Boris is DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for TENS of THOUSANDS of DEATHS

[herecomesthsun]

I can see the appeal Boris in many ways. He went to the college next to mine, I can imagine he would be good company at dinner, he comes across as being amusing and likeable at times.

He is an appalling Prime Minister.

He locked down too late and we paid with the lives of many.

Schools reopened with inadequate safety and no effective track and trace. This will send the numbers of coronavirus cases very high.

It's great that he does not want to lock the extremely clinically vulnerable into a ghetto. However, the above situation makes society very unsafe for us. We are not able to withdraw our children temporarily from school and educate them safely at home.

Watch the mums in their 20s 30s and 40s get admitted to hospital! Cough, mum, cough!

Is this right?

NO

Just adding a bit of balance to what the Torybots are posting.

You're welcome.

@LastTrainEast

You know people are arguing that lockdown is causing gazillians of people to commit suicide and that Boris is responsible for locking down TOO SOON.

We should put both factions in an arena and have them fight it out. At least they'd provide some entertainment.

1 week sooner lockdown would have meant 4-5 weeks sooner release from lockdown, apparently. Maybe fewer suicides. Win win.

My other country shaming the UK

Lee Marshall
@leenelmezzo
·
6h
Rome Fiumicino airport. I landed from Athens at 16:40. Did free Covid test at 17.10. Got results at 17.40 (negative). No Boris, the reason the UK’s infection rates are worse than Italy’s isn’t because Brits are “freedom-loving”. It’s because you and your government are shite.

I knew the standards at Balliol were higher than Trinity but how on earth did you get in if this thread is an example of your critical thinking skills?

Personally imo the blame lies squarely at the origin of the virus. There never would have been any deaths if this virus did not exist.

Also how can you directly balme Boris, did Boris force people to go out and break the rules. How about on here where there are plenty of posts about people saying they are going to break the rules..how is Boris directly at fault for them doing that?

Where have you seen Boris telling you people yo hold illegal raves and not eveb social distance? If people spread it and someone died he is responsible for that death its the those who couldn't do the right thing.

@cyclingmad

Personally imo the blame lies squarely at the origin of the virus. There never would have been any deaths if this virus did not exist.

Also how can you directly balme Boris, did Boris force people to go out and break the rules. How about on here where there are plenty of posts about people saying they are going to break the rules..how is Boris directly at fault for them doing that?

Where have you seen Boris telling you people yo hold illegal raves and not eveb social distance? If people spread it and someone died he is responsible for that death its the those who couldn't do the right thing.

So you could say that it's the virus' fault. Except that viruses are life forms very limited in their structure and are not able to form a conscious intent to the extent which they can be said to take responsibility for their actions.

I would argue that Boris can. And as the actual Prime Minister he can reasonably be expected to be called to account for his decisions.

I would also argue that government planning sits fair and square at the heart of this crisis, and that most people have been following the rules with some care. (and this is a view shared by a number of very senior scientists).

The majority of people in this country have not been attending illegal raves. People have been trying to work from home and shop on line.

It does not help at all when the government sends out mixed messages, for example about the desirability of working from home in a pandemic.

And they could get some tips from other countries that have got at least part of the overall picture right. For example, the quick turn around for testing in Italy mentioned just above.

@Londonmummy66

I knew the standards at Balliol were higher than Trinity but how on earth did you get in if this thread is an example of your critical thinking skills?

You see, that comment is ad hominem. (or ad feminam).

Why don't we discuss some ideas instead?

Countries, like Italy, who are using rapid antigen tests, do look good. I was just reading about their efficacy though, and it seems the jury is still out. WHO aren't convinced, and still consider PCR as the gold standard, but as we know PCR needs to be done properly, and in a lab, and therefore has turnaround issues. Some countries seem to be backing up the rapid tests, with PCR's, which therefore seems a waste of time and effort. It's a balance as always, and time will tell.

Article on antigen tests from Nature here www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02661-2

I'm not a pathologist by training, and I am sure a lot of careful thought goes into the choice of test for different purposes.But it does sound as though these quick and cheap ($5 apparently) tests could be used to screen particular populations and detect the most infectious individuals. That could be very useful! (even, temporarily, if there is no other testing easily available)