Westminstenders: Political vacuums are very bad things

[RedToothBrush]

Johnson has been notible (once again) but his absence.

Whilst we appreciate he has been ill and has a new baby, we are in the midst of a national crisis and a sense of leadership and guidance from our prime minister has been lacking.

And its not gone unnoticed.

Not just by the press. And not just by opposition. Nor NHS and care managers. But on the ground where it matters.

The lack of the sense of seriousness has dissipated. The sense of duty to country to behave. The idea that it will some how be all over this week when it doesn't appear to be the government strategy. The total lack of policy for a week whilst it's become clear bit by bit that these things have been under discussion and decided upon prior to the supposed key meeting on Thursday from the announcements from the regional assemblies. All in favour of a TV stunt tomorrow night.

Let's see how that goes.

The grandstanding isn't a substitute for detail and substance in a crisis. And we still have the looming show down at the end of June over extension of transition. More optics. More lack of practicality at a time when things will really be on the brink.

The next month will be telling and we hit the wall of economic reality which will bring the whole world crashing in on the lives of so many people.

This is the calm before the storm. Enough the sunshine. Enjoy the time with families. Before this is over everything will have changed for so many.

This is just the start of things unravelling and it needs someone to take control and draw up solid blueprints for all our futures. Is a man who is so frequently awol from where he is supposed to be and doesn't take commitments and responsibilities seriously, really the man for that?

Churchill had a vision for the country that cited housing as our second social service, the NHS being our first.

Will Johnson manage to some how forge out so grand new venture which gives the resource and rewards it deserves to the NHS (beyond lipservice and empty platitudes and clapping, that recognises the importance of social care and can stop the almost inevitable coming wave of homelessness and unemployment

And can he do it without selling us off as a basement bargain to the us?

It would be too much to hope for that western states rethink their funding model for private vs public research.

Tatiana no, they are being released into the public to see if they get it or not, at least in the Oxford trials. I suppose that's one of the reasons it takes so long.

I am sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, as all I know comes from a bit of reading around online debates, but I think they'd be in big trouble if they deliberately exposed someone to the virus when there is no current known treatment for it.

Although I am no expert on the ethics of medical trials!

Ah, looking at Google it looks like they're now moving the trials to hospitals - I can't see any more details behind the telegraph headline due to the paywall, but it looks like they're worried that prevalence isn't high enough in the community to tell them much.

So glad Emma de Souza won her case [yay]

Listening, since when do serious people decide on a course of action during in a pandemic based on what children want?

It's not up to schools or the general population to save other people's marriages. Certainly not if the cost might be infection brought into homes from schools, whether to teachers' homes or the homes of students themselves with vulnerable household members.

@squid4, that wasn't meant as a criticism of you or any plans you may have to send your children to school.

It sounds as if you and your H need to sit down and look at your expectations of each other, and at actual hours logged at housework and hands on childcare as well as hours doing income-related work, also the need for sleep, and stress management time. I personally don't think your H is being fair.

BJ apparently decided that being fat landed him in hospital, so plans to make the nation thinner too

I dont doubt this will be trialled on the lower end of the UC claiments and the disabled because we will no doubt be the ones to suffer the most after the crisis is over

This story about doctors being gagged over the PPE shortages is quite chilling www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52671814

Heroes.

We've gone full on Kitchener. No hiding it anymore.

Stick a white feather on teachers.

Send 'em over the top.

Who does the Mail think are the members of teaching unions?

It's the same as we've said about the NHS "Heroes" rhetoric. Heroes die and that's ok because they are brave saviours.

But it's not ok. Not ever.

BCF when you deliberately expose someone to a disease in order to test a vaccine/cure, that's called a challenge trial. They are legal, but there are legal hurdles to surmount in order to get permission to carry them out. They do not sit in the same group as normal clinical trials. (I worked in health research until a year ago).

I think it's likely that there will be challenge trials for a COVID vaccine, have heard the idea bandied about, but these have to be done properly, and informed consent is even more essential than it usually is.

@pointy how do they set the bar for informed consent? Considering this is such a new disease and long term effects are relatively unknown and varied (lung/kidney damage/MS for eg)... Presumably if they developed those they'd have no financial recourse for medical help further down the line (I know we currently have NHS, but as we know that may not be for long - which opens another can of worms for informed consent, no?).

The bar for informed consent is set incredibly high in any case - but for challenge trials the eligibility criteria are stricter than for any other trial. The discussion I saw on challenge trials for COVID did focus on the fact that there isn't a treatment, but greatly enhanced payments were discussed.

For a normal trial it's common to have an initial discussion, provide information, allow time for that to be processed (often as much as 6 weeks even for a non medication trial) and then come back. At every stage, the participant is re-consented - in a challenge trial that frequency of confirming consent would increase.

Personally for COVID I wouldn't consider doing it (and I'm too old - I imagine they will only take the lowest of risk participants).

It's a massive race to the bottom to remove health and safety standards.

It's aimed at ununionised blue collar workers who are unable to complain at working conditions who have got the hump that others have complained. The response is to decide no one should have rights rather than organise.

Bloody awful.

That daily mail cover is despicable.
Thanks for support, DP has apologised. We're going to try putting them in school when I'm on nights at least, sleeping in the day is very hard when I know he's struggling to WFH and "teach"/entertain.

yes, there is a lot of clapping the "right" nurses and doctors, ie the silent or the dead ones, and the ones who point things out are called "left wing activists". will be the same for teachers, probably worse

www.lbc.co.uk/news/lbc-uncovers-sage-committee-minutes/

LBC uncovers SAGE committee minutes which contradict the government's care home claims

Government advice kept in place until 12 March said it was "very unlikely" care homes would be infected - however SAGE committee minutes in February said "there is a realistic probability that there is already sustained transmission in the UK."

Boris Johnson and Sir Keir Starmer clashed in the Commons today after the Labour leader said the Government was “too slow to protect people in care homes” during the crisis, which the Prime Minister denied.

In a letter following the exchange, Mr Starmer drew on the Government's own official advice published on 25 February which said it was "very unlikely that anyone receiving care in a care home or the community will become infected."

Hitting back, Downing Street claimed Sir Keir had "inaccurately and selectively" quoted this official guidance which was in place until 12 March before being withdrawn.

LBC's Ben Kentish pointed to tonight's press conference which saw deputy chief medical officer Jenny Harries state care home advice issued on 25 February stayed in place until 12 March because "they had the view that there was no sustained community transmission in the UK."

However, Ben Kentish found minutes from a sub-committee at scientific advisory group SAGE on 10 February which said:

"It is a realistic probability that there is already sustained transmission in the UK, or that it will be become established in the coming weeks."

Ben reiterated that this was dated 10 February - two weeks before the official care home guidance was issued and more than a month before it was withdrawn.

In the press conference, Jenny Harries also said that it is "very likely" that some of the 10,000 "unexplained" additional deaths in care homes in April were due to coronavirus.

This came on the same day the Prime Minister announced a further £600 million to help tackle virus epidemics in England's care homes.

Downing Street and the Department for Health and Social Care have been contacted for a response.

In another part of the MN forest, we are getting a glimpse of the Tory strategy for countering Starmer. He's a paedophile-lover who let Jimmy Saville off the hook, tipped off Ronnie Biggs and sold Jack the Ripper the knife...

The DM cover has just caused so much upset and anxiety amongst teachers. Twas ever thus. they must be loving this from their safe home offices.

Must say though the pic made me laugh : the teacher is hugging a child!

In another part of the MN forest, we are getting a glimpse of the Tory strategy for countering Starmer. He's a paedophile-lover who let Jimmy Saville off the hook, tipped off Ronnie Biggs and sold Jack the Ripper the knife...

Which is at least 10 years past it's sell by date and will be 14 years past it when the election comes. Sometimes you can be too desperate.

The bar for informed consent is set incredibly high in any case - but for challenge trials the eligibility criteria are stricter than for any other trial. The discussion I saw on challenge trials for COVID did focus on the fact that there isn't a treatment, but greatly enhanced payments were discussed.

Screening criteria will also be extremely tight. By the time they get to phase 3, there will be a lot more data on risk factors, which will help recruit genuinely low risk candidates.

But ethically very challenging nevertheless.

Do the 'greatly enhanced payments' not offer another layer of complexity in the consideration around ethics?

People consenting to something they otherwise wouldn't due to financial incentive? My brother is fucked financially at the minute and I can see him jumping at something like that that offered a few grand in his pocket, when in better times he wouldn't usually consider it.

I find it very interesting (coming from a non-scientific background) and am not sure what my position is. And as is mostly the case on these threads, I have no answers, only questions!

Research is an ethical minefield at the best of times - all of this makes it harder still. Financial incentives are very controversial indeed. My team worked in the NHS/University environment and so we were not involved in any trials that offered major incentives. In fact we were checking everything we did to ensure that paying people back their costs and nothing over wouldn't get them in trouble in terms of benefits.

Just catching up now so belated to songs, misti, squid and anyone else suffering with this awful situation.
Teachers are definitely looking like the latest culture wars issue with all the usual cliches. Good point PP made earlier around the good (keep quiet - “heroes”) and bad (speak out - “left wing agitator”) healthcare workers.

A few of my friends who work in varying parts of health care think this is appalling for the teachers. They've been through the unsafe working at points, they don't wish it on others. Also quick to point out that their work wasn't halted or changed in the way teachers' jobs were plus the timescale with which this change is meant to happen is so short. They don't see themselves as heroes either.

It's a massive race to the bottom to remove health and safety standards.

It most definitely is, but don't forget that this is what people voted for. There was no good reason for people in those "Red Wall" seats to put in Tory MPs, but they chose to do so. They also already knew that their Prime Minister was a liar and a cheat, but were apparently happy with this.