Harry Bloomfield, Esq. wrote:
Broadback explained :
What seems to have been lost is that the lockdown will not decrease the
number of cases. It is simply there to save the NHS from melt down by
spreading the cases over time. Personally I think the eye watering cost to
the economy would have been better spent pouring money into the NHS.

I know they are doing a pretty good job creating the Nightingales, but
general they cannot simply and instantly magic up hospitals, equipment,
doctors and nurses. They have a lead time, particularly the latter
staff, measured in years. They virus is here - NOW, the need to take
measures is here and NOW. Lockdown is the only way to control it at
this moment.


The extra staff are a mix of €˜returners, €˜early graduates ( for example
Doctors normally all start on a Wednesday in the Summer- I should remember,
our middle daughter was one a few years back, she is now a Registrar) but a
number have been pushed through, ditto nurses), other workers and
volunteers for the none medical jobs have been recruited - including from
areas like the airlines.

Im not suggesting the above will stay in the NHS - obviously the early
graduates hopefully will- but they will man the extra hospitals/ fill
shortages etc.

The planning, response etc has been quite impressive.

The way the volunteer system runs (GoodSam) is really quite impressive.