Boris - The Prime Minister

First thoughts on PMBoris, will he make a difference?


  • Total voters
    574

Tool

LE
I totally agree with you on the lack of positives being reported
AND the underlying health issues that lead to their deaths last night they were reporting that a number of people had died , from a young age to 106.... 106 FFS alright , he may have died WITH co-vid 19 symptoms , but underlying health problems , he did bloody well getting that old as it was , but don't let that get in the way of a good story
AFAIK, the way that the UK reports deaths is also at fault (stand fast, BoJo). If you die from an underlying cause, but Covid-19 is evident, you die from the "more serious" issue, ie. Covid-19.
 

Truxx

LE
I expect honesty and a candid appraisal of the situation, not half-truths and obfuscation.

I would expect minimal information to be given directly to the public from the clinicians who are looking after the PM; they have a duty of care to their patient, not the public and their priority is to keep family members informed and relevant key government personnel.

The government on the other hand has a duty to the country first and foremost, and I would suggest being economical with the truth is unhelpful and counter-productive, as evidenced by the daily Covid-19 press briefings.

I think it was Alok Sharma, the Business Secretary, who a few days ago conducted the daily briefing as if it were a political interview and simply ignored and refused to answer any questions he didn’t like.

Not surprisingly the following day’s headlines in all the press and media were very, very critical of that approach and the briefings since have been notable for providing wherever possible full and complete answers to all questions, with follow-up questions also being answered.

It’s quite refreshing (as well as important) to have a press conference that is actually informative, rather than the far to frequent soundbites, spin and bullshit.

Considering we’re not at war, I’m interested in who you think is disadvantaged by keeping the public in the dark about the health/condition of the PM.
An observation on the daily press briefing would be that someone in No10 needs to grip it a bit. What it needs to decide is just who the audience is. At present it veers and hauls between addressing the media ( which is what the political speakers tend towards) and addressing the public. It seems to work best doing the latter- not sure if it goes out live across all platforms but it needs to.

Otherwise the egos control the agenda. Which, in some cases is Ok, but in other cases not.

Boris is very good at talking directly to you and I while seeming to be talking to the hacks. Others are less adroit.

I love the medics though, they talk to the hacks like they are patients with a nasty little rash. Top marks to them.
 
AFAIK, the way that the UK reports deaths is also at fault (stand fast, BoJo). If you die from an underlying cause, but Covid-19 is evident, you die from the "more serious" issue, ie. Covid-19.
I could be wrong, but I suspect that’s pretty much de rigueur for all reporting of deaths in the Western world, simply because it’s the only practical way of recording death rates.

For example, an individual comes into hospital with an exacerbation of their COPD but dies from pneumonia.

Is it the pneumonia that killed him?

Well, yes, but the reason he was suffering from pneumonia was because of the underlying health condition, so COPD is recorded as the cause of death, for the purposes of the death stats.

Likewise, a patient who is normally fit as a flea develops pneumonia and dies of heart failure because of the pneumonia, but it won’t be the organ failure that’s recorded as the cause of death for the statistics, but the disease.

And if death isn’t noted in that way, then nobody would ever be recorded as dying of AIDS, as it isn’t the disease that kills, but the infections that arrive on the back of the disease.

From the point of view of Covid-19, the comorbidities aren’t the cause of death at that time, though might’ve been a cause of death later, so aren’t relevant from a statistical point of view, but are important to clinicians and researchers trying to get to grips with managing the disease.

As I mentioned in another thread, it might be useful for the public to know what the comorbidities are that put one more at risk, if only to promote lifestyle changes or consider some form of prophylaxis.
 

Truxx

LE
I totally agree with you on the lack of positives being reported
AND the underlying health issues that lead to their deaths last night they were reporting that a number of people had died , from a young age to 106.... 106 FFS alright , he may have died WITH co-vid 19 symptoms , but underlying health problems , he did bloody well getting that old as it was , but don't let that get in the way of a good story
If I might quote David Hockney

"The main cause of death is birth"
 
I agree entirely with what you say, but can't help wondering why three different journalists think that repeating the question is going to get a different answer the third time from the one given first.
Never watched an interview with Abbot have you - repeat the question get 3 different (non) answers
 
As I remember it, the certificate issued at point of death (and completed by a doctor) is as follows
1
a Disease or condition leading to death
b Other disease or condition, if any, leading to 1a
c Other disease or condition, if any, leading to 1b

2 Other significant conditions Contributing to death but not related to the disease or condition causing it.

From the way the form is set out it would seem to me that, when lists are produced, there is quite a scope for how the information can be used
 
Last edited:

Slime

LE
An observation on the daily press briefing would be that someone in No10 needs to grip it a bit. What it needs to decide is just who the audience is. At present it veers and hauls between addressing the media ( which is what the political speakers tend towards) and addressing the public. It seems to work best doing the latter- not sure if it goes out live across all platforms but it needs to.

Otherwise the egos control the agenda. Which, in some cases is Ok, but in other cases not.

Boris is very good at talking directly to you and I while seeming to be talking to the hacks. Others are less adroit.

I love the medics though, they talk to the hacks like they are patients with a nasty little rash. Top marks to them.
Another observation.

One issue the daily briefings cannot address is that they cannot reach a sizeable portion of the population, and the quality of the briefing makes no difference.

A growing number of the population never watch TV news, and don’t get any of their news from mainstream or TV media.

I’ve listened to a number of articles that point out that many young people will never see these TV briefings despite there being a TV in the home they live in.
Talking with one of my kids it was interesting that he has heard many in his age group who are getting ALL their info from social media. Sadly, after having a look at some examples there are far too many outlets claiming:
The government are telling lies.
It’s all to do with 5G
It’s a chinese weapon.
It’s to control the population etc etc.
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
You do know you're arguing with Bagl0ck, right?
Good job I put the troll onto ignore then, along with all the other wazzocks and their sock puppets.
 

StBob072

LE
Book Reviewer
I learned a lot about St Thomas's ICU when my brother in law was taken there a few years ago, particularly about the specialist life support therapy which saved his life when he was suffering from pneumonia!

Unfortunately I can't remember the scientific details (perhaps @mercurydancer could enlighten us?) but I'm pretty certain if anyone can help the PM to get well, it's Tommy's!
Excuse me quoting my own post but the thing I was trying to remember is Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO). St Thomas's are world leaders in this, and I'm certain that was what saved my BIL, who was in an induced coma for almost a week.

Just throwing this out for those of you who might be interested and have too much time on your hands at the moment...
 
Wasn't it the practice in BAOR that major exercises would be cancelled once two soldiers had died?
The rule was the exercise would end when 10% of troops had died. If you remember the tinned salmon poisoning from the ratpacks, also the Royal Signals guys who died through carbon monoxide poisoning when wet cam nets kept the exhaust gases within the cam covered area*. Finally, IIRC a troop of Tankies died when a tank or two went over a ledge during a night move (someone please confirm that one - it could have been exercise traffic but I'm sure it was a NODUF).

* shortly after we were given extension exhausts which extended out of the covered area.
 
As I remember it, the certificate issued at point of death (and completed by a doctor) is as follows
1
a Disease or condition leading to death
b Other disease or condition, if any, leading to 1a
c Other disease or condition, if any, leading to 1b

2 Other significant conditions Contributing to death but not related to the disease or condition causing it.

From the way the form is set out it would seem to me that, when lists are produced, there is quite a scope for how the information can be used
And not one option for d. Old age and has reached the end of life.
My Dad died aged 93 and it was put down to COPD.
My Mum also died a couple of years later at aged 93. Put down as asthma.
When I was asked at the funeral of my Dad what he died of, I replied "He was 93".
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top