Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hearing about special advisors and the like getting involved in decision making during the current crisis there are some useful government docs on line including this one on the Scientific Advice Group for emergencies (the 'secret' (as coined by the Guardian)). Not sure why HMG don't publish this guidance or the National Risk Register any more. The attached is from the coalition government. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/80087/sage-guidance.pdf


I despise Cummings but not sure how influential he has been in the response to Covid-19 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52421744


One good thing about the current government is moving away from military campaign terms such as battle rhythm. I think that they have kept the dreadfully termed concept of operations.


The leaked stuff on operation Yellow Hammer, that I didn't find particularly sensitive or damaging, was good at explaining how this all works, and feeds into COBR. Can't find the document, here's the wiki entry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Yellowhammer

As SAGE is secret, TV is what we have to go on (If you want that to change allow us to see the minutes).


Ominous whispers and secret meetings reminds me of AIDS in the early 80s.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-children-illness-nhs-doctor-warning-health-alert-a9485441.html


To be honest if we start saying such as there may be multiple pathogens are out there then the conspiracy theories will become more attractive.

JohnL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As SAGE is secret, TV is what we have to go on (If

> you want that to change allow us to see the

> minutes).

>

> Ominous whispers and secret meetings reminds me of

> AIDS in the early 80s.

>

> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavi

> rus-children-illness-nhs-doctor-warning-health-ale

> rt-a9485441.html

>

> To be honest if we start saying such as there may

> be multiple pathogens are out there then the

> conspiracy theories will become more attractive.


People need to be aware of these manifestations of the immune system especially since early on we were led to believe that young people do not get covid19 seriously etc. Also the government do not want to precipitate mass hysteria.

There is still no vaccination against HIV btw- just great advances in treatments

There's a good case for government to be more open. Post coalition it feels less so. But no conspiracy as far as I can tell. The Guardian ran a non-story, and confused flu pandemic with emerging infectious disease. Far easier to plan for the former.


The Open Government initiative was a good step forward - I thought that this was Blair but actually it was the Coalition. But like 'Big Society' now confined to the national archives. Both were the right idea.


And a final comment is seeing BoJo back in front of the camera he seems to have adopted a presidential role, with nobody being able to fully deputise in his absence. Don't think this is a good thing, with all the background noise that it led to eg on apparent government lack of thinking about relaxing lockdown. I'm sure there was a lot of thinking.

Seenbeen,manifestations of immune system, is not a new idea. Most people who suffer from auto immune disease are aware. If you mean in regards to the virus, until there has been

A connection that seperates these symptoms from other on going cases still undiagnosed which have also been seen in adults, regarding vasculitis and other similiar symptoms. Many people not being given a diagnosis. If diagnosing these problems have been difficult in the past, It would be good to be alerted to the differences berween these similiar symptoms, especially when it

Is so difficult to come up with a diagnosis.

Don't you think the Government are doing the best they can?


It can't be easy dealing with this pandemic, which is not just national but global. It's very easy to sit on the edge, pass judgement, pick holes, slag those off who are working hard to overcome the virus and try to reduce the number who are dying as a result.


James O'Brien on LBC this morning did his three hour phone it, it was totally depressing, at every opportunity he was taking pot shots at the Government.


What do you think any other Party would do differently?

The impression I get from JoB on LBC is that he sees inconsistencies and malpractice in the way the Govt is handling the situation and, importantly, misinformation at daily briefings with limited opportunity by the press to challenge and interrogate.

Just saying 'well any Govt would probably do the same/no better' doesn't really address his concerns.

Dbboy, it seems to becoming more acceptable to not question any contradictions, even when things no longer make sense. You have not added anything to the thread regarding the scientific advice which all I was saying, was it was not clear. I have tried to support parents going through the nightmare of this illness, which has same symptoms as the conditions we are being alerted to. with there child

for just over one year. I am struggling to see the link with symptoms that are related to an already hard to understand illness.

Now that may equal in your mind your response.

You have the right to not question even that which you do not understand, if that brings you to believe you are a person who understands the government are doing there best, I do not have a problem with that, I neither have a problem what you assume about me for expressing my views. The right to respond is welcomed.

Questioning the government about managing the pandemic is something we are all entitled to do in this democracy.


What some of us find farcical is the political opportunism by Labour whereby they continually pressurise Govt to come up with a detailed plan for ending lockdown - without issuing any plan of their own.


If Labour want to lead the country some day they should formulate a plan, publish it and let population evaluate it. It's akin to the dithering Corbyn did over the EU debate.


It's a case of put up or shut up!

TE44 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seenbeen,manifestations of immune system, is not a

> new idea. Most people who suffer from auto immune

> disease are aware. If you mean in regards to the

> virus, until there has been

> A connection that seperates these symptoms from

> other on going cases still undiagnosed which have

> also been seen in adults, regarding vasculitis and

> other similiar symptoms. Many people not being

> given a diagnosis. If diagnosing these problems

> have been difficult in the past, It would be good

> to be alerted to the differences berween these

> similiar symptoms, especially when it

> Is so difficult to come up with a diagnosis.


Most people are not aware of most manifestations of the immune system mostly due to the innate immune system at the beginning of an infection. For example my young son was exhibiting symptoms of appendicitis so we took him to A and E...it turned out to be mesenteric adenitis- inflammation of lymph nodes in his abdomen....these days it is best to err on the side of caution as covid19 is about.

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't you think the Government are doing the best

> they can?

>

> It can't be easy dealing with this pandemic, which

> is not just national but global. It's very easy to

> sit on the edge, pass judgement, pick holes, slag

> those off who are working hard to overcome the

> virus and try to reduce the number who are dying

> as a result.

>

> James O'Brien on LBC this morning did his three

> hour phone it, it was totally depressing, at every

> opportunity he was taking pot shots at the

> Government.

>

> What do you think any other Party would do

> differently?


Sounds par for the course for him. He is a great disseminator of fake news most of the time anyway.

Funny thing about JoB on LBC, regarding Covid19, he's just asking logical questions about why we are in current situation, how it happened and where the boo-boos were.

Seeing as UK is in an avoidable situation, has suffered more deaths than necessary, has had no coherent plan now for weeks, front-line staff have limited PPE (or 'FEEL' they don't have enough PPE, if you listen to Priti Patel - that's right, those staff may just be imagining it!), has had no lockdown, people are associating freely in public, I think that's fair enough.

One may not like JoB (he can grate with self-grandiosement), but please point out his mistruths (as you see them).

I've given the government the benefit of the doubt for the last number of weeks but the more I understand the less I believe this. KK has come up with a number of relevant points. Listening to some the experts - the loss of regional response capability with the disbanding of the government offices and strategic health authorities, the failure to monitor at ports of entry, and the failure to prioritise testing for all front line staff, I expect are all serious failures. As well as delays in getting our act together.


I believe not having a strategy for those returning from risky areas in March, such as China, Italian ski resorts was a further massive failure. Other counties worked out the main routes of infection and hit this through testing and/or isolation. Stopping transmission from our hospitals, care homes and hospices through locking down and testing, rather them being a major domestic source of infection, is another significant factor.


Anyway fine to say this in hindsight and you may question the wisdom of throwing rocks at the government. But there again I could pub the blame on those of us who switched to the Tories in 2010 because of the doubling of the threshold ob death duty, or Ed Mlliband standing against his brother, or bring Brexit into the equation.



All food for thought.

Response as the pandemic hits is one thing, preparedness for the scenario of a pandemic is another. On the former there is room for debate, on the latter none.


In spite of an in depth exercise and assessment of the real threat of a global pandemic a few years ago, the government did not address the recommendations, or the areas found lacking from that exercise. For example, it never built up a stockpile of surgical gowns, even though the report apparently identified that as one area in need of addressing. The rumour is that funding for pandemic preparations was funded into no deal Brexit preparations.


Who knows what the truth is, but I suspect this will all come out in a subsequent inquiry. There will be real pressure on government to publish any relevant reports, although we are still waiting for the Russia report to be published etc, so transparency I suspect, won't be high in this government's list of priorities, and there may well be need for legal action once again.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...