They'll definitely need to put the blame somewhere to distract from their own culpability.
And on a separate note of excess deaths - the preliminary report for week 44 (the one I was concerned about and figured Johnson must have seen something in to cause the sudden reaction of lockdown) are showing as no excess deaths. I haven't got any figures yet, they come out Tuesday, but they are not showing an increase above the normal in the weekly PHE report.
If that proves to be the case then the extended furlough until March (especially as it isn't sector specific) and the timing of locking down plus the period of 4 weeks seems bizarre.
That's the way I'm seeing it TT, I could have seen the point of locking down when the original SAGE warning was made, and even a couple of weeks later when Starmer pointed it out. Both of those were at a point where locking down would have stoped the increasing rate and also could incorporate half term to minimise the impact. But making a decision last Friday and for a month with the added furlough extended to March screams of panicking to me.
And on a separate note of excess deaths - the preliminary report for week 44 (the one I was concerned about and figured Johnson must have seen something in to cause the sudden reaction of lockdown) are showing as no excess deaths. I haven't got any figures yet, they come out Tuesday, but they are not showing an increase above the normal in the weekly PHE report.
If that proves to be the case then the extended furlough until March (especially as it isn't sector specific) and the timing of locking down plus the period of 4 weeks seems bizarre.
(11-06-2020, 05:24 PM)tiptontown Wrote:(11-06-2020, 05:08 PM)baggy1 Wrote: They'll definitely need to put the blame somewhere to distract from their own culpability.
And on a separate note of excess deaths - the preliminary report for week 44 (the one I was concerned about and figured Johnson must have seen something in to cause the sudden reaction of lockdown) are showing as no excess deaths. I haven't got any figures yet, they come out Tuesday, but they are not showing an increase above the normal in the weekly PHE report.
If that proves to be the case then the extended furlough until March (especially as it isn't sector specific) and the timing of locking down plus the period of 4 weeks seems bizarre.
This is what I don't get B1. A lot of people have been questioning the lockdown because of the damage to business and jobs considering there doesn't appear to be excess deaths for the time of year.....It just seems there's an element of not really knowing how things are going to develope, so lockdown just to be safe.
That's the way I'm seeing it TT, I could have seen the point of locking down when the original SAGE warning was made, and even a couple of weeks later when Starmer pointed it out. Both of those were at a point where locking down would have stoped the increasing rate and also could incorporate half term to minimise the impact. But making a decision last Friday and for a month with the added furlough extended to March screams of panicking to me.