jeanmark

FrancesB1, unless you take your iPad everywhere with you, it wouldn't be of use even if you had the app. It is your phone it tracks not you as an individual.

Bev1707, although I hate to defend this government it isn't them that set the parameters for the operating systems, its Apple and Google that do that. Remember, this app runs in the background at all times and thus users a lot of the systems resources. It may affect other processes you are trying to complete or even stop working completely, if you are doing something particularly demanding with your phone. If it was left to the government, no one would have smartphones as they do not like anything smarter than them!

Until everyone and I mean everyone, understands this is a problem for us all and that we need to be aware of how our own actions can have an adverse effect on others, no amount of restrictions will work. However, both Prof Witty, Chief Medical Officer for England and the UK government's Chief Medical Adviser and Prof Vallance, the Government Chief Scientific Adviser jointly recommended a total lockdown of two weeks (14 days), this was rejected. Both professors believed It would have allowed the virus to slow down and an effective track and trace system to catch up, thereby enabling control of the virus. Then the economy could be re-started under full scrutiny.

A nod and a wink via the 'old boy' network Viking, it was all private companies and definitely not cheap. It did not even go out to tender!

Well Yodama, I do agree with the rest of your comment as it is unclear what system they are using. As to test and trace, whilst they insist on paying millions to private companies that have no experience of such an area, we will not have an efficient system in place. Keep safe Yodama.

Sorry Yodama, it is not the flu virus, both are contagious respiratory illnesses, but they are caused by different viruses. COVID-19 is caused by infection with a new coronavirus (called SARS-CoV-2) and flu is caused by infection with influenza viruses. On average 7,000 people die from flu each year, to date there have been over 41,000 from Covid this year. Far from being alarmist, the statistics are as accurate as they can as they are reported daily to a central database. Only time will tell the actual toll from the disease.

The problem is swaneldo, there are a number of people who may know they have been in contact with a positive person, they could be asymptomatic but remain infectious. I appreciate there are the "worried well" who will want to be tested even when they haven't knowingly been in contact with anyone infected. It is the system that is at fault. Maybe they shouldn't have paid millions to private companies to deliver a service they had no experience of! By the way, at the moment there is no evidence to suggest you become immune to the virus, that was confirmed today by Professor Witty during his Covid-19 update. I'm like you, I will use my common sense and keep away from as many people as possible.

With regard to the Rule of 6, a friend posted this yesterday and mirror my own thought. "So the government are encouraging you to report your neighbours if they don’t follow the new rule of 6. Before following this advice you should really consider the fact the government won’t be there to help you jump start your car or lend you tools if you needed it. They won’t be an extra set of eyes to watch your property if you are away. They won’t keep an eye on your kids if they are playing in the street and someone strange is hanging around. We need each other, it’s how we get by and live in peace because at the end of the day they won’t be standing there on your door step to help you out when s**t gets real. Asking you to report people in your community is a scummy thing to do and it shows their mentality to be dishonest. All of them are the biggest law breakers and abusers in the country".

Thank you Lionel, plus I agree, what a state of affairs indeed.

I'm not sure I had any thoughts on where I would end up. I was born and raised in Norfolk and moved to Lincolnshire to start my nurse training. At the time of my training, you were expected to give your training hospital at leat a years service once qualified, after a year I moved to Oxfordshire purely to compete a post-grad course in Accident and Emergency Nursing with the intention of leaving once completed. That never happened, I was offered a post that sounded interesting and after two years I met my husband (rather a shock to my parents as I had never intended to marry), as a result all of my varied career from that point forward remained in the one city. A beautiful old university city that I never really liked, but living with a man I adore. Fortunately, we moved to a nearby village 30 years ago and here I will stay until I get called to a higher - or lower - pasture!

Well Lionel, you are being very kind to think our leader actually has intelligence and even any interest in the result of his actions. As long as he gets what he wants, he is happy!

I have to agree Lionel, too much money is being made by people who have no social or moral conscience. My great niece, a front line worker, has just tested positive, and what a surprise, none of her family are able to get a test. This includes my sister and my brother-in-law, despite him being high on the 'at risk' list. My great niece is devastated that she has no way of knowing if she may have infected them.

Lionel, I understand your confusion but many people refuse to wear masks in enclosed public spaces. My step-granddaughter is responsible for standing at the door of the shop and garden centre where she works (usually as an events organiser). At 25 she has been incredible shocked at being swore at, spate at and threatened with violence when she tries to enforce the rule. Sadly all by older men who should know better. This behaviour isn't isolated as many shop workers would testify to. We've seen marchers where people believe their human rights are being contravened by the rule to wear a mask. That is one of the reasons we continue to have a problem I have to add that if we had a competent government that gave clear instructions we may also manage things better.

Viking that is the point, they have only used private companies that have financial connections with the Conservative party i.e. finical donations to the party, nepotism and friends of MP's and the Lords. None of these things were put out to tender, which is a requirement for every other major government spend!

Interesting Arono and on the assumption you are referring to the Covid-19 strain of the virus how do you come to that figure. When you ask what you chances are of dying from the virus, the experts say how difficult the question is to answer. Have you used Case Fatality Rate, Crude Mortality Rate or Infection Fatality Rate, as all will give a different answer?

Well said Lionel and I do believe it's a modern day case of heroes led by donkeys...

The problem is people believe this is run by the NHS but it is actually run by private companies. The contact tracers are employed by Serco, who were paid £108 million for the first phase of the work, up to late August. The call centre is operated by American specialists Sitel, who were paid £84m for a similar period. All components – administering tests, processing samples in laboratories, and contact tracing – are contracted to private companies. Multinational consultants Deloitte handle testing logistics, including collection of statistics, and in turn appointed outsourcing companies Serco, Mitie, G4S and Sodexo, together with the Boots pharmacy chain, to run drive-through or walk-in test centres. There was already an experienced system in Public Health, but they chose to ignore that, instead giving money to private companies with no experience of Trace and Track. Some European countries also had a tried and tested system but that was ignored in favour of paying private companies to develop our own. A single mother with a young child developed symptoms and was told to travel 100 miles to a test centre, even though she explained she didn't drive. She was just told to ask someone to drive her!

KayT4, surely we are doing them no favours by enchroaching into their environment with the constant building into these areas. We then blame them for having to adapt to the changes.

Actually Viking if you had read my comments correctly I was stating what doctors put on a Medical Certificate for cause of death as a general rule and not in relation to the present climate. This was in defence of comments made that implied doctors lie on these legal documents just to screw figures relating to Covid-19. For example, if someone has been living with someone who died from Covid-19, developed the symptoms of the virus and then died from these, it is a reasonable to consider Covid-19 as the cause of death, if there is no other known cause at that time. However, If someone dies as the result of trauma caused by a car accident, that is what would be on the certificate, Covid-19 would not be mentioned.

Sorry Viking but 'exacerbation' of an illness is not semantics but an actual diagnosis for chronic conditions and would be legitimate to write on a medical certificate for contributing to cause of death. Thus writing such is not 'taking the easy and quick way', these are legal documents and the completion is taken seriously by those signing. I agree that I hope neither of us experience further deaths of friends in the near future and be prevented from attending their funeral.

Well Viking, I've had 5 friends die in the last three months and only one didn't require a post mortem but the certificate did state Covid-19 as the second cause, as the first cause had been exacerbated by the virus and thus death occurred earlier than would have been expected. The other 4 died of heart attacks or strokes. Doctors are required to certify causes of death “to the best of their knowledge and belief”. It has to be remembered that deaths are required by law to be registered within 5 days of their occurrence unless there is to be a coroner’s post mortem or an inquest. How many times have you known doctors to DELIBERATELY LIE on a medical certificate for cause of death, excluding doctors like Shipman of course?

In the UK there are many cases where the cause of death will be known and the certificate can be issued by the doctor and a post mortem wouldn't be necessary. However, a hospital doctor can request one if unclear about an illness or cause of death and a post-mortem will always be carried out if it's been requested by a coroner when the cause of death is unknown, or following a sudden, violent or unexpected death.

Duvet, my response related to your assertion that doctors were basically lying on death certificates about cause of death. I was stating what is actually written on death certificates. In relation to Covid-19 and deaths the World Health Organisation COVID-19 Case and Death definitions recognise that countries have varying approaches to COVID-19 case definitions. They therefore recommend using the surveillance case definitions which are available in the WHO interim guidance on Global surveillance for COVID-19. "A COVID-19 death is defined for surveillance purposes as a death resulting from a clinically compatible illness in a probable or confirmed COVID-19 case, unless there is a clear alternative cause of death that cannot be related to COVID-19 disease (e.g. trauma). There should be no period of complete recovery between the illness and death". Post Mortems continue to be carried out for deaths were cause can not be identified, unexpected death, trauma, siucide etc. as per Coroners instruction. As kidney failure can be the result of Covid-19, particularly if a young person had no previous symptoms of kidney disease, it should not come as a surprise that a doctor could easily make a Covid-19 diagnosis in an otherwise healthy young girl, without assuming he/she lied!

Duvet, what ever makes you thing that? A Death Certificate states the main cause of death and then other contributing factors which may include Covid-19. A Post Mortem would be carried out routinely if a cause can not be established or if the dearth was sudden and unexpected.

I so agree with you monzaV.

I agree Ykennedy, but those of us who fell into the category of requiring shielding took it seriously to protect ourselves, not because we were 'ordered' to. How can you blame a police force that is under resourced for not taking action when they do not even have enough staff for more serious crimes let alone confront a group of youth who are flouting the 'rules'. As you have already pointed out, shielding is not mandatory, well neither is everything else this government chooses to give 'advice'. Many are left wondering what we should be doing, as even this Prime Minister's U turns have had U turns. Also, those in authority who believe they are above the law should be brought to account, but when the leader of the country chooses to protect them, what can the police do? We all have a responsibility to try and reduce the spread of this virus and not just rely on the authorities to do it for us. Maybe re-close pubs, restaurants, public events etc. go back to having only essential shops open. Take away the very things the young rely on to try and make them understand the seriousness of the situation, rather than letting them believe they are immune because of age. I realise the economy is suffering badly, but you can rebuild an economy, you can not raise the dead!

Approximately 2 years ago my Health Practice introduced a system by which you could not book a GP appointment over the phone (you are instructed to phone 999 for an emergency). Instead, a GP phones you back within 2 hours for a telephone consultation, if the GP feels you need to be seen, he/she then books an appointment and you are always guaranteed a face to face consult the dame day. This has cut face to face consults by 80% giving more time for those who do need to be seen. Practice Nurse and Health Care Assistant appointments are made in the usual way.

I do understand peoples reluctance, particularly when listening to non experts telling people how harmful they are, but vaccination isn't just to protect the individual from a specific disease but to help the community as a whole, in particular those people unable to be vaccinated because of underlying problems. Vaginal mesh is a totally different argument, although I agree not all doctors have taken that problem seriously enough. Also Thalidomide is not a good example. This was originally intended as a sedative or tranquiliser, but soon began being used for other problems. One of the side effects found it helped with morning sickness, but the drug had not been tested on foetuses and should never have been used for that purpose. People should have a choice in general but I believe if it is something that helps protect the people as a whole, choice may not be an option if many do not want to comply.

Sorry the truth67, not all infectious diseases were the result of improved sanitation etc. it helped but wasn't the only solution. Smallpox was eradicated because of a world wide vaccination programme, not environmental changes. No, vaccines are not risk free, but then neither is paracetamol and other such medicines. The three vaccines making up MMR were introduced in 1971 and has been very successfully with serious sides effects being very rare. Over 500 million doses have been used in over 100 countries around the world since its introduction and the World Health Organisation recognises it as a highly effective vaccine with an outstanding safety record (WHO, 2001). There will always be those rare occasion what someone is harmed but that could be said for any medicine by any route.

Unfortunately Not2grey, education and persuasion hasn't helped so far.

I know the Jenner Institute and have great faith in their vaccine development work. Under normal circumstances vaccines can take time to develop, however, these are not normal circumstances. Pandemics do not give the luxury of time when so many people continue to die and the Jenner Institute began work on the vaccine in January this year. Their research on Covid-19 can be accessed at www.ox.ac.uk

Thalidomide is the wrong example. This was originally intended as a sedative or tranquiliser, but soon began being used for other problems. One of the side effects found it helped with morning sickness, but the drug had never ever been tested on foetuses and should never have been used for that purpose. It is still in use today for certain conditions but only licensed to be used by specific named doctors.

Sorry tetty137, where did your information from? Very severe reactions may cause breathing problems but they are very rare and usually occur within minutes or very soon after receiving the vaccine.

I'm also vulnerable and have been receiving the jab for many years and never suffered any untoward effects. The effects of developing the viral strain that may hit is far worse. Being vaccinated it also helps protect those who are unable to receive the vaccine.

Well as 95% of population have to be vaccinated to get herd immunity I believe it should be mandatory to protect those who are unable to be vaccinated. The present vaccine is being well tested, work began on a vaccine in January 2020 and during the Phase I/II trial the vaccine has been evaluated in more than 1,000 healthy adult volunteers aged between 18 and 55 years in a randomised controlled trial. Between April 23, 2020 and May 21, 2020, 1077 volunteers, received the vaccine or a placebo and there were no serious adverse health events related to it (www.ox.ac.uk). With such a virulent virus, you do not have the luxury of taking years to develop a vaccine. Maybe you should try ready the research from the Jenner Institute, after all we all know what Jenner achieved.

I agree as you have to have 95% of a population vaccinated to produce herd immunity. This then protects those people who are unable to be vaccinated because of underlying conditions.

Latest research from Oxford University suggests they benefit both the user and others. It is believed that the release of the findings of this study prompted the introduction of them in shops!

I apologise as I had no intention of appearing patronisingly superior, but neither did I see your thread explaining your experience. I to have many years experience of infection control but in the field of Infectious Diseases, Tropical Medicine and HIV at a senior level.. I'm also aware of the recent Oxford study that has demonstrated there is evidence that mask and face coverings may help reduce the risk of transmission of this particular virus. WHO and other professional organisations now believe there may be a benefit in trying to control its spread. I believe any small way that may help is better than ignoring expert advise. There is still so much to learn about this strain of the virus that advise will change as more understanding emerges, in the mean time we can only try and use everything we can to protect ourselves and others. In my experience a mask is one way of reminding people of a problem and as such they do take care.

TrudyLS, I'm well aware of how face masks work and their purpose. For Covid-19 it is a risk reducing measure but if there are a number of people who refuse to comply, then they are putting others at risk, including their own family. Many scientist have agreed on the benefits of wearing masks, maybe if you took the time to read the research, which is well conducted, you may realise this. It appears a little confusing to make a sweeping statement that no scientist has agree to the wearing of face masks during a pandemic but not take the trouble to read recent research relating to that very subject.

TrudyLS, read 'Oxford Covid-19 study - face masks and coverings work - act now' published 8 July 2020 www.ox.ac.uk This does recommend the use of masks and/or face coverings.