Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Just to give another view of the NHS and GPs - two GPs probably saved my life last year.   I'd been extremely ill, no appetite, significant weight loss, not taking enough fluids.  Wife took me to A&E.  Terrible experience.  After four hours told my wife to take me home.  She said "told you this was a mistake.  I'll get you an emergency GP appointment tomorrow".  Saw a GP Registrar (essentially a trainee GP) following afternoon.  She was very concerned and asked a colleague for a second opinion.  Second GP was horrified as soon as she saw me, and said "You ought to be in hospital".  She told the trainee to arrange to have me admitted to hospital and just over two hours later (after my wife had driven me there) I was in bed on a medical assessment ward.  Stayed in hospital for a week and was only discharged because they needed the bed.   I was going to complain about my A&E experience (I think the triage nurse must have screwed up my triage assessment) but a week after I was discharged, I had to take my wife to A&E as her optician thought she might have a detached retina.  It was about 5:30pm on a Saturday and the place was full of injured footballers and rugby players.  It was much busier than it had been on the Monday afternoon I'd been there, but my wife saw a doctor in 20 mins and we were out in 40 mins.  I decided that sometimes you're just unlucky...
    • Many households heated by oil are stocking up on cheap fuel during lockdown. View the full article
    • I keep an eye on the NHS board because I'm a former NHS manager.  I saw this thread started years ago and thought I'd have look.   I'm sure it's purely coincidental, but when I got to #61, it reminded me of a different poster on a different thread from last year.  They aren't identical, but the way things are expressed are remarkably similar.  (eg 20 min wait - ask receptionist - Drs are very busy - wait another 20 min - ask again - receptionist checks computer - says Dr has refused to see you because of complaint 2 years ago - transferred to another GP who expresses "shock" at other Dr's behaviour - vague and confusing references to a "justified" complaint.   Maybe it's just me, but they seem remarkably similar, although the other thread is missing a 2014, 2016, 2017 backstory.     layla_83   As others have already said, there seems little point in complaining now about issues that stem from things that happened in 2014 (and 2016?).  If you wanted to complain to "put the system right", you should have done that six years ago.  Even if the original GP is still about, they won't remember any of it, so there will be absolutely no opportunity for them to learn any lessons from it.  And the fact that the original GP did not want to see you (or rather your mother) because you (she) had made a complaint against them two years ago most certainly does not mean that the GP remembers anything from 2014, it just means that you (or your mother) are flagged up on their system as a "complainer".  As I asked a year ago, why would anyone be unhappy because a GP they had previously complained about refused to see them?  You should be relieved!!!  You say the GP should not take the complaint personally, but if I were a GP I would not want to treat anyone who has made a complaint against me.  (And if you are connected to that other thread, you should have complained to your local CCG or the GMC by now).   You were going to send a letter of complaint to the practice in 2017, so why only now complain about their response?  Did it take them nearly three years to reply?
    • Hi JeelyM and welcome to CAG   1. Do you have the details of the person you bought the bike from.   2. Did you go to their address when you bought it.   3. Did you pay cash for it or what other means.   4. Did you pay the full market for buying the bike.   5. What did you pay.   6. Give us make and model of the bike please.
  • Our picks

    • View this quiz Employment status during COVID-19
      What do you do if you’ve been told not to come to work due to the current crisis.  Watch the video here or on the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page.

      Did you learn anything? Do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 0 replies
    • One Parking Solutions - Damning judgement. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/421148-one-parking-solutions-damning-judgement/
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 66 replies
    • View this quiz Coping with extreme hardship
      Life can be tough when you're entering the world of work and in the present virus crisis, things are even more difficult.

      Watch the video below or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page . Afterwards, you can see if you've understood the points which are being made by taking the quiz.
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 8 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply
    • View this quiz: Pre-pay meters
      An explanation of how some gas and electric companies offer emergency quarantine support.

       
      Watch the video here – or go to the Youth Consumer Service Instagram page and watch it there. Then come back here and do the quiz
       
       
      Submitter BankFodder Type One Right Answer Time 5 minutes Total Questions 6 Category The Youth Consumer Service Submitted 15/05/20  
      • 1 reply

Recommended Posts

My son and his colleague's who work for Police Scotland had to attend and disperse 20 odd folk having a house party in edinburgh.

Most of them drugged up, total moron's.


 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thoughtless and moronic, They obviously don't give a damn need locking up that sort.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 04/04/2020 at 21:57, brassnecked said:

meanwhile another "expert" wants the UK to go back to the Herd Immunity let granny die plan

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8186507/PMs-virus-adviser-warns-Britain-need-adopt-herd-immunity.html

 

I know we shouldn't take the mail seriously ... but

 

If he's an expert - no wonder we are in the state we are.

 

 

We aren't painted into a corner by the policy as he allegedly laims

We are 'painted into a corner' by the lack of testing.

 

Testing everyone, repeatedly if necessary - is the ONLY sane way forward, and also essential preparedness for next winter and any future outbreaks

Everything else is filler

(not intending to minimise the benefits or costs of current and 'other policies)

 

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is what Dr Richard North said was essential, but their planning and Centralisation put the kibosh on that as the resources aren't there locally.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

Well I can confirm that those desperately needed supplies are reaching the hospitals although far more is needed

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sure that the entire nation is reassured and lost in gratitude to you for this heart-warming confirmation.

 

Do keep us updated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

 

 

Testing everyone, repeatedly if necessary - is the ONLY sane way forward

 

 

 

Just out of interest, how long did it take you to formulate this conclusion? I'm not looking for a particularly accurate answer, just round it up to the nearest nano second.

 

 How is this going to work then?

 

Where are the medical personnel and laboratory staff required to undertake this massive project going to come from? Now this is just a stab in the dark but I'd imagine they'd be quite busy at the moment.

 

Even South Korea, who are recognised as having one of the most aggressive testing policies have only managed to test 1% of their population. You clearly have no conception as to the scale of what you're proposing.

 

Even if it was possible to plan, organise and execute it would take years to achieve, by which time all the data would have been redundant and completely meaningless. I was tested last week and it took 2 days for the result, which by the time I received it was already out of date as I was then and now just as likely to be infected as I was when I took the test.

 

Think about it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I don’t see some users posts, but since they’ve been quoted .........

 

I agree (in parts) with 2 contributors postings.

 

WHO says “test, test, test”, so more tests ARE key. That is part agreeing with one contributor.

 

I also agree with cjcregg. One has to understand the limitations of a test : (sensitivity, specificity and its positive and negative predictive values - which involves sensitivity / specificity AND prevalence!).

 

One also has to understand which test, to apply those limitations.

a) RNA NAAT? (Commonly called PCR, though PCR is a tradename, so ‘PCR’ is to ‘NAAT’ like ‘Hoover’ is to ‘vacuum cleaner’)

b) Antigen testing?

c) Antibody testing? (If so, IgM? IgG? Both??)

 

Knowing which test(s), their limitations, and thus what the result actually MEANS is more important than a blanket statement of “test everyone!”, (and repeatedly ??! ) .... especially as it allows prioritisation of who gets what test to maximise benefit, until “testing for all” is more than a pipe-dream .....

 

Would you repeat a positive IgG test? If so, in what circumstances??

Edited by BazzaS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BazzaS said:

 

 

I agree (in parts) with 2 contributors postings.

 

WHO says “test, test, test”, so more tests ARE key. That is part agreeing with one contributor.

 

 

 

The 'test, test, test' call from WHO specifically applies to just ''suspected cases'' and those who recently had contact with confirmed cases. WHO isn't calling for speculative testing.

 

I assume Prof Tobyjug is referring to a PCR test but as testing the entire nation for anything is a fantasy it doesn't matter much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Tests are not fantasy, only your ramblings are.

 

Tests aren't even significant cost compared to the economic and social cost of locking down millions of people who may have already had it.

... Let alone the absolute disgrace that front line NHS and shop assistants aren't being tested.

 

That johnsons  ridiculous 'herd immunity' policy has brought us here and you seem hell bent on excusing it is the only fantasy sold as a real option.

It was just the do nowt until its too late option. Not the sensible one.

 

So which is a real achievable option, and which isn't?

* Locking down the whole population (any not locked down and untested are almost certain to be spreading it) for at least 3 months - and as things are going even longer next year is likely and deal with the REAL social and economic fallout from that

 

* Test the whole population, repeatedly if necessary.

 

 

 

 

Edited by tobyjugg2

I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with testing, TJ, as clearly the WHO do. But as I understand it there is meant to be a strategy around it so that test results help the outbreak to be managed to best effect.

 

The WHO's test, test, test recommendation may be a bit short on detail.


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

 

So which is a real achievable option, and which isn't?

* Locking down the whole population (any not locked down and untested are almost certain to be spreading it) for at least 3 months - and as things are going even longer next year is likely and deal with the REAL social and economic fallout from that

 

* Test the whole population, repeatedly if necessary.

 

 

 

 

 

Testing the whole population isn't achievable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

 

 

The WHO's test, test, test recommendation may be a bit short on detail.

 

The detail is crystal clear and as I described it, here's the head of WHO explaining it.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-51916707/who-head-our-key-message-is-test-test-test

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
54 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

 

Testing the whole population isn't achievable.


Yup, I agree.

 

You’ve quoted a poster who wants the whole population tested, repeatedly.

 

 

Even without that poster explaining what of the different available tests they are considering, perhaps they could explain:

a) how many tests per day they want performed, and

b) how many tests they feel there will be capacity to take, transport and assay, while

 c) how many they feel are currently available

d) (where are the extra testing platforms coming from? and the reagents, the staff and space for them all??).
 

I want £1000 (as a universal baseline income, regardless of employment) per month for every person in the U.K.

It is a great idea, but just not feasible . Just like the “test everyone, repeatedly” idea.

 

My expectation is that the details (of this great plan they want instituting) won’t be forthcoming ..... 

Edited by BazzaS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cjcregg said:

 

Testing the whole population isn't achievable.

 

So which of those options is more achievable

Probably cost less

Allow vast amounts of people to return to work and careful social gathering

Puts processes in place for when this DOES happen again

etc etc

 

and which one doesn't?


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

I agree with testing, TJ, as clearly the WHO do. But as I understand it there is meant to be a strategy around it so that test results help the outbreak to be managed to best effect.

 

The WHO's test, test, test recommendation may be a bit short on detail.

 

Yes, it seems to me they (understandably I suppose) clearly don't want to define something that is politically unacceptable.

 

But not testing is quite clearly NOT the or any answer.

 

That we are this far in and STILL without wholesale testing of the front-line staff (Nurses, Doctors, careworkers, deliverymen and shop assistants to name a few) is unconscionable, neglectful and reprehensible IMO.

 

The testing can be ramped up from there. But we have to GET there first.

and its long overdue.

 

 


I express my honestly held opinions - they are nothing more or less than that.

... Its just doing some due diligence that makes them seem unusual ...

 

Please don't assume what you see here is what I wrote - At least some of my posts HAVE been edited without my knowledge or agreement - or anything showing people they have been amended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

So which of those options is more achievable

Probably cost less

Allow vast amounts of people to return to work and careful social gathering

Puts processes in place for when this DOES happen again

etc etc

 

and which one doesn't?

 

Is this post available in English?

 

Honestly, if you can't be bothered to articulate yourself then I can't be bothered to answer.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really worth reading this blog today, ignore the title the author is a Phd in Public Health and worked in that sector before he was a Eurosceptic, was a co-author with the late Christopher Booker on various subjects , over the last 2 weeks has forensically analysed the response to the pandemic and the planning to control it.  They followed the plan for therwrong disease, they assumed it was a flu, its not its a SARS and needed a much different response well worth a read, source documents and links to relevant information is well provided.

 

Some insights into the mindset of the "Experts" and advisors in the blog Neil Ferguson he of the Computer Modelling, and doesn't fare well, he fell into the assumptions trap, with computer modelling, as in flawed data gives flawed results with no bearing on a real situation. the classic GIGO Garbage In Garbage Out.

 

http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87571#disqus_thread


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Richard North talks a lot of sense, in my view. The other commentator I rate is Prof John Ashton who was director of public health in Liverpool and then president of the Faculty of Public Health.

  • Like 1

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps he should rename his blog  but he has been on various inquiries as Expert Witness, and spoken to Select Committees in Parliament.  He is very thorough with research.  Too good as they no platform him as he tends to get it right and the others then refuse to listen and carry on down the wrong road


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have read the Richard North blogs. Yes they do make sense.

 

I see Trump is blaming the WHO, saying they sided with China too much going back a few months and by not recommending stronger actions to contain the virus, it allowed it to be spread more.

 

Does Trump have a point ?  If China was locked down earlier, with flights incoming/outgoing stopped, would it have made any difference ?

 

The problem with this virus is that many people have it, without showing any visable symptons. Therefore any lockdown will stop the spread temporarily, but as soon as lockdown over, you will have more outbreaks occurring.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know, as the source of the virus is (purposely?) vague in some ways, but it is clear its a SARS, and needed a different plan from get go.  WHO are likely complicit for allowing the misinterpretation as a flu type to continue.  Some of the rejoin/remain camp should ignore the blogs title and go have a look, its certainly more illuminating and coherent than anything from legacy and mainstream media at the moment.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps Trump's response to W H O is down to this theory that Covid-19 is an escaped bioweapon that got out and China hid it  https://www.siasat.com/covid-19-biowarfare-says-bioweapon-creator-dr-francis-boyle-1866058/


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, but it presupposes the UK is still in the EU, it isn't it is in a  transition,  having actually  left under the Article 50 process; but if the UK decided to stay in, it might need an Article 49 Rejoin application, it couldn't just cancel Brexit, more debate there ad nauseum probably.  Either way its a mess in UK and EU.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't trying to rekindle the Brexit debate, it was more about how it affected the PM's thinking about the virus.


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...