WHEN'S IT ALL GONNA OPEN??

[Alan de Enfield]

22 minutes ago, Philip said:

Ok so care homes aren't quarantined, but they're not a big source of infection in the community.

Exactly right - they are a little risk to the outside community as they don't (generally) leave the building. They are more at risk from outsiders (staff or visitors) bringing it into the home, once it is in the home, its like a 'cruise ship' confined spaces shared staff etc and it can run riot.

 

Just because they are not 'in the community' does not devalue them as people, although the Government seemed to be working on an agenda that 'we can afford to lose a few oldies'.

[mrsmelly]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Exactly right - they are a little risk to the outside community as they don't (generally) leave the building. They are more at risk from outsiders (staff or visitors) bringing it into the home, once it is in the home, its like a 'cruise ship' confined spaces shared staff etc and it can run riot.

 

Just because they are not 'in the community' does not devalue them as people, although the Government seemed to be working on an agenda that 'we can afford to lose a few oldies'.

My Mum is the oldest in her care home. I dont think she will let anyone take her crown ?

[churchward]

5 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Exactly right - they are a little risk to the outside community as they don't (generally) leave the building. They are more at risk from outsiders (staff or visitors) bringing it into the home, once it is in the home, its like a 'cruise ship' confined spaces shared staff etc and it can run riot.

 

Just because they are not 'in the community' does not devalue them as people, although the Government seemed to be working on an agenda that 'we can afford to lose a few oldies'.

However,the people who work in the care home community do come and go each day just as care workers in hospital do.

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, churchward said:

However,the people who work in the care home community do come and go each day just as care workers in hospital do.

 

Are you agreeing with me, or did you intend to quote "Phillip" ?

[churchward]

4 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

My Mum is the oldest in her care home. I dont think she will let anyone take her crown ?

Long may it be so.  It must be worrying for the people in the homes knowing how dangerous for them the virus could be. My 88 year old father living with us has become a bit worried by it all.  It is also a source of additional worry/stress for us as we have to go out and shop etc so if he did get the virus it would be because of us bringing it into the house. Thankfully the likely hood is low as our house is remote and away from most people.

3 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Are you agreeing with me, or did you intend to quote "Phillip" ?

I am referring to the thought that a care home is not part of the wider community as people inevitably come and go.  This activity connects them to the outside world even if the residents do not go out at this time.

[Alan de Enfield]

4 minutes ago, churchward said:

I am referring to the thought that a care home is not part of the wider community as people inevitably come and go.  This activity connects them to the outside world even if the residents do not go out at this time.

 

17 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

They are more at risk from outsiders (staff or visitors) bringing it into the home, once it is in the home, its like a 'cruise ship' confined spaces shared staff etc and it can run riot

 

 

That's what I said, so you were agreeing with me - repetition adds emphasis, so lets just hope Phillip sees it.

[mayalld]

8 hours ago, peterboat said:

The numbers aren't going down when you add the rapidly rising deaths in nursing homes! It doesn't matter where someone dies if they have the virus they count

Well, if you look at todays graphs, which include care homes, the deaths ARE declining. Not as fast as if you exclude care homes, but the are still coming down.

[mayalld]

4 hours ago, MartynG said:

I have been trying to keep up hopes of relaxation in the rules .

But that is becoming harder to maintain optimism  with time. The rate of new infections isn't dropping (possibly due to more tests being conducted)  and the death rate is only just starting to show a possible slow decline.  

 

I don't see pubs and restaurants opening in 2020 and even if they did I would not be using them.  Social distancing cannot possibly  be adequately managed  in a pub or restaurant and many local cafes  and smaller restaurants are simply too small to keep people 2metres apart.

Social distancing will remain the new normal and I would not be surprised if that lasts for at least a year from now.

 

I do hope it is nearing time to allow travel for visiting property such as holiday homes, caravans and boats and just maybe for day trips to visit  close relatives , although not everyone will want to take up those options for fear of transmitting the virus between family members . 

 

 The next government review is 7th May .

 

In the meantime I am pleased the weather has turned a bit wet and cold  as it will keep people at home.

 

 

 

 

 

The number of tests being carried out is increasing massively, but the number testing positive is declining slowly.

 

If you double the number of tests, and the number positive stays flat, that means that the rate of infections has halved.

[Ianws]

1 hour ago, mayalld said:

The number of tests being carried out is increasing massively, but the number testing positive is declining slowly.

 

If you double the number of tests, and the number positive stays flat, that means that the rate of infections has halved.

Is that correct? Previously, tests were just for people admitted to hospital and quite likely to be infected. Now it’s wider. Some of the people testing negative now would have also tested negative if they had been able to access a test at the time. However, it is something to be positive about that tests are growing in number and infections are slowing, if not necessarily halving.

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, mayalld said:

 

 

If you double the number of tests...........

........YOU WOULD HAVE JUST OVER THE GOVERNMENTS(sorry, Matt Poppycocks) TARGET FOR THIS MONTH......

 

Theyve now got a new target - 250k tests a day - even though they havnt achieved the last 2 targets they set.

However, this is an aspirational target according to Raab - with no target date - and therefore isnt a target in normal folks world.

[LadyG]

9 hours ago, Philip said:

That care home figures should be differentiated between hospital figures, because infection within care homes is unlikely to spread into the community, more so now with the restrictions in place.

 

Basically, the situation in the care homes shouldn't mean not acknowledging the progress made in the community, as peterboat seems to be doing.

Care homes are staffed by live out staff, lots of them.

Unless they are showering and changing clothes in a dedicated place, they will take infection home with them

[Ianws]

It doesn’t meet the criteria for a SMART target.

 

specific - yes

measurable - probably

achievable - we will have to see

sometimes the A stands for agreed- if that’s with the people doing the tests, then I don’t know if they have agreed that’s a target they could meet, they might have. 

relevant - yes

timed - apparently not

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Care homes are staffed by live out staff, lots of them.

Unless they are showering and changing clothes in a dedicated place, they will take infection home with them

And a few are likely to bring it in with them. Locked down institutions like care homes (or cruise ships) are at risk once one or two infections occur within them.

[roland elsdon]

5 minutes ago, LadyG said:

Care homes are staffed by live out staff, lots of them.

Unless they are showering and changing clothes in a dedicated place, they will take infection home with them

They are also often untrained ( supervised by one qualified staff). Young , migrant or or ‘gig economy’

It is seen as low skilled and unimportant.

 

In order to care for such a vulnerable group of people they have had to massively step up in their work practices  and make great sacrifice I suspect.

 

I just hope when this is contained they do not get forgotten because they are not NHS or ‘ essential’.  
At the moment they are proving just how essential they are, regardless of  any deaths of their  charges because society could not manage without them.

 

 

[Ianws]

I agree, it can be seen as unskilled. It definitely isn’t but is underpaid for what should be expected. It’s not just professional personal care but the commitment and desire to understand and respect the individual person and do the best to support them in the way they want and give them as full a life as possible. It needs leadership from managers, training and committed, trained staff. It’s awful how it has become a low paid gig job. The staff and the people they support deserve better. Adult social care has been underfunded for years and I hope at least one positive from the current situation is a re-evaluation. If it was your son, daughter, mum or dad you would expect a great service for them , just like with the NHS. 

[bizzard]

1st day back at school after lockdown.

[sueb]

It's not just the care homes who have staff coming and going. The people who have care in the home have carers going from one house to another, several houses in one day. We are going to have a district nurse visit us and I'm dreading it.

[WotEver]

Interestingly, and this could have a large impact on kids going back to school, it appears that kids don’t pass CV19 on to adults. 
https://apple.news/AJVg5Aa_KSbmuuhTYuEsOPg

No child has been found to have passed coronavirus to an adult, a review of evidence in partnership with the Royal College of Paediatricians has found.

[Momac]

Just now, WotEver said:

Interestingly, and this could have a large impact on kids going back to school, it appears that kids don’t pass CV19 on to adults. 

How can anyone possibly know that ?

Fake news?

[WotEver]

Just now, MartynG said:

How can anyone possibly know that ?

Fake news?

If you read the article then you will know

[Paddle]

5 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Just because they are not 'in the community' does not devalue them as people, although the Government seemed to be working on an agenda that 'we can afford to lose a few oldies'.

You are absolutely correct, there is no sense in which they are devalued as people.

 

However, they are also members of society (anybody living in their own home with a live-in carer is outside my definition). As such, they have to accept what is happening in society at large. Nobody created this virus. Nobody wanted this virus. It has appeared out of nowhere, and society has to deal with it as best it can. And having spent quite some time in care homes, visiting, I tell you: anything that would shorten my residence there would be a good thing. Generally people don't leave a care home otherwise than feet first.

 

As a society we are not very good at accepting death these days; a GP friend of mine says that in his experience people with a belief in religion accept the death of their relatives much better than those without.

 

And nothing of the above devalues the lives of those in care homes. But it does reflect the reality that we are all sharing a planet with a largely innocuous virus that does target the elderly.

[Ianws]

The article is vague. It says From around the world, we are not seeing evidence that children are involved in spreading or transmitting the virus, but we do not have enough evidence

 

[Richard10002]

5 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Are you agreeing with me, or did you intend to quote "Phillip" ?

I'm not sure what you were trying to get across. It sounded like you were agreeing with Phillip, i.e. that care homes are no risk to the outside community.#

#

However, your queries of Churchward suggest that you agree that the staff and any visitors that there might be, (none/not many), coming and going is an opportunity to spread take it into the care home, and to spread it in the outside community.

 

Given that care homes are at great risk, then the staff are obviously highly likely to be carrying it without knowing it.

[peterboat]

8 minutes ago, Richard10002 said:

I'm not sure what you were trying to get across. It sounded like you were agreeing with Phillip, i.e. that care homes are no risk to the outside community.#

#

However, your queries of Churchward suggest that you agree that the staff and any visitors that there might be, (none/not many), coming and going is an opportunity to spread take it into the care home, and to spread it in the outside community.

 

Given that care homes are at great risk, then the staff are obviously highly likely to be carrying it without knowing it.

No I didn't pick him up as agreeing with Phillips at all Richard 

[matty40s]

1 hour ago, WotEver said:

Interestingly, and this could have a large impact on kids going back to school, it appears that kids don’t pass CV19 on to adults....

 

 

Kids dont share anything with adults nowadays, it's not cool....

[WotEver]

42 minutes ago, Ianws said:

The article is vague.

Of course it is.  Everything about Coronavirus is vague.  It's too new, and scientists are still gathering data.