Anag Ram Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 10 minutes ago, rammieib said: How many care homes are Privately run institutions and how many are driven by the Government? I genuinely don't know the split here but should the Government be responsible for providing the PPE and covering the general welfare of patients in the privately owned care homes? I think about 90% are privately owned but often it is Local Authorities which are responsible for running them and who would be asking the government for PPE and taking instruction on how to operate safely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 21 minutes ago, Anag Ram said: I think about 90% are privately owned but often it is Local Authorities which are responsible for running them and who would be asking the government for PPE and taking instruction on how to operate safely. There's also the question, if a private company isn't providing adequate PPE - what should be the repercussions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grumpy Git Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 9 minutes ago, GboroRam said: There's also the question, if a private company isn't providing adequate PPE - what should be the repercussions? Private care homes don't even provide decent food for their residents in some cases, despite the horrendous fees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 16 hours ago, Chester40 said: That in bold.. is very confusing. The whole country is being bleed dry financially, emotionally...knowing on what basis surely has a lot of merit, regardless of where you stand generally. If I was about to have an operation, have a baby, visit a relative in a care home .. I would want to know the real risks. I'm sorry you're confused. If the current "official" figure is 45,000 deaths in the UK what does it really matter if, by questioning the count mechanism, someone could also say that the(ir) "true" figure is 30,000 (for example)? All I'm saying is that I don't get why people are obsessing about the pinpoint accuracy of the figure. Like it materially changes anything. That sort of internet truth warriorism is ridiculous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anag Ram Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 Statistics is one of the areas which has been badly affected by the extreme situation in which the government finds itself. An example of this is a case I know of where a ninety-something patient was dying of heart and lung disease. The care home advised the family it was a matter of days due to the severity of the condition. When the patient died, cause of death said coronavirus. So it's hard to pin down the accuracy of death figures for the disease. I take more notice of the deaths above average for the time of year. They give a good indication something exceptional is happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 50 minutes ago, Anag Ram said: I think about 90% are privately owned but often it is Local Authorities which are responsible for running them and who would be asking the government for PPE and taking instruction on how to operate safely. I don't think you're correct - pretty sure that the only involvement that councils have with private homes is paying the fees of those folk that qualify - private homes are (as the name suggests) privately run and only accountable to the CQC to make sure they are providing a 'decent' level of care to the residents. As for PPE, I think you'll find the homes are responsible for provisioning their own equipment (rather than the government providing it to them) - most of the complaints from care homes regarding PPE is that they have been unable to buy it (either not available from normal suppliers as the NHS has snaffled it all or prices being hiked by suppliers making a quick 'supply and demand' buck). I think the only input the government have had is in providing the guidance on how they should operate safely.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 27 minutes ago, SchtivePesley said: I'm sorry you're confused. If the current "official" figure is 45,000 deaths in the UK what does it really matter if, by questioning the count mechanism, someone could also say that the(ir) "true" figure is 30,000 (for example)? All I'm saying is that I don't get why people are obsessing about the pinpoint accuracy of the figure. Like it materially changes anything. That sort of internet truth warriorism is ridiculous It's important because the stats (deaths/new cases/ 'R' number etc) are being used to guide policy on how the country responds to the pandemic. A 50% inaccuarcy as per your example could make a huge difference to what the government decide to do next (greater freedom or tightening the lockdown). I've avoided this thread previously because I didn't want to get involved in the almost morbid fascination that some on here have with how many have died, but now it's become clear that the death stats are so badly aligned with reality, it is important to all of us that there is a review and we have a better idea of the reality of the situation. The general public will only obey guidelines to help control the situation if they are confident that there is a basis of reality behind the instructions - as it stands, there's likely to be another wave simply because (for example) people don't now think there's a justification for wearing a mask when they're standing next to some old dear in the supermarket..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sith Happens Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 50 minutes ago, Grumpy Git said: Private care homes don't even provide decent food for their residents in some cases, despite the horrendous fees. Don't get me started on care homes. A friend of ours used to work in a private one. The residents had some sort of mat alarm system, so in the night if they got out of bed an alarm was sounded so that one of the carers could make sure they were ok. However those doing nights wanted some kip, so how could they allow residents to get in the way of it so they had an off switch for the mats, so they turned them off so they didnt get interrupted with their beauty sleep. Said friend didnt do it and didnt stay long due to the practices. I really would not want to put my mum and dad in a home, but if i had to i would definately investigate how i could put a nanny cam in place so i could keep an eye on them, probably illegal though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamworthram Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Anag Ram said: I think about 90% are privately owned but often it is Local Authorities which are responsible for running them and who would be asking the government for PPE and taking instruction on how to operate safely. Are you sure? That doesn’t sound right. Why would the LA be responsible for running a privately owned home? Do you mean they are responsible for regulating them (through the Care Quality Commission or whatever it’s called) in the same way Ofsted inspect privately owned nurseries by don’t actually run them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anag Ram Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 5 minutes ago, Tamworthram said: Are you sure? That doesn’t sound right. Why would the LA be responsible for running a privately owned home? Do you mean they are responsible for regulating them (through the Care Quality Commission or whatever it’s called) in the same way Ofsted inspect privately owned nurseries by don’t actually run them? I think sometimes the care home itself is owned by private equity firms who don't have care experience. It used to be that LAs ran the majority of homes but they couldn't make it work due to the low levels of government funding. Even now homes close due to the large number of underfunded state places compared to private payers. Care at home is the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stive Pesley Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 The spread of Covid-19 is based on two factors: 1. How dense the population is 2. How dense the population is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B4ev6is Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 Even people care at home people looking after them dont have the time only allowed 15 mins at any home next to nrothing that cook food give any medcation even some dont brother to give it to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexxxxx Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said: The spread of Covid-19 is based on two factors: 1. How dense the population is The link between population density isn't quite as clear as you might think... https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200618110953.htm The other sort on the other hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariotofmyown Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 Not sure why there is so much debate about death numbers. The only stat that seems reliable to me is total number of deaths vs 5 year average. We were about 500 a week less than average in Jan and Feb. Ended up with about 50k more than average during the Spring. We are now back to about 500 below average. Lockdown and social distancing has clearly prevented the virus from spreading. It seems like we lockdowned too late and didn't learn from what happened in Italy. Or the successful preventative measures taken in places like Hong Kong or South Korea. Putting hospital patients into care homes without testing looks to be the worst decision made during the virus. Perhaps we can keep deaths down by easing lockdown but persisting with social distancing measures. It doesn't seem that we have an adequate test and trace process in place though. We need an inquiry to look at the total lack of planning into how to deal with a crisis like this to prevent it happening again. We urgently need a quick inquiry to understand how and why decisions were made this year so we don't make the same mistakes again if a 2nd wave strikes soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 Daily Express today... In the graph, posted by Samuel Tombs, chief economist of Macroeconomics, the UK's rolling average of weekly cases is now 16 percent above what it was on July 8 in hospitals. Due to this rise incases, he stated the UK was now "sleepwalking towards a second wave". Earlier, the UK's coronavirus death total rose by 110 in the last 24 hours the Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed. That rise now takes the UK's total to 45,422. The number of cases also rose by 445 taking the number of positive COVID-19 cases to 295,817. This may differ from previous statistics as this relates to cases across all settings. Face masks do protect the wearer, as well as people they come into contact with, from coronavirus, a new study has suggested - highlighting widespread confusion in the UK, where it is not even compulsory to wear them in shops yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler Durden Posted July 22, 2020 Share Posted July 22, 2020 4 minutes ago, sage said: Daily Express today... In the graph, posted by Samuel Tombs, chief economist of Macroeconomics, the UK's rolling average of weekly cases is now 16 percent above what it was on July 8 in hospitals. Due to this rise incases, he stated the UK was now "sleepwalking towards a second wave". Earlier, the UK's coronavirus death total rose by 110 in the last 24 hours the Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed. That rise now takes the UK's total to 45,422. The number of cases also rose by 445 taking the number of positive COVID-19 cases to 295,817. Ironic name really or is that the reason he was chosen for the job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexxxxx Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 7 hours ago, sage said: Daily Express today... In the graph, posted by Samuel Tombs, chief economist of Macroeconomics, the UK's rolling average of weekly cases is now 16 percent above what it was on July 8 in hospitals. Due to this rise incases, he stated the UK was now "sleepwalking towards a second wave". Earlier, the UK's coronavirus death total rose by 110 in the last 24 hours the Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed. That rise now takes the UK's total to 45,422. The number of cases also rose by 445 taking the number of positive COVID-19 cases to 295,817. This may differ from previous statistics as this relates to cases across all settings. Face masks do protect the wearer, as well as people they come into contact with, from coronavirus, a new study has suggested - highlighting widespread confusion in the UK, where it is not even compulsory to wear them in shops yet. Not entirely sure you can judge actual infection rate by number of positive cases done in testing. Improvements in contact tracing and testing increases are obviously having an effect. I think the ons 'survey'/random test is the better one to look at. As long as the other metrics such as hospital admissions, deaths, people on ventilators etc are dropping... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoetheRam Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 Anyone feel good about being back in a busy office environment yet? Or are we all happier working from home, given the benefits that have been shown? Asking for a friend that has been ordered back into work with the reassuring line that "all reasonable steps are being taken to ensure your safety". How does it feel to be in a poor circulated room full of people again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThePrisoner Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 20 minutes ago, JoetheRam said: Anyone feel good about being back in a busy office environment yet? Or are we all happier working from home, given the benefits that have been shown? Asking for a friend that has been ordered back into work with the reassuring line that "all reasonable steps are being taken to ensure your safety". How does it feel to be in a poor circulated room full of people again? Fortunately, my work place has left it up to us when we return back to the office. We're doing as well as we were in the office working remotely (which has been my argument for sometime!). They expect us to fully return just after Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexxxxx Posted July 23, 2020 Share Posted July 23, 2020 24 minutes ago, JoetheRam said: Anyone feel good about being back in a busy office environment yet? Or are we all happier working from home, given the benefits that have been shown? Asking for a friend that has been ordered back into work with the reassuring line that "all reasonable steps are being taken to ensure your safety". How does it feel to be in a poor circulated room full of people again? Id like to go back to the office 2/3 days per week but not yet. Think there's a bit of a way to go yet before I'd be comfortable with that. I'm not a big fan of wfh all dya every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.