on the one hand we need to learn from history but on the other people who have been through difficult times want their children and grandchildren to have easier lives.
The problem seems to be that for many people enjoying easy lives (the vast majority) there is an incomprehension of history or an unwillingness or inability to learn from it.
One of the reasons I'm bothered about the kind of people who seem to have hijacked the BLM movement (probably mostly from SWP-type organisations and Momentum) is that any perusal of 20th century history shows that in moral, ethical and democratic terms you can't get a piece of paper between them and Hitler's brownshirts in the 30s. I realise that for many that will be an outrageous assertion but one only has to read the books.
The bottom line is that extremism coupled to the will to forbid is a very bad thing indeed and the target for a civilised, democratic society has to be tolerance of the views of others. As that French bloke had it, "I may not agree with what you say but I am prepared to defend to the death your right to say it". If you can't or won't sign up to that, I find you worrying.
(The "you" is directed at no one individual on here but is meant generally.)
The problem seems to be that for many people enjoying easy lives (the vast majority) there is an incomprehension of history or an unwillingness or inability to learn from it.
One of the reasons I'm bothered about the kind of people who seem to have hijacked the BLM movement (probably mostly from SWP-type organisations and Momentum) is that any perusal of 20th century history shows that in moral, ethical and democratic terms you can't get a piece of paper between them and Hitler's brownshirts in the 30s. I realise that for many that will be an outrageous assertion but one only has to read the books.
The bottom line is that extremism coupled to the will to forbid is a very bad thing indeed and the target for a civilised, democratic society has to be tolerance of the views of others. As that French bloke had it, "I may not agree with what you say but I am prepared to defend to the death your right to say it". If you can't or won't sign up to that, I find you worrying.
(The "you" is directed at no one individual on here but is meant generally.)
doctor Bob
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 5,171
- Reaction score
- 1,881
Chris152":1gp890us said:
Where did you get that from? Do you think everyone aged 35 or younger doesn't know 2 world wars happened? Most of the people I know aged 35 and under went to school and were taught history and know these things. Most of your posts Chris are very good but this is just facebook nonsense.
It was the general sentiment of the post that I thought was good, Bob - not whether a detail like that was accurate. And tbh, while both my parents were alive in WW2, I haven't really got a clue how bad their experience of it was. For me, it was a few tales about doodlebugs and the sounds of bombs landing. And dad cruising about in the North Sea. They didn't talk about it much. I don't think most of us today, under or over 35, have much of a clue. Maybe that's just my experience tho.doctor Bob":9okdn2h8 said:
Lons
Established Member
I learned about them during history lessons and from my parents and grandparents Bob but that's a totally different thing to being involved in them. Of course younger people know they happened but the further away in time they get the less important they seem to be to later generations.doctor Bob":3k3qzlff said:
I didn't read Chris's post as that they literally didn't know about them and doubt he would have meant it that way.
Have you had a bad day Bob? You seem a bit grumpy. :wink:
EDIT My post crossed with your reply Chris and that's what I see as well.
Just because those of us living now didn't suffer in the same way as our parents/grandparents doesn't lessen or invalidate the suffering we are going through now.
If you go with that logic you could say our grandparents shouldn't complain because they didn't live through the civil war or the black death or the Roman occupation. We can learn and empathise with history, but it doesn't lessen the problems of the present.
If you go with that logic you could say our grandparents shouldn't complain because they didn't live through the civil war or the black death or the Roman occupation. We can learn and empathise with history, but it doesn't lessen the problems of the present.
doctor Bob
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Jun 2011
- Messages
- 5,171
- Reaction score
- 1,881
Come on chaps, everyone knows that the current generation has it easy. Crikey when I was growing up in the 70's I knew it was easy compared with the 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's, christ they didn't even have flares, choppers or tape recorders. Like wise my son knows how tough the 70's were as I've told him about black and white TV, and neighbours coming to our house to use our telephone because we were right posh , Don't be going posting facebook rubbish or I shall start calling Chris "Karen".
, Don't be going posting facebook rubbish or I shall start calling Chris "Karen".
Andy Kev.":2bmpv719 said:
"That French bloke" actually didn't say it.
- Status
Similar threads
