Lockdown easing?

[Saint-Just]

But I’m confident it’s those working directly with Covid patients. So a lot less than 3500.

That confidence is seriously misplaced.
If hospital did that, casualties among the staff would rocket. As stated earlier, they should not wear a mask once they KNOW the patient is not positive to Covid, and even then if they KNOW they are not positive themselves. Until then, they are cannon fodder without PPE.

[TBKBABAB]

Think the visor ‘discussion’ maybe has run its course?

Great effort by a lot of people to try and help which is still going on in different ways.

Not an expert and anyone who is please correct me if I’m wrong, I would think that under normal
circumstances it’s not a commonly used item of PPE compared with gloves, masks, gowns so initially
there was probably a shortage and I remember lots of local news reports in our area of various
people producing them because they are simpler to make from widely available materials than most other
types of PPE but they must comply with British Standards to be used in the required areas in NHS whether
most of these did I don’t know.
Pretty quickly a large number of U.K. companies switched to producing these in large volumes and don’t
think there was an issue for this type of PPE for long.

[oldoakknives]

That confidence is seriously misplaced.
If hospital did that, casualties among the staff would rocket. As stated earlier, they should not wear a mask once they KNOW the patient is not positive to Covid, and even then if they KNOW they are not positive themselves. Until then, they are cannon fodder without PPE.

I think you’re right so slightly higher than my estimate.

Think the visor ‘discussion’ maybe has run its course?

Great effort by a lot of people to try and help which is still going on in different ways.

Not an expert and anyone who is please correct me if I’m wrong, I would think that under normal
circumstances it’s not a commonly used item of PPE compared with gloves, masks, gowns so initially
there was probably a shortage and I remember lots of local news reports in our area of various
people producing them because they are simpler to make from widely available materials than most other
types of PPE but they must comply with British Standards to be used in the required areas in NHS whether
most of these did I don’t know.
Pretty quickly a large number of U.K. companies switched to producing these in large volumes and don’t
think there was an issue for this type of PPE for long.

I think that’s a sensible summing up.

[Passenger]

I haven’t seen a validated protocol for cleaning single-use PPE and taking it through a testing procedure to confirm it was still meeting the standards.

Likewise, nor details of the protocols used on all that out of date gear that was relabelled and sent to the front lines, sure Govt said it was tested and safe but given their cavalier approach to verisimilitude, isn't it probable new date labels were slapped on.

That's a cracking headline in The Mail, how long until 'Dulce et decorum est' makes a comeback.

[Saint-Just]

I think you’re right so slightly higher than my estimate.

Exactly. Add to that, at the beginning there were not enough tests so the need for PPE was far greater than if there had been enough to test staff repeatedly and every patient entering and leaving hospital, whether symptomatic or not.

[Saint-Just]

Likewise, nor the protocols used on all that out of date gear that was relabelled and sent to the front lines, sure Govt said it was tested and safe but given their cavalier approach to verisimilitude, isn't it probable new date labels were slapped on.

I believe that is indeed standard procedure (far from me from supporting the current shower, but fair is fair).
It’s not like food that goes bad and that’s it: the use-by date relates to possible contamination so they are irradiated again, which guarantees another safe period (I think).

[Onelasttime]

I think you’re right so slightly higher than my estimate.

So what is your estimate then? 20% of staff? 30%?

This might help:

Elsewhere, guidance sent to Guy’s and St Thomas’ Foundation Trust staff yesterday, seen by HSJ, told them to wear PPE for “All patient-facing encounters irrespective of covid-19 status, which involve being less than 2 [metres] distance from a patient”.

“This also includes any staff working in a clinical area within 2m of a patient, eg food services and cleaning teams,” the email said.

[TBKBABAB]

I haven’t seen a validated protocol for cleaning single-use PPE and taking it through a testing procedure to confirm it was still meeting the standards.

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...-equipment-ppe

Not sure what your interpretation of validated is but reviewed and approved by the HSE.

[Saint-Just]

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...-equipment-ppe

Not sure what your interpretation of validated is but reviewed and approved by the HSE.

Thank you for that link.

For me, it is what I call a cop out.

Where there are acute shortages of PPE, and where it is safe to do so, it approves the sessional and reuse of PPE.

Not only does it acknowledge there is an acute shortage (which really was the point being made earlier), but it says "where it's safe to do so". When is that? Is it left to the Trust's expertise? to the hospital management's? It certainly isn't to the users, as a link posted earlier indicates.
It seems it wants to distance itself from any responsibility should NHS staff were victim of the virus and their relatives taking them to court over Health and Safety laws.

[oldoakknives]

So what is your estimate then? 20% of staff? 30%?

This might help:

Elsewhere, guidance sent to Guy’s and St Thomas’ Foundation Trust staff yesterday, seen by HSJ, told them to wear PPE for “All patient-facing encounters irrespective of covid-19 status, which involve being less than 2 [metres] distance from a patient”.

“This also includes any staff working in a clinical area within 2m of a patient, eg food services and cleaning teams,” the email said.

So you accept it's not 3,500 a day then.

In the news item TFB linked it says .......

"....To date, over 7,300 protective visors have been made by Daniel and the Chiltern Academy volunteers, based on a design from New York University, which have been donated predominantly across Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and Buckinghamshire, but also as far afield as Preston and Scotland..."

So the number was divided among at least 5 places according to the report. So probably rather less than 8000 to each authority or hospital.

The only actual numbers I can find online are for surgical masks not visors.

I see you've dropped the silly name calling, thats a plus.

[Slamdoor]

I read that there are demonstrations this weekend against the lockdown by the muppets that believe it’s all a hoax or a waste of their precious time or liberty. Give me strength.

[Saint-Just]

I read that there are demonstrations this weekend against the lockdown by the muppets that believe it’s all a hoax or a waste of their precious time or liberty. Give me strength.

Or give them the virus... Darwin at work!

[oldoakknives]

I read that there are demonstrations this weekend against the lockdown by the muppets that believe it’s all a hoax or a waste of their precious time or liberty. Give me strength.

Probably all under 30 and still feel invincible.

[ralphy]

I believe that is indeed standard procedure (far from me from supporting the current shower, but fair is fair).
It’s not like food that goes bad and that’s it: the use-by date relates to possible contamination so they are irradiated again, which guarantees another safe period (I think).

What gives me cause for concern is that if it’s ok to clean stuff (that’s passed it’s use by date) and label it up with a future date why hasn’t that been the practice done previously?

R

[Chris_in_the_UK]

What gives me cause for concern is that if it’s ok to clean stuff (that’s passed it’s use by date) and label it up with a future date why hasn’t that been the practice done previously?

R

It is not stuff that is needing cleaning, rather stuff in it's original (unopened & undamaged package) which is re-sterilised by irradiation and then a new date label is applied. It has been done for years.

[AlphaOmega]

I believe that is indeed standard procedure (far from me from supporting the current shower, but fair is fair).

Thanks for trying to keep things balanced, SJ.

Those of us under a little pressure don't really have much of a stomach for bickering yet we need to read these threads to help us stay informed.

[Onelasttime]

So you accept it's not 3,500 a day then.

In the news item TFB linked it says .......

"....To date, over 7,300 protective visors have been made by Daniel and the Chiltern Academy volunteers, based on a design from New York University, which have been donated predominantly across Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and Buckinghamshire, but also as far afield as Preston and Scotland..."

So the number was divided among at least 5 places according to the report. So probably rather less than 8000 to each authority or hospital.

The only actual numbers I can find online are for surgical masks not visors.

I see you've dropped the silly name calling, thats a plus.

I’ll try again. What percentage of staff do you think are using protective masks in any one hospital?

[TBKBABAB]

Thank you for that link.

For me, it is what I call a cop out.


Not only does it acknowledge there is an acute shortage (which really was the point being made earlier), but it says "where it's safe to do so". When is that? Is it left to the Trust's expertise? to the hospital management's? It certainly isn't to the users, as a link posted earlier indicates.
It seems it wants to distance itself from any responsibility should NHS staff were victim of the virus and their relatives taking them to court over Health and Safety laws.

If the PPE isn’t available for whatever reason you have to have a contingency plan, the other options are send the NHS staff into situations without certain items of PPE, reduce the staffing levels or leave some patients without care.

[Tooks]

I’ve attended hospital 3 times in the last 4 weeks for something I was being treated for pre outbreak.

It’s anecdotal, but every member of staff and every patient I saw was wearing a surgical mask, so they must be getting through those at a rate of knots.

Obviously, I was nowhere near the areas of the hospital where any Covid patients are being treated, but would expect them to have the gowns, FFP masks as well as visors.

It was a very calm atmosphere though, professional and still caring, and my nervousness at being invited to a hospital appointment amidst all this soon dissipated.

It’s clearly a localised issue, the Nurse who was with me for about 45 mins said there’d been no PPE issues for them, but like everybody she was concerned other hospitals appeared to be struggling for some things.

[Saint-Just]

If the PPE isn’t available for whatever reason you have to have a contingency plan, the other options are send the NHS staff into situations without certain items of PPE, reduce the staffing levels or leave some patients without care.

I completely agree. But the premise of the discussion was around whether there was sufficient PPE or not.
Clearly, from your link, there was not and a contingency plan was put in place; contingency plan that had not been prepared before the crisis as it should have, but regardless better than nothing.

[Christian]

Occasionally pop back to this thread and I lost track...we on day 3 or day 4 now of the PPE debate?

[TBKBABAB]

I completely agree. But the premise of the discussion was around whether there was sufficient PPE or not.
Clearly, from your link, there was not and a contingency plan was put in place; contingency plan that had not been prepared before the crisis as it should have, but regardless better than nothing.

Seemed to have got off track, this is the lockdown easing thread.

It’s difficult to have a contingency plan already in place for a virus which is completely new so you don’t know exactly what PPE is required in what situations and there were WHO guidelines for situations where there are shortages but for the same reason they weren’t specifically for Covid.

[Saint-Just]

Seemed to have got off track, this is the lockdown easing thread.

It’s difficult to have a contingency plan already in place for a virus which is completely new so you don’t know exactly what PPE is required in what situations and there were WHO guidelines for situations where there are shortages but for the same reason they weren’t specifically for Covid.

Not specific to a virus but specific to a pandemic, which implies a contagious disease, for which PPE is required. It was called Cygnus.

[oldoakknives]

I’ll try again. What percentage of staff do you think are using protective masks in any one hospital?

Same question I asked you earlier. And you never answered either so don’t expect me to know.

[Onelasttime]

Same question I asked you earlier. And you never answered either so don’t expect me to know.

I admitted I didn't know, but you mentioned you'd made an estimate. But you don't know either? Cool.

[KNog]

A very quick update from a school's point of view.

I spent the morning surveying and measuring classrooms.

I was surprised at the result. Even in relatively spacious classrooms the maximum number of children that can be accommodated if social distancing is employed is five plus one teacher. In my head I thought it would probably be ten. It isn't.

I did a very similar excercise on Wednesday.

My classroom can hold 5 and 1 as well.

Any more and pupils can't move without encroaching anothers space or go to the toilet without everyone first evacuating in reverse order of entry.

Having been in school this week it's clear social distancing in schools is virtually impossible even when pupils are well behaved. Add some ringers into the mix, slash staff numbers and catering for a whole cohort becomes completely naive.

[TBKBABAB]

Not specific to a virus but specific to a pandemic, which implies a contagious disease, for which PPE is required. It was called Cygnus.

Cygnus was based on a flu pandemic so any contingency plan based on that would have needed to be reviewed
and adapted for a new Virus like Covid, same as you wouldn’t wear the same PPE for Ebola.

[ralphy]

It is not stuff that is needing cleaning, rather stuff in it's original (unopened & undamaged package) which is re-sterilised by irradiation and then a new date label is applied. It has been done for years.

That's reassuring. Thanks.

R

[Kevin]

I did a very similar excercise on Wednesday.

My classroom can hold 5 and 1 as well.

Any more and pupils can't move without encroaching anothers space or go to the toilet without everyone first evacuating in reverse order of entry.

Having been in school this week it's clear social distancing in schools is virtually impossible even when pupils are well behaved. Add some ringers into the mix, slash staff numbers and catering for a whole cohort becomes completely naive.

A friend is a teacher in a London school who has been working during the outbreak as kids of health workers etc have still been coming, he posted this elsewhere this morning which seems to echo your comments

"The saddest thing about schools reopening is that kids won’t get an education if they return. Even with the tiny numbers we have been having in, all the time has been taken up by keeping them apart, staggering everything and making them wash their hands, as numbers increase it will just be impossible to actually focus on any academic activities.
And even the most studious, self disciplined kids find it incredibly difficult to constantly follow distancing rules."

[eoghan101]

Agree with this. Many schools have effective home learning regimes in place to ensure students don't fall behind. To wind them up and give children a less effective education makes no sense for those children.

After 6 weeks schools will be closed again and it's unlikely many of the usual childcare options like summer camps will run. So back to parents for childcare.

[Foggy]

I did a very similar excercise on Wednesday.

My classroom can hold 5 and 1 as well.

Any more and pupils can't move without encroaching anothers space or go to the toilet without everyone first evacuating in reverse order of entry.

Having been in school this week it's clear social distancing in schools is virtually impossible even when pupils are well behaved. Add some ringers into the mix, slash staff numbers and catering for a whole cohort becomes completely naive.

Likewise. I agree with you.

For those not familiar with schools here is a bit of detail.

The very latest guidance has made it clear schools are to plan for all pupils in year R, 1 & 6 coming back, as well as the key worker and vulnerable children from other year groups, so the chance of social distancing is made impossible.

Let’s take a 2 form entry school. It will have 14 classrooms, and if full, will have 420 pupils across all year groups.

Let’s assume there are currently 30 children attending from the key worker & vulnerable children group.

Taking years R, 1 & 6 could be a maximum of 180 children. Some of these will already be in the key worker group, so for this example, let’s say 10 of the 30. So, if everyone comes back, there will be 180 + 20 children in school on the 1st June. So, 200 kids in max group size of 15 will use up all 14 classrooms.

So, having ascertained that 5 per class to maintain any semblance of social distancing, the reality is there will be up to 3 times that many in each class.

By default, given that the next stage proposed for July is all year groups back, that means back to business as usual in terms of class sizes I.e. 30 per room. So presumably, if that’s ok in a school, other social distancing in the wider public will also have been abandoned by then.

In essence, the only way that any semblance of true social distancing will be enabled, with risks reduced, will be based on those parents who decide not to send their children back to school, thus reducing the numbers in school.

R number still below 1 after this? Not a chance in my humble opinion.

Foggy

[eoghan101]

Gavin Williamson on 5 live stating it had always been the plan for the reopening of schools on June 1st. Bit of a shift from there being no set date.

[wampa]

In our setting, looks like about half of parents will return their children to school initially, with another group waiting a week or two behind to see how things go. This is pretty similar to what happened in Germany I believe, with some hesitancy to begin with but numbers gradually rising. Think we'll take around 2/3 in total from our usual cohort of 60 eventually until the end of this academic year.

Government guidance has always been pretty clear for the youngest children in Primary, social distancing is not possible or expected within groups but it is possible and expected between groups.

There are some vaguer rules about sharing play equipment and which equipment is OK to share & which isn't. This is important for a Reception class as a lot of the learning is enhanced by shared equipment. A new document is due to clear this up for Early Years settings, hopefully it won't be quite so vague. But we are trying to use common sense as to what can be easily cleaned and will be ready to use again the next day or for the next child if it's something like a balance bike.

We've gone for maximum group sizes of 10 rather than 15 initially, doesn't sound like it will make a lot of difference but a third less aged 4/5 years old to keep an eye on will make a big difference while they get used to the new routines and the staff looking after them get used to the new routines too.

[eoghan101]

DfE's chief scientific advisor doing some serious back tracking.

Speaking at the science and technology committee, earlier today, Osama Rahman said*he had not assessed the effectiveness of government guidance published yesterday on how to reopen schools safely.

When later asked about the transmission of the coronavirus and whether the plans were “putting together hundreds of potential vectors that can then go and transmit?”, Rahman said: “Possibly, depending on school sizes.”

He also said the decision to reopen schools was made by cabinet, not the DfE.

But in a letter sent to the committee this evening, published by the department, Rahman said he has “full confidence” in the plans, “subject to the conditionality of the five tests, including a decreasing transmission rate”.

He added he was involved “in all parts of the guidance recently published by the Department for Education and fed in at various stages”.

He said he and his team have been “closely involved in advising on the government’s position on reopening education institutions”, including being at “all meetings of the children’s task and finish working group, a sub-group of SAGE, which has made a key contribution to the recent decision”.

“Throughout, the Department for Education has been led by the science at all of these key decision points and that will continue to be the case throughout this pandemic.”

The letter was published to “offer some important points of clarification in case my position is misrepresented”.



https://schoolsweek.co.uk/coronaviru...ning-comments/

[Passenger]

Just out of curiosity are there any scientists or Dr's actually among cabinet...and wasn't their leader daft enough to ignore the scientific advice about shaking hands...

[ralphy]

Gavin Williamson on 5 live stating it had always been the plan for the reopening of schools on June 1st. Bit of a shift from there being no set date.

Is that the same Gavin Williamson who said last month that schools ‘could not reopen until the ‘Five Rules’ were met’?

If so, have they been? I must have missed that announcement.

R

[TBKBABAB]

Gavin Williamson on 5 live stating it had always been the plan for the reopening of schools on June 1st. Bit of a shift from there being no set date.

That was the plan doesn’t mean they have to announce it straight away this is still subject to no major change in R etc and I am sure the information available last week was way higher than 2 weeks before that so there is no point in announcing
it earlier than when you are fairly sure it will happen, otherwise all you will get is crucified if it doesn’t.

The pillar 4 testing is really ramping up which should give even more accurate data as regards R and actual infection numbers
by the 1st of June.

[TBKBABAB]

Is that the same Gavin Williamson who said last month that schools ‘could not reopen until the ‘Five Rules’ were met’?

If so, have they been? I must have missed that announcement.

R

They aren’t due to open till 1st of June so it will only happen if they have then.

[TBKBABAB]

By default, given that the next stage proposed for July is all year groups back, that means back to business as usual in terms of class sizes I.e. 30 per room. So presumably, if that’s ok in a school, other social distancing in the wider public will also have been abandoned by then.

In essence, the only way that any semblance of true social distancing will be enabled, with risks reduced, will be based on those parents who decide not to send their children back to school, thus reducing the numbers in school.

R number still below 1 after this? Not a chance in my humble opinion.

Foggy

The proposed potential changes for July which would be major as regards maybe some more shops, bars etc opening, on some sort of basis, aren’t going to happen if things don’t improve drastically in the next 6 weeks so likely will only happen if you R is really under control and we have come down much lower on the various curves so just wait and see.

[Foggy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52677194

According to this the R number has gone up, and that’s before the recent changes from stay at home to stay alert, so doesn’t look promising ☹️

[Kingstepper]

Other countries (Denmark I believe) manage the classroom by dividing it into taped-off groups of five who don’t social distance between themselves.
Not ideal but at this rate schools here won’t even be going back in September.

[Saint-Just]

[Foggy]

Other countries (Denmark I believe) manage the classroom by dividing it into taped-off groups of five who don’t social distance between themselves.

Not dissimilar to what the guidance here is saying, apart from the fact it’s groups of up to 15 for England.

Foggy

[Kingstepper]

Not dissimilar to what the guidance here is saying, apart from the fact it’s groups of up to 15 for England.

Foggy

Then why are people posting diagrams of pupils spaced apart on here?

[Foggy]

Then why are people posting diagrams of pupils spaced apart on here?

To make the point that social distancing isn’t physically possible with more than 5 in a class.

But the bottom line, is a bubble of 5, by default is going to be less risky than a bubble of 15. So basically I think the Danish model is better.

Foggy

[Foggy]

Harries has just said this in this evenings briefing.

It is about looking for a reduction in the number of cases, she says. “That is our focus, not R.”

So now R isn’t the focus. Bizarre given that the R number directly leads to the number of cases.

Foggy

[TBKBABAB]

Harries has just said this in this evenings briefing.

It is about looking for a reduction in the number of cases, she says. “That is our focus, not R.”

So now R isn’t the focus. Bizarre given that the R number directly leads to the number of cases.

Foggy

Perhaps an explanation why https://www.gov.uk/government/news/g...atest-r-number

But R is any easy system to use with Joe public, below 1 OK above 1 bad.

[ralphy]

Is that the same Gavin Williamson who said last month that schools ‘could not reopen until the ‘Five Rules’ were met’?

If so, have they been? I must have missed that announcement.

R

They aren’t due to open till 1st of June so it will only happen if they have then.

My mistake then, I'd formed the opinion it is happenenig on June 1st and with no caveats. So if the 'Five rules' haven't been achieved the schools won't be opening then?

Good to hear, if true.

R

[TBKBABAB]

My mistake then, I'd formed the opinion it is happenenig on June 1st and with no caveats. So if the 'Five rules' haven't been achieved the schools won't be opening then?

Good to hear, if true.

R

You can read all this https://www.gov.uk/government/public...overy-strategy

or there is this from the Telegraph today

MPs will quiz the Prime Minister on the 51-page document, which aims to gradually ease the coronavirus lockdown and take the country to freedom across three phrases.
The Prime Minister says that it is too early to ease lockdown measures because of the danger of a second peak, but small steps can be taken as part of a "conditional plan", dependent on sustained falls in infections and deaths.

[AlphaOmega]

But the bottom line, is a bubble of 5, by default is going to be less risky than a bubble of 15.

This is the bit I can't quite grasp.

Surely it's only going to make a minor difference as the infection rate will still spike, just at a slightly slower pace.