jeanmark

chari, like you I have yet to have anyone explain to me exactly what benefits there are now we have left the EU. Call me a cynic but I recognise that those with off shore accounts have now avoided having to pay tax on their money, and of course, this includes the very people in charge of our country who also pushed Brexit through. It appears that people like farmers and fishermen may not get the benefits they were expecting. Well you reap what you sow...

Fortunately Celtictaf, I only had to teach student nurses in specific subjects that related to my specialist field of nursing, this gave me a great deal of control over content.

Thank you Purplehat, fortunately I am very strong willed and despite my school experiences I had a long and satisfying career that included professional qualifications and gaining a degree. I continue to hate numbers! .

Sorry Yodama, I just have no confidence in a Prime Minister who makes a living out of lying and when everything he does is for his own the benefit. He will take the credit for others successes and blame anyone but himself for things that do not go to plan. His school report from Eton stated that he showed that he believes he should be praised for everything but shows no abilities for anything or take responsibility for his actions.

PurpleHat, I agree on the alphabet but as to numbers, they never trained my brain, just froze it. I spent most of my schools years dreading any math lesson, loosing sleep the night before as you were always made to feel a failure if you couldn't grasp certain aspects of the subject with maths teachers ignoring you if you were a little slower than the rest. I have managed this far to cope with everyday numbers and no longer worry what people, think, other than make sure others do not suffer as I did. We all have a strengths and weaknesses, mine is the latter but I have many of the former!

I am sure as a Republican you will never see their worth but they are paid for the work they do for the country and the Queen voluntarily also pays tax. In 2018 it is estimated the Royals brought in £430 million more than they cost us that year. Do we mind paying them, no we do not as they earn that money. Incidentally, Princess Diana did do charity work for people, her involvement with HIV and The National Aids Trust are well known, plus her work in supporting Centrepoint, The English National Ballet, Great Ormond Street Children's Hospital, The Leprosy Mission and The Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Trust! What makes you think she was instructed to only work for animal charities?

Actually that's not totally accurate - fact check: "One of the first things we've done on day one is get rid of pulse trawling" Pulse trawling, which involves the use of an electric current to force fish off the seabed making them easier to catch, was indeed banned in UK waters on 1 January 2021. But France and Belgium - both EU member states - had already outlawed the practice in their territorial waters (which stretch up to 12 nautical miles from the coast). The UK could have done the same when it was still a member of the EU. An EU-wide ban was also passed into law in June 2019 and is due to come into full effect on 1 July 2021. Pulse fishing has become less common over the past few decades in EU waters. There were eight vessels - seven from the Netherlands and one from the UK - using the technique in UK waters between January 2019 and June 2020, according to ocean conservation charity the Blue Marine Foundation. Four were fishing within UK territorial waters and therefore could have been banned by the UK, before it left the EU. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/55522329?fbclid=IwAR3m_qPrtMVWiRh3W6BLqoywZmZj3CER_rlGSBP0U0eyJ_5nyfAQjufAugs

Mine is always not to set a New Years Resolution. I see no point in setting yourself goals you know you won't reach!

TerryH57, I appreciate where you are coming from but there is education regarding family planning and conception in many regions, However, it shouldn't be assumed that all women have control over their bodies and can thus reduce pregnancies. It takes two to help reduce pregnancies how ever well educated you are about the subject...

Ariadne, they probably recognise it isn't nonsense...

I nursed many a person who believed that - what a surprise when they found themselves in hospital!

Surfer Pete, that is the problem, they can't stop people who choose to break the rules. That is why we still have a problem. If people decide to do their own thing, that is there choice, but will they remain in isolation for 14 days following Christmas to prevent them infecting anyone else? It only takes one person who is asymptomatic but infectious, to allow the virus to continue spreading. The rules are to protect us all not just certain individuals.

Ariadne, how sad that you are unable to give the rationale for you decision to belong to the anti-vaccination movement, other than to state your mother was once ill following a flu jab. I gave an explanation as to why I believe vaccination programmes are important and your response - get back up on your soap box. I assume you are unable to give a rational answer for our stance...

Ariadne, it appears your response to my comments relating to the above ave not been put on this page. But having received a copy this is how I respond to that. The term 'Herd' is used in Infectious disease management to describe a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached. It is used as a way of stopping the spread, its aim is to protect people from a virus, not by exposing them to it. Other terms are community or population immunity but most people usually understand the term 'herd' without interpreting as a negative term. You are right that as an adult we tend to have freedom of choice. However, a whole community should not be put at risk by an individual choice. You may wish to follow the anti-vaccine movement, but I'm a realist not an idealist. There is plenty of proof for the benefit of vaccination, a simple example is the eradication of smallpox. As to lockdown, this only works if everyone complies, but we have all seen those who decide to make their own choices and ignore the rules, or deny there is such a things as a virus. As of today there are 1/2 million active case in the UK alone so logically the masses can be infected by the few. You have accused me of being an idealist but as already stated I am a realist, but then my knowledge of disease control is based on working and managing an Infectious Disease Unit for a number of years. I have no idea where yours comes from. Incidentally, Covid-19 is a respiratory virus with transmission being through person to person contact and through direct contact with respiratory droplets. There is currently no evidence that people can catch Covid-19 from food or food packaging - or from drinking tap water.

I apologise Ariadne, it was not my intention to sound aggressive. I have to disagree with the belief that bodies heal themselves, there are many times a body will not heal itself. As to your not wanting to be part of a herd, that;s your choice but do you leave your house? Also, did you never receive any vaccinations as a child, what about polio, diphtheria, rubella. to name but a few, all of which benefitted us all with herd immunity. A worldwide vaccination programme wiped out smallpox. You may have been healthy year after year but that does not mean you are immune, just lucky, it only takes one thing like a virus to change all of that. I accept the Covid-19 vaccine is too early for the news media and our Health Minster to celebrate a miracle.

Ariadne, because of the constant evolving nature of influenza viruses (as with other viruses), it is continuously monitored and the annual flu jab is based the predicted strain for that year. This prediction is for the most virulent strain for that year. Any vaccine that is developed understands mutation, it is not quite as simple as "it changes therefore the vaccine won't work". Vaccination programmes are not just to protect an individual, it also serves to protect the community, hence the term 'herd immunity'. But herd immunity only works if the majority of people are vaccinated and thus those people who are unable to receive vaccines because of underlying problems are protected. If a large number of people choose not to be vaccinated they are putting other people at risk who may not be so lucky if they become infected.

TeresaC53, I appreciate that Tony Benn renounced the title he inherited from his father and was a staunch believer in a Republican State. He was certainly strong left wing. However, I was never influenced by his beliefs but admired his principled approach. I remain a supporter of the Monarchy.

Mercury, that's not really accurate, if you have an underlying condition that makes you more vulnerable to Covid-19, become infected with Covid-19 and die as a result, that is a death that is attributed to Covid-19. The fact you know of no-one in your area that has died from Covid-19, thats on the assumption you know the cause of death of everyone in your area, doesn't mean people are not dying from the disease. I assume you are aware that there are many people who were fit and healthy until they caught the virus and died as a result. There are even more who have caught the virus, recovered but are now suffering Long Covid.

TeresaC52, we will never agree on this subject, fortunately I'm not blinkered and can see both sides of the argument but I continue to favour the Monarchy. I agree they have a large number of staff, but many are in ordinary jobs and thus in employment. You can argue this comes out of the public purse but so does the cost of unemployment.

CarolJ73, Thalidomide isn't a good example to use as an objection for a new vaccine. The drug was originally intended as a sedative or tranquilliser, however, it was noted to help with morning sickness, sadly the drug had never been tested for use in pregnancy, that's what led to the tragedies. .

TeresaC53, I actual agree on the first part of your comment regarding the Platinum Anniversary, but also recognise that in these desperate times people do have to have something that is positive to look forward to. However, please do not blame the Royal Family for the present situation with regard to the pandemic, that problem lies mainly with the Government. and not the amount of money paid for the work the Royals do. Yes, we are facing a disastrous future with Brexit on top of a pandemic but that doesn't mean all future celebrations must be avoided. Whether we have a party in 2 years time will not stop the hundreds dying each week until everyone recognises we all have a responsibility in stemming the flow of this virus, money alone will not solve the problem. Also never assume that we do not understand the heartbreak of not being able to be with loved ones at their time of need, or when a lock down prevents you from collecting a loved ones ashes. This situation has nothing to do with the present debate on whether we should abolish the monarchy in favour of a Republican system. You have strong beliefs regarding the purpose of the monarchy but please also understand that many of us do recognise the cost to the country but believe that cost is worth the benefit we, as a country, get from them. The fact you disagree doesn't necessarily mean you must be right on all counts.

TeresaC53, I'm unclear as to why you believe all royals are secretive and corrupt, I'm not aware of any sound evidence to support this. As to the younger generation, I accept that a survey held in 2018 identified that 25% of 18-24 year olds opposed them along with 23% of 25-34 year olds. However, of those supporting the monarchy, 77% were in the over 55 year olds. Maybe the older generation have lived long enough to recognise the Royal Families worth!

Well TeresaC53, having just read your piece from today, I'm sorry but the term 'bigot' comes to mind in this discussion. I am curious as to why you view all members of the royal family with such contempt.

Lionel, I hate the idea of losing our Royal Family, that is why I am glad I will never see their demise in my life time. It is sad that there are those who can not see their value other than in monetary terms, rather than what they represent as part of our countries history.

TeresaC53, I believe we have to agree to disagree, We appear to have different views and experiences of the work of the immediate Royal Family and I for one am happy to have the Queen as a figure head for our country. I do accept that we will eventually have an elected Head of State, but fortunately not during my life time.

Like Lionel I am a staunch royalist and have always seen the benefit to the country in having the Queen. She works incredible hard and does actual pay income tax and capital gains tax, and since 1993 her personal income has been taxable as for any other taxpayer. The Queen has always been subject to Value Added Tax and pays local rates on a voluntary basis. She works for the benefit of the country and thus should be paid for her service. At present the US is a good example of why a democratically elected Head of State may not be in the best interest of the country!

I'm with you there Billythequiche, I have difficulty in understanding those who refuse vaccination for no other reason than their own selfish beliefs or who heard from someone who knew a woman, whose son met a girl, who heard from a friend that someone they knew once had a nasty reaction to a jab! No one should expect to be 'rewarded' for their own part protecting society as a whole.

Butterlump, in all my 47 years in the NHS I never once heard a doctor or any health care individual imply that caring for a terminally ill patient was a waste of time.

MarionH92, herd immunity works if the majority of a population has been vaccinated against a disease and thus protects those who are unable to be vaccinated for what ever reason or have a compromise or weaker immune system. At the moment scientists have not identified clearly if those who have been infected develop immunity, in which case herd immunity will not work. A virus has to have a host to allow it to spread, a 'circuit' breaker would help slow the infection and assist in controlling its spread. It will only work if everyone complies.

Well Valleyman we have something in common, I was nurse for 47 years. You are right, front line nurses do not decide policy, but it is usually senior front line staff that have to try and juggle beds, staff etc. and I have been there. I am well aware of the problems with areas such as cancer treatments but I'm also aware they often then fall into the vulnerable section and are more at risk of contracting the virus if treatment has begun. I also agree the waiting list are unacceptable but trying to play catch up is very difficult when routine and emergency services have to continue. A second wav of the virus was inevitable, the main problem is the way our government has handled the whole situation. You only have to read about Exercise Cygnus in October 2016, to see how they made the decision not to prepare because of cost. I accept this was a simulation for a Flu pandemic the the principles of management are the same. They may now be too late, I understand the economy is vital but without people there will be no economy! A barrier of 2 weeks would hopefully give them time to catch up with the virus and hopefully make it easier to manage.

Valleyman, I think it is a little unfair to say the NHS deserted so many other patients, your family may well work in heath care but do they know how difficult it is to find extra beds where none exist, extra staff where none exist etc? I have two members of my family working at the front line, one in Covid-19 intensive care and often worked a 13 shift as there were no staff available. In such circumstances you have to try and cut the risk to other patients plus deploy staff where the greatest need is at the time. ITU usually requires 1:1 care, many kinds of surgery require ITU beds, and thus have to be canceled, many trauma patients still require immediate ITU care, ITU's within existing hospitals can not just be extended without cutting other services. That is why routine services were reduced, yes it is hard for those who are still waiting, but in our life time, there has never been such a situation that has stretched our already reduced resources to such an extent. Lets not blame the very people who are trying their hardest and many are suffering terribly as a result.

Honestjohn, the government are not interested in the age of your phone. The problem you have with its age, is caused by Apple and Google as they set the parameters for the operating systems. It is worth noting that the app. runs in the background at all times and thus users a lot of the systems resources. Thus an up to date phone is essential. It isn't unusual for software writers not to support older devices when newer versions of devices become available. (Try as I might, I can't get my old VHS collection to play on my blue-ray player at all). If your device cannot support the demands required of it, should software writers have to write a separate application for every version of phone that ever existed, even though they may not contain the correct hardware? As much as I find it abhorrent to support this government, they can not be held responsible for this issue.

Parsnip54, I agree with Viking, many do not have an up to date phone, not all people want anything other than a device that is used as a phone, or able to afford to constantly update it! This government doesn't exactly have a good record of getting things right so maybe some peoples scepticism should be excused. I also understand that not everyone is a wiz with up to date technology so maybe a little slack is necessary when someone isn't able to embrace new technology. I have been able to downloaded the app, I'm all for doing all I can to try and reduce the spread of this virus, I will also be self isolating should the need arise, as one of those that had to shield for 4 months, I understand enough to recognise my responsibility in protecting others if I expect them to protect me. As to government advice, that is a little more difficult as they do not always take the advice of their experts, but I do listen, assess and follow when the it is sound. I also accept that many do not, thus I will protect myself from them!

Information on the official Government site regarding the app and the algorithm used for risk assessment states: "The app uses Bluetooth signal strength between devices to estimate the distance between two people. It estimates the distance for that encounter as one of three levels: Close, Medium and Far. It is highly likely that encounters identified as “Close” are significantly within 2 metres and that those identified as “Far” are most likely over 4 metres away. Those identified as “Medium” will include encounters that are close to 2 metres away; some slightly under and some slightly over. The accuracy of the distance calculation depends on a number of external factors, such as where the phone is on the body and the surrounding environment, and so each individual distance measurement is inexact and there will be a large degree of overlap between these three levels". I still believe when and where is irrelevant, but then I would self isolate for 14 days regardless of whether it is only advisory, I tend to be over cautious where viruses are concerned. Maybe having family working at the front line influences my decisions. But also my specialised field of nursing for many years was Infectious Diseases, Tropical Medicine and HIV. I'm also retired and the only friends I meet have, like me, been shielding and we tend to restrict contact with other people when possible. However, my husband does the shopping and he is even more wary than me about other peoples behaviour. We both felt it important to download the app as the more people who do, the more accurate the information gathered. We also have the Corvid-19 app for Prof Spector's research at King's College and that is also a good way of assessing how things are in the area I live. At the end of the day, it is up to each individual to assess the risk, not only to themselves but to others they may meet in passing, based on their own knowledge and experience. I'm afraid I do not trust this government to give me advice on staying safe, particularly as they do not appear to follow the same advice.

It is probably only the older person who can afford to run for President! I understand from a friend, who has just done her postal vote, that the other 3 candidates are younger but do not stand a chance.

SSC, it's purpose is just to inform you that you have been in contact with someone and should self isolate for 14 days. Where that contact was is irrelevant, as it would not help you assess the risk. Other than the obvious contact, I understand it is defined as contact within one metre for one minute or longer without face-to-face contact. That would include shopping and your mask is predominately to protect others from you! Even if you know who you are in contact with, do you know everyone they have been in contact with and know that all those people are virus free?

iestynlad, we all want it to end as soon as possible but obeying a rather odd rule appears to only apply to those of us not in the government. It would have made more sense to closed pubs and other such establishments rather than punish a neighbour whose grandmother came to visit! Pubs must close at 10pm but the bar in parliament is excluded from the rule, we must all obey the ruled 6 but if you want to go grouse shooting, the rule of 6 doesn't apply. Common sense it what is needed and most of us would report those who had large risky parties with no regard for others, but report your neighbours who had a long awaited visit from some one they love because that increased their number to 7, sorry I couldn't do that.

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.