D
Deleted member 292770
Is that all, given the poor conditions and hard time they’re having of it I’d have thought it’d be in the thousands
Omicron variant caught a cold
- Thread starter Notch7
- Start date
- Status
Not disputing that and I know that for a fact. Just that some people post up on here and never quite give the full information to build a complete picture. Sure, there may have been 200 that have left that trust in the last 6 months (that could happen in any large organisation) but how many have joined that trust in the same period?
The article says it was 4% of the total, which means an annual equivalent of 8% turnover. Unfortunately that isn't useful either without a baseline for what it normally is for nurses.
no the government dont want to do it, but the health experts are trying to angle it that way,
Tougher restrictions, not full lockdown measures.
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 7,070
- Reaction score
- 1,193
- Country
The one described in the post - that there will be overload of the NHS with covid and all will suffer as a result
Asking people to reduce the number of cases by restricting what they do is "hysteria"?
So if we have tens of thousands of people queueing to get into hospital with covid you're going to blame underfunding.
Because there will be many times as many people with the new variant of unknown severity.
If omicron turns out to be 90% the pathogenicity of delta , the NHS will not be able to cope. Directly or indirectly, people will suffer and die.
Restriction of activities would have reduced that.
What's so hard for you to understand?
It's not panic, it's common sense.
It seems there will be 3 separate votes on the new restrictions. The one that will get least support by the Tory will concern mass gathering and tests and at least double jabbed etc. However the people who vote against that know that Labour will help it through. Pure politics and some who probably feel lets get the cull over as soon as possible. They are hedging about the eventual number of deaths but more is likely to come out on that eventually as it happens. As people age and virus may just stay it's something we may have to always live with.
was reading an article the other day and pandemics usually last between 2.5 and 3.5 years, apparently as the virus mutates it weakens itself, because it's intentions is not to kill the host. however they do not yet know if covid will follow the same trajectory
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 7,070
- Reaction score
- 1,193
- Country
We've had various global 'flus, which didn't last long. WHich pandemics?
- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 7,070
- Reaction score
- 1,193
- Country
Nice list:
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-pandemics-throughout-history.html
Hmmm, that looks familiar
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/10-pandemics-throughout-history.html
Hmmm, that looks familiar
No idea was in a health magazine, I can't find the article I was referring to now, but this is an alternative one that pretty much sums up what I was referring to.
https://www.statnews.com/2021/05/19...cientists-look-to-the-past-to-see-the-future/
The common sense seems to be entirely lacking in the anti-vaxxers and like children when denied a sweetie, they just repeat 'why, why, why..' when the answer is so obvious.
I part blame the gov and communications for some of it. They need people to carry on and little attention is paid to the age of people in hospital other than old. Well I recently posted something showing a large number of them are in their twenties. A week ago most were in their late 40's area.
This goes back to the earlier days. Many hardly notice etc and only the old suffer. That's far from the truth other than death and isn't totally true in that area either.
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 14,164
- Reaction score
- 4,151
- Country
- Status
