Attempted Robbery In Cape Town
ChatterBank0 min ago
Time For Hancock To Go
Talks a good job, but fails to act. False statements, false promises, false targets, failed to protect the elderly, failed to protect NHS workers, failed to protect care workers, failed to get PPE, failed to get testing kits, well he did buy millions, but he never got them tested to see if they worked. failed to report true death rates in care homes. In fact I can't think of one thing he has achieved. If he stays in his position any longer you will see more NHS staff die, along with many more. Get rid Boris, we need action not fancy talking.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by teacake44. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Wow, yes, goalposts moved so far they were in the middle of the Atlantic.
No test can be 100% reliable, but I trust the people who designed it to have known how to do their job. But moving onto that from the question of the testing volume is pretty weak. Like, I think we all can accept that it's legitimate to question whether or not tests that have only been posted should be included in the stats, but even then it isn't a "lie", since the source for this revelation is the Government telling us so at the same time as announcing that they met their target. But that aside they have met, or almost met, the target they set. May as well let them have that one, especially as the Government is also well aware of the need to have an even higher testing rate anyway.
No test can be 100% reliable, but I trust the people who designed it to have known how to do their job. But moving onto that from the question of the testing volume is pretty weak. Like, I think we all can accept that it's legitimate to question whether or not tests that have only been posted should be included in the stats, but even then it isn't a "lie", since the source for this revelation is the Government telling us so at the same time as announcing that they met their target. But that aside they have met, or almost met, the target they set. May as well let them have that one, especially as the Government is also well aware of the need to have an even higher testing rate anyway.
It's being claimed the postal tests have only recently been counted in the figures.
https:/
https:/
On 2.4.20, the PM tweeted a post saying, "We will test 100,000 people per day by the end of this month"
That's folk, not tests.
https:/
That's folk, not tests.
https:/
Yes, it's not totally satisfactory way of counting in my opinion but Professor Newton did make it clear that this method has not changed, it's just that the numbers were not a significant before. If it is a fudge it's a one-off fudge because they will eventually be processing (but not counting again) most of these (we hope). The publication of a target when we are in new territory and the way some will berate them if targets aren't met must have influenced them to take steps to ensure it was met on 30 April ' by hook or by crook'. But the real challenge now is to maintain this level going forwards and ensure we could people tested not tests. If they do that we should congratulate them. Hopefully we can get to 200000 a day during May
In a nut shell, a test sent is not a test conducted, and I can't really remember what briefing it was last week that Matt Hancock said, that they were ( training army personal) to be able to take tests at the many test stations over the UK, so if you need training to do a test right, what's the point in sending/ posting kits out to homes. The figures given by the government are about as reliable as the death figures have been for many weeks.
The deaths figures by whatever measure you want have always been there. If you chose to misunderstand them or not look then I can't help you. And Chris Whitty has constantly pointed to the Excess Mortality figure (which is published monthly I think) as the key real indicator given that every country has slightly different ways of counting /miscounting Covid deaths (and because of due to/with Covid issue)
Personally I've never seen why testing is all the rage. It's fine for those who test positive: "You've got it. Go home. Do not go near anybody. Do not pass Go. Do not collect £200". Meanwhile for those who test negative: "You're fine. Go back to work and give succour to the sick and needy". And they contract the virus on the way home.
It's fine for determining how many people have got the disease. It's not too clever for identifying those who haven't. Still, I imagine somebody's thought it through
It's fine for determining how many people have got the disease. It's not too clever for identifying those who haven't. Still, I imagine somebody's thought it through
Those tested at test centres are those who are feeling unwell and think they might have the virus. If they follow social distancing, probably by driving home as they usually turn up at the test centre in a car, and avoid then self isolate to avoid contact with others. If the result they get maybe 48 hours later is positive they should continue self-isolating. If the result is negative the idea is that they return to work if feeling well enough. The aim is to get people back to work in key roles as soon as possible if the Covid result is clear.
Yes, of course they might catch Covid in the meantime if they fail to follow social distancing or pick it up at work when they return.
Yes, of course they might catch Covid in the meantime if they fail to follow social distancing or pick it up at work when they return.
