This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Such sad news that he has contracted Coronavirus and has been hospitalised.
Apparently he’s been suffering with pneumonia so hasn’t yet had the vaccine.
Let’s hope he has one more fight in him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-55881508
In reply to WaterMonkey:
Bugger. 😕.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
🤞🏻
In reply to John Ww:
> Would somebody please tell me what this means.
Fingers crossed, a secular version of praying for someone.
In reply to John Ww:
It means fingers crossed.
In reply to mountainbagger:
OK, thanks.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
I feel really sad if its true he didn't have the vaccine. Tragic that elderly people who are unwell are not in a position to receive it, or it is deemed too dangerous.
I wonder how many people or relatives have had to make this awful decision?
Wishing Sir Tom the strength to come through this battle.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
Apparently a statement from the hospital tonight said that his family are with him. Sounds ominous. Bless him.
In reply to Chopper:
> Apparently a statement from the hospital tonight said that his family are with him. Sounds ominous. Bless him.
Oh shit I hope not. The last I heard was on the early evening news and they sounded happy that he wasn’t in ICU.
In reply to Chopper:
It appears that one rule for one and one rule for another is still a thing then.
In reply to marsbar:
I expected he might get a bit of extra special treatment from NHS staff. I don't begrudge him that.
My worry is that he picked something up on his BA-funded holiday to Barbados before Christmas. Again, I don't begrudge him that, but I worry it may have been unwise of BA to make such an offer in the circumstances (largely for PR, I would guess). But he may well have said "sod it, I know I probably haven't got long left anyway; I'm going to have a nice time before I go".
Fingers firmly crossed for the old boy.
In reply to marsbar:
> It appears that one rule for one and one rule for another is still a thing then.
On this occasion, I don't begrudge this act of kindness.
Sir Tom is not rich, famous in the conventional sense, or in a position of power. He's one of million's who went to war for his country, and survived to make 100 years of age.
In the time of need when the country looked for some moral support, people latched onto an old duffer pushing a frame around his garden to raise a few quid for his local NHS. The old duffer got a knighthood and raised a substantial amount of money for the NHS. Granted, the government pissed larger sums up the wall in dodgy deals but its the thought that counts.
The fact that Sir Tom's family are at his side, is a small consolation to his family and people like myself.
In reply to captain paranoia:
> My worry is that he picked something up on his BA-funded holiday to Barbados before Christmas.
Would that not have shown up within a couple of weels?
In reply to captain paranoia:
> My worry is that he picked something up on his BA-funded holiday to Barbados before Christmas.
Would that not have shown up within a couple of weeks?
In reply to marsbar:
> It appears that one rule for one and one rule for another is still a thing then.
Its a long time since I've seen such a depressingly mean spirited statement.
In reply to marsbar:
It’s a discretionary mater, not a rule. There’s no way the hospital can use -or not use - their discretion on a case like this that isn’t going to come back at them.
In reply to marsbar:
> It appears that one rule for one and one rule for another is still a thing then.
Get a grip man. That's as mean a statement as I've seen on here. Rest assured there will be a good reason for allowing a family to visit.
In reply to wintertree:
> It’s a discretionary mater, not a rule. There’s no way the hospital can use -or not use - their discretion on a case like this that isn’t going to come back at them.
I dunno... one way they risk being accused by Piers Morgan and his mates of being heartless.
The other way they publicly undermine the ability of the NHS to tell the families of the other 500 people dying of Covid every day that they can’t come to hospital.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
I was saddened to see this morning that there have been trolls targetting Capt. Tom. No doubt they are the usual callours, heartless, evil minded goons hiding behind social media.
Personally I see Capt Tom as one person who, intentonall or otherwise, lifted our spirits in some of the darkest of our days. We need people of that calibre more than ever.
In reply to Chopper:
> Would that not have shown up within a couple of weeks?
well he has been being treated at home for the last few weeks according to the papers so it fits timescale wise
In reply to marsbar:
> It appears that one rule for one and one rule for another is still a thing then.
Care to explain that statement?
On the face of it it reads as being very mean. I hope I have misinterpreted it because you've always come across as being one of the more level headed and compassionate posters on this forum.
Fingers crossed for the old boy, I wish him well.
In reply to marsbar:
> It appears that one rule for one and one rule for another is still a thing then.
It either means bad news because he is deteriorating or unfair preferential treatment, so either way it isn't a good thing.
Since this pandemic begun I've had to take many patients into hospital with them, their relatives and myself knowing that this is the last time they will see each other (even if family get invited in it is a very small number of relatives), and also going to families (for other reasons) who've had recent bereavement in hospital and seeing the psychological fallout of this policy (severe anxiety, hospital admission refusal). It's a heartbreaking thing.
In reply to those who think I am mean;
Tell that to the hundred thousand families who weren't allowed to be there when their loved ones passed on. My thoughts are with the parents of a 13 year old who died alone and weren't allowed to bury him.
Am I the only one who sees the propaganda in the story? Am I the only one who thinks that the NHS isn't a charity and we pay taxes for it?
I'm pleased for him that he has his family there of course. I'm pleased he had a nice holiday.
But when everyone else is suffering staying at home and cancelled holidays and family in hospital without visitors being allowed, when people his age who aren't able to be cared for at home haven't seen their families since last March, when my parents haven't seen their grandchild longer than that because they are being sensible and not going to airports or sitting on planes is the right thing to do, I have to wonder if the rest of you have lost your minds thinking it was great to take a 100 year old on a long haul flight.
Meanwhile all the hospital staff who have enough to do already will now have to explain why everyone else can't have their family at their bedside.
In reply to marsbar:
Thank you for explaining
In reply to Chopper:
None of my issue is with Captain Tom. I have issues with the way his story has been used by the media and I think BA may as well have killed him. What a publicity stunt. If I had a 100 year old family member I'd be keeping them shielded.
In reply to marsbar:
The whole adoption of the NHS by the Tories, after years of just using it as a cash cow to enrich their mates, sticks in my throat but we'll have to live with I suppose until there's a reckoning.
In the meantime, your points about Sir Tom are on one level fair enough, but under these terrible circumstances I think he genuinely made a contribution to morale and understanding at a time that it was particularly welcome. It's a bit unreasonable to expect that he wouldn't get some sort of different treatment under the circumstances.
In reply to marsbar:
I dunno - if I get to 100 would I be prepared to take risks for a last holiday in Barbados? I think it might be a very rational thing to do. His marbles seem pretty intact, maybe you underestimate him?
In reply to marsbar:
> In reply to those who think I am mean;
> Tell that to the hundred thousand families who weren't allowed to be there when their loved ones passed on. My thoughts are with the parents of a 13 year old who died alone and weren't allowed to bury him.
> Am I the only one who sees the propaganda in the story? Am I the only one who thinks that the NHS isn't a charity and we pay taxes for it?
> I'm pleased for him that he has his family there of course. I'm pleased he had a nice holiday.
> But when everyone else is suffering staying at home and cancelled holidays and family in hospital without visitors being allowed, when people his age who aren't able to be cared for at home haven't seen their families since last March, when my parents haven't seen their grandchild longer than that because they are being sensible and not going to airports or sitting on planes is the right thing to do, I have to wonder if the rest of you have lost your minds thinking it was great to take a 100 year old on a long haul flight.
> Meanwhile all the hospital staff who have enough to do already will now have to explain why everyone else can't have their family at their bedside.
While I agree with most of your post, is it not possible that Captain Tom is able to make his own decisions about whether it’s wise to go on holiday? You make it sound like he had little or no choice in the matter.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> I think he genuinely made a contribution to morale and understanding at a time that it was particularly welcome. It's a bit unreasonable to expect that he wouldn't get some sort of different treatment under the circumstances.
I can see that, but he's from a generation who took their duties to others very seriously, rather than looking for loopholes to avoid them.
I think he's a tremendous example, but it would be a shame if special treatment wss given to him when tens of thousands of others have been unable to be with loved ones when they died.
In reply to baron:
Totally agree, but he/his family shouldn't expect or accept preferential treatment (if this is what it is) when he becomes ill, possibly as a result of his own choices and actions to enjoy his life. I hope he had a great time in Barbados!!
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
I'm not questioning his competence or capacity.
I'm questioning the morality of BA.
In reply to SAF:
> Totally agree, but he/his family shouldn't expect or accept preferential treatment (if this is what it is) when he becomes ill, possibly as a result of his own choices and actions to enjoy his life. I hope he had a great time in Barbados!!
I agree.
In reply to marsbar:
I’m with you. I can name a few volunteers who have busted a gut helping communities, have caught Covid, ended up in hospital and not given any special treatment.
He’s a great guy, no disputing that.
In reply to SAF:
> Totally agree, but he/his family shouldn't expect or accept preferential treatment (if this is what it is) when he becomes ill, possibly as a result of his own choices and actions to enjoy his life. I hope he had a great time in Barbados!!
Some pretty big assumptions there?
Do we know the family expected special treatment? Not sure we do and if they got offered the chance to see him they should have refused? That's a big horrible decision.
And we know he caught it in or going to Barbados? I thought someone else had commented that the timing didn't seem to suggest that.
Such a shame and so unfair all around (covid and indeed everything I mean).
In reply to SAF:
> It either means bad news because he is deteriorating or unfair preferential treatment, so either way it isn't a good thing.
> Since this pandemic begun I've had to take many patients into hospital with them, their relatives and myself knowing that this is the last time they will see each other
And the last sound that the relatives will associate that experience, is me slamming the vehicle door closed.
Its not a nice feeling slamming that door closed, when everybody around knows the fate of their loved one laid out on the vehicle's stretcher and they can't be with them until that dreaded phone call from the hospital.
It really is not the best part of my job.
😢
In reply to WaterMonkey:
And he has just passed on
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
In reply to SAF:
He went to Barbados on the 11th December and got admitted to hospital on the 31st of January.
I really don't think he will have caught it there.
In reply to marsbar:
> In reply to those who think I am mean;
I was confused by the text, without context that does not exist looking at a monitor/screen.
> Tell that to the hundred thousand families who weren't allowed to be there when their loved ones passed on. My thoughts are with the parents of a 13 year old who died alone and weren't allowed to bury him.
I totally empathise with that.
> Am I the only one who sees the propaganda in the story? Am I the only one who thinks that the NHS isn't a charity and we pay taxes for it?
I also agree that this is a propaganda rolling story to raise morale. Not the bit about going into hospital with Covid though.
> I'm pleased for him that he has his family there of course. I'm pleased he had a nice holiday.
I had no idea that Sir Tom had a holiday or that he travelled abroad for the holiday. That's not a choice I would have personally made. But then I am not 100 years old with precious little time on the clock to have new experiences. Even aged 100, I may still have erred on the side of caution and stayed home.
> But when everyone else is suffering staying at home and cancelled holidays and family in hospital without visitors being allowed, when people his age who aren't able to be cared for at home haven't seen their families since last March, when my parents haven't seen their grandchild longer than that because they are being sensible and not going to airports or sitting on planes is the right thing to do, I have to wonder if the rest of you have lost your minds thinking it was great to take a 100 year old on a long haul flight.
I agree with every point of that.
I still, have not seen my new Great Nephew. I could been to see him when allowed last year, but with the nature of my job, I did not want to inadvertently share a virus that I may or may not have had. All these are choices considered by many the length of this land.
The long haul flight, I think, maybe was not a good idea.
> Meanwhile all the hospital staff who have enough to do already will now have to explain why everyone else can't have their family at their bedside.
Understandable comment, and while at work, a conversation I have had once in a while with members of the public.
Dominic Cummings has a lot to answer for when he took a shit all over the media, by driving during the first Lockdown and showing not a single ounce of regret.
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
> And he has just passed on
That is awful tragic news.
My respects to his family.
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
I'm sorry to hear that. I rather hoped that having cheated death for 100 years he might make it through this too.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
What a last year to his life, nice one Sir Tom.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
What a last final year he experienced though. A wonderful experience for everyone really.
RIP Sir Tom!
In reply to WaterMonkey:
I'm gutted. RIP Capt Tom.
He lifted our spirits when we were in need
Post edited at 16:53
He really was one of the very few people with Sir at the front of his name who made the title seem vaguely like a real honour. He'll be missed.
In reply to Chopper:
> I'm gutted. RIP Capt Tom.
> He lifted our spirits when we were in need
agreed
What a gent!
In reply to WaterMonkey:
An inspirational man indeed. He was a reminder to me that there are many decent, unassuming people in the world who unexpectedly and unconsciously display their excellence to the rest of us. Rest in peace, sir.
In reply to Graeme Alderson:
That's sad news. A true gentleman who was an inspiration to the nation at the worst time in our history since WW2. A well deserved knighthood if ever there was one.
RIP Sir Tom
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
<The whole adoption of the NHS by the Tories,>
Yes - I want to put my foot through the TV every time Johnson spews stuff about 'Our' NHS...not yours mate...you and your ilk have not only done their systematic best to appropriate every financially beneficial contract (usually linked to some kind of execitive management service, paying big bucks to fat cats) whilst depleting ground-level human resources by poor pay & conditions...whilst at the same time having the bare-faced front to have themselves and their family members fully signed-up to virtually every private patients plan going. Two-faced, amoral and utterly without principles. But then, that's seen as a badge of honour by Johnson's brigade of mercenaries. So *nob off about the 'Our' in the NHS, Johnson. Get back in your privileged kennel where you belong.
Sorry, not much filter left at present...
Post edited at 17:24
In reply to Greenbanks:
...and yes, sad about Captain Moore. He was rightly admired by millions.
In reply to Greenbanks:
I'd like to think that Labour could really capitalise on the support that has been generated for the NHS over the last 12 months... Once this pandemic is (hopefully) in decline, then Starmer should really take it upon himself to investigate and condemn the creeping privatisation, the reliance on an utterly incompetent yet obscenely overpaid private sector, the application of 'market principles...' Some sort of 'back to basics' and even post War values would be great campaigns to run...
The NHS could and should become one of the defining institutions of the UK (along with the BBC, the police and even a reinvigorated civil service...) And why not? Let's replace the Tory past of colonialism, imperialism and dark, satanic industrialisation with a culture oriented towards health, quality of life and cooperative care at times of need. C'mon Keir, time for the vision thing.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
RIP Sir Tom. Condolences to his family.
In reply to various: whatever your feelings about the Labour Party, the Conservative party and the NHS I don't think now or this thread is the time or place to air those views and indulge in political point scoring. Most, if not all, of the country will likely be feeling a sense of loss at the passing of a gentleman whom we felt we knew like one of our family. Put differences to one side for a while if only out of respect for Capt Sir Tom.
In reply to Chopper:
' Most, if not all, of the country will likely be feeling a sense of loss at the passing of a gentleman whom we felt we knew like one of our family.'
Um, I'm not sure that's 100% true. Actually, it's nonsense - straight from the pen of an idle drunken hack to the front page of the DM. Do you really believe that cr*p?
Which is not to say - from what I saw and heard, greatest respect to the old fella; well done for a life well lived, right until the very end.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
Don't understand.
I felt genuinely sad when I heard.
Aren't you being rather cynical?
In reply to Removed User:
No more sad than I do for the other 100,000, really. Thousands of people raised money for the NHS, the fact that this chaps campaign went viral doesn't make it any more worthy than my local 10yr old selling cupcakes.
In reply to Removed User:
I'm not cynical - I have the highest respect for what I have read about Captain Tom, although in all honesty I can't get overwhelmed about the demise of a 100 year old, and I suspect his family will be sad but with no great sense of grief.
It's the cliches about 'touched us all', 'felt part of the family', 'brought us together' etc I can't be dealing with.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
This must be a rare occurence of when a live topic turns into an obituary, I think it should be closed and the surrounding discussions re-opened in new threads.
In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
> This must be a rare occurence of when a live topic turns into an obituary, I think it should be closed and the surrounding discussions re-opened in new threads.
I disagree, I think it’s a poignant reminder of this virus, it’s starts out with news that someone has caught it, then they’ve been hospitalised, then they’ve sadly lost their fight for life.
When I started the thread I was really hoping it would turn into a good news story but sadly not to be. That’s life under a pandemic I guess.
RIP Captain
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> ' Most, if not all, of the country will likely be feeling a sense of loss at the passing of a gentleman whom we felt we knew like one of our family.'
> Um, I'm not sure that's 100% true. Actually, it's nonsense - straight from the pen of an idle drunken hack to the front page of the DM. Do you really believe that cr*p?
> Which is not to say - from what I saw and heard, greatest respect to the old fella; well done for a life well lived, right until the very end.
I've been rather cross, that among the 'RIP' and 'hero' things shared on facebook, nobody seems to mention that the government knew of covid's existence a few months before it became endemic in the UK, and that the heroic fundraising wouldn't have been needed if it wasn't for the decade plus of underfunding (so that the NHS takes a deep each winter during flu season). There were signs in my local CO-OP in January of 2020 for the staff next to the till, with covid information on them, and the government only really jumped once it was a problem towards the end of March, which has me feeling that ultimately he didn't die from covid, but from the government's inaction towards stopping it from entering the UK. Among the social media sadness which will be forgotten by tomorrow, there's been nothing about any of the broader picture, or context.
Generally I'm chilled, but this is serious, I don't understand why people aren't talking about the how and why.
Post edited at 21:16
In reply to Timmd:
Are you not capable of separating the sadness of a person’s death from the failures of a government for the purpose of remembering the person for what they did and not for what the government didn’t do?
The government didn’t kill Captain Tom.
In reply to baron:
Honestly, I don't feel particularly sad. He was 100. Life well lived and I hope the family celebrate his life.
Whether or not he got it on holiday, we have no idea. He could well have. The length of time doesn't mean much. People hang on with covid for weeks. It was a risk, he knew that and decided it was worth it, which you can't blame him at 100, just sitting in your house is a risk at that age. We've probably all taken a few risks these last 12 months.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
> Oh shit I hope not. The last I heard was on the early evening news and they sounded happy that he wasn’t in ICU.
I saw a statement about not being in ICU and being 'made comfortable', which is pretty ominous.. I took it to mean they don't want to use up an ICU bed on a 100 year old who likely wouldn't make it. So I'm not sure he got preferential treatment.
Post edited at 01:41
In reply to whoever:
Personally, I don't feel sad. I feel, if anything at all, slightly angry. Why?
My mum died early April. She too supported the NHS - by working as a nurse from age 16 to 60 (her training began one year after the NHS was formed). Then when she "retired" she was persuaded to come back (reluctantly) to the hospital she worked at for the previous 30 odd years for another 3 or 4 years as Matron.
She didn't get to die with her family by her side (I couldn't even get back into the country at the time). She got to die in pain, alone - my dad having died some weeks earlier. She had just two people at her funeral, which I witnessed via zoom (well, mostly - the internet died for a few minutes during the brief ceremony).
I'm yet to feel anything in particular concerning my mum's death - which probably makes me some sort of sociopath. I'm certainly not going to feel sad for someone I don't know, however worthwhile his life might gave been, and I find the Princess Diana type grief appropriation nauseating frankly.
Sorry if that's mean spirited - feel free to hate me.
Post edited at 02:46
In reply to WaterMonkey:
> I disagree, I think it’s a poignant reminder of this virus, it’s starts out with news that someone has caught it, then they’ve been hospitalised, then they’ve sadly lost their fight for life.
> When I started the thread I was really hoping it would turn into a good news story but sadly not to be. That’s life under a pandemic I guess.
I'm sure some deniers are already out spreading the idea that he was a robot imposter, manufactured by the space lizards to scare us all into staying home while the elite feast on babies in a giant pyramid somewhere.
To all the covid deniers.
He wasn't !!!
In reply to Roadrunner6:
> I saw a statement about not being in ICU and being 'made comfortable', which is pretty ominous.. I took it to mean they don't want to use up an ICU bed on a 100 year old who likely wouldn't make it. So I'm not sure he got preferential treatment.
I doubt the decision was based on whether or not "they" wanted to use an ICU bed up on him but more on the fact that the aggressive treatments available in ICU were simply not viable for a 100 year old as even if those treatments had a positive effect they wouldn't have been able to wean him off those treatments afterwards.
Post edited at 07:12
In reply to WaterMonkey:
He is not a hero. A real hero would use their spotlight and platform to stimulate REAL change by highlighting the government's failures, holding them accountable, and demanding real continuous changes to the NHS. Doing one thing ONCE then handing over a load of money with no questions asked on how it's to be spent, then taking the fame, and the free holidays and knighthood doesn't make you a hero.
Marcus Rashford is the type of hero we needed - he didn't walk a load of steps to raise money to pay for kid's meals himself. He highlighted why it is important and made the government do it and wants real sustained change!
and marcus rashford doesn't even get to reap the rewards of how much he should be getting laid right now!
Don't mean to say it's not sad for Tom's family or that he deserved this. But I'm just pointing out that it is just that - a sad death for an old man, not the death of a martyr/hero who changed society...
In reply to jassaelle:
> He is not a hero. A real hero would use their spotlight and platform to stimulate REAL change by highlighting the government's failures, holding them accountable, and demanding real continuous changes to the NHS. Doing one thing ONCE then handing over a load of money with no questions asked on how it's to be spent, then taking the fame, and the free holidays and knighthood doesn't make you a hero.
You do know he was 100 years old right?
Marcus Rashford has spent a lot of time and energy pushing for change. That's not easy you know.
And I think it's only you that has used the term hero or martyr.
Post edited at 09:03
In reply to jassaelle:
Do yourself a favour and shut up. You're making a fool of yourself. Show some self awareness and respect for others at this time.
In reply to jassaelle:
Sad angry individual
In reply to jassaelle:
> He is not a hero. A real hero would use their spotlight and platform to stimulate REAL change by highlighting the government's failures, holding them accountable, and demanding real continuous changes to the NHS. Doing one thing ONCE then handing over a load of money with no questions asked on how it's to be spent, then taking the fame, and the free holidays and knighthood doesn't make you a hero.
You have a very narrow definition of hero. What about someone who runs into a burning house and drags some kids out? Most people would call them a hero even though they have not made political change, "just" saved some kids from burning to death at considerable personal risk.
Post edited at 09:12
In reply to Andy Gamisou:
Thanks for highlighting that.
It's all too easy to forget those thousands of first wave NHS volunteers returning from retirement with substandard PPE and facing a significant risk of death and a greater risk of permanent physical and mental health problems. Tom was a lovely bloke who did some wonderful things in his last year but he would I'm sure have been very sympathetic to your views.
In reply to jassaelle:
That is being rather mean spirited.
RIP to a man who lived his life well and seems by all accounts to have been loved for good reason by people who knew him. He had a good innings but it is sad perhaps he didn't quite live to see the NHS he gave such support to prevail over COVID
In reply to Neil Williams:
> You have a very narrow definition of hero. What about someone who runs into a burning house and drags some kids out? Most people would call them a hero even though they have not made political change, "just" saved some kids from burning to death at considerable personal risk.
This was my first thought Neil - it is an incredibly specific definition of 'hero' that jellytrad appears to be working on.
To take your own analogy one step further, it'd be like saying that the individual in question should have left the people within the burning house and instead focussed their time and effort into campaigning for smoke alarms instead.
Clearly this is a very extreme example, but it goes to show that there's a benefit to both 'doing' and 'campaigning'.
In reply to jassaelle:
My view of Captain Tom is that he was an ordinary man and I mean that in the best sense not in any kind of denigrating way, he then started something extraordinary and became a conduit for and symbol of the best that happened during the worst of last year.
Does this make him a hero? In my book yes!
In reply to Rob Greenwood - UKClimbing:
> To take your own analogy one step further, it'd be like saying that the individual in question should have left the people within the burning house and instead focussed their time and effort into campaigning for smoke alarms instead.
You left out "while minimising his tax liabilities through a number of companies to ensure that the cost of the smoke alarms falls proportionately more on those with much lower incomes than himself".
Perhaps mean spirited of me, (and I do admire Rashford's work on this), but still not a patch on jellytrad's utterly crass post.
Post edited at 11:30
In reply to Ridge:
> Perhaps mean spirited of me, (and I do admire Rashford's work on this), but still not a patch on jellytrad's utterly crass post.
I like to think he/she will come back and apologise. Surely nobody could be that crass deliberately?
In reply to SAF:
> I doubt the decision was based on whether or not "they" wanted to use an ICU bed up on him but more on the fact that the aggressive treatments available in ICU were simply not viable for a 100 year old as even if those treatments had a positive effect they wouldn't have been able to wean him off those treatments afterwards.
So they decided he wouldn't make it..
In reply to Hat Dude:
Well said Hat Dude. My sentiments exactly. Ordinary people doing extra ordinary things like raising £33 million for the NHS. We should celebrate such accomplishments rather than delve into known problems and raise them as examples as why these types of fundraisers shouldn't have happened. I wonder if the same people bemoan Live Aid or Children in Need.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> The whole adoption of the NHS by the Tories, after years of just using it as a cash cow to enrich their mates, sticks in my throat but we'll have to live with I suppose until there's a reckoning.
I'm no Tory - but that isn't accurate.
The politicisation of the NHS has been by all parties for decades. It is now centre stage in each general election.
If ever there was a need for a cross-party group to develop the strategic plan and take it out of binary political control, this is it.
In reply to Gone for good:
A very sad loss to his family and the country. He became a beacon of hope in a dark time and most of the country rallied round him.
Most definitely a hero in my book and well deserving of the knighthood. Far more than a lot of people who receive them.
It was only a matter of time at 100 years old that something would lay him low but it is a shame he didn't live to see "the end" of Covid.
I really hope he enjoyed his holiday, I'm sure he knew the risks and said sod it, I'm 100 years old I'm off to party.
In reply to Removed UserBilberry:
I don't know why you think your point conflicts with mine. As it happens I completely agree with the idea of depoliticization of the NHS, in my wildest fantasies I could imagine an institution run like an enhanced BBC, with a charter, agreed funding for 'n' years, and a board of (expert) governors who are just left to get on with it, free of stupid MPs wittering on about 'postcode lotteries' or whinging about their hopelessly uneconomic and impractical cottage hospitals being closed.
I know the Labour party isn't immune from privatisation - they extended PFI when it should have been strangled at birth - but the use of NHS as a cash cow for any number of private sector companies, from Capita to Europark, has become the signature policy of the Tories over their last 10 years. Early in the pandemic everything that Hancock tried to do - from Test and Trace to PPE procurement - was subbed out at the very first opportunity to private sector companies that had no frigging idea. Bet they still got paid though.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
I would suggest that as this thread has changed to an RIP it would be better if any views not relating directly to Captain Tom are taken elsewhere.
In reply to marsbar:
> None of my issue is with Captain Tom. I have issues with the way his story has been used by the media and I think BA may as well have killed him. What a publicity stunt. If I had a 100 year old family member I'd be keeping them shielded.
Seems NHS may have killed him. He was negative after returning from his trip, but was positive after he was released from the hospital
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/captain-tom-moore-tested-negative-covid-barbados-...
In reply to pavelk:
It depends when he took the test. It's hard to know but very possible he got it in Barbados or in hospital. Or just at home.
In reply to Roadrunner6:
> It depends when he took the test. It's hard to know but very possible he got it in Barbados or in hospital. Or just at home.
It also depends on which test he took LF are notoriously poor.
In reply to Removed UserBilberry:
> The politicisation of the NHS has been by all parties for decades. It is now centre stage in each general election.
But there's only one party wanting to keep it out of private hands, while the other is actively trying not to.
In reply to WaterMonkey:
I see Boris has asked us to clap to honour Tom and all he did for the NHS.
Maybe he should honour Tom by giving the NHS a pay rise, one they fully deserve, what a wanker!!
In reply to Cobra_Head:
Johnson's the ultimate bandwagon-jumper. Riding on The Captain's status to feather his own putrid nest.
In reply to Cobra_Head:
> I see Boris has asked us to clap to honour Tom and all he did for the NHS.
> Maybe he should honour Tom by giving the NHS a pay rise, one they fully deserve, what a wanker!!
I don't understand your logic here.
Sir Tom raised £34M for the NHS Doesn't that deserve recognition?
As for the Government's past failure to pay front line NHS staff adequately, that's a separate issue - honouring Sir Tom's memory is not a political matter, it's honouring the memory of a very special and caring individual, that's all.
It doesn't let the Governments off the hook. My plural is deliberate, because under recognition and under payment of the NHS staff has been going on for decades.
Post edited at 19:08
In reply to Trangia:
> I don't understand your logic here.
> Sir Tom raised £34M for the NHS Doesn't that deserve recognition?
Of course it does, and there are a number of ways to do that, jumping on the "let's clap" bandwagon, you know the thing most people did for the NHS, only to see the government shit on them a couple of months later, doesn't seem the appropriate way to do it.
I was a fan of clapping for the NHS, because it was the only way I could personally show my appreciation, Johnson f*cked that up for me, and I feel I've been duped, christ knows how NHS staff must feel. Betrayed doesn't cover it.
He was knighted, by the way, too.
In reply to Greenbanks:
> Johnson's the ultimate bandwagon-jumper. Riding on The Captain's status to feather his own putrid nest.
There's a special place for him, hopefully.
In reply to Cobra_Head:
> Of course it does, and there are a number of ways to do that, jumping on the "let's clap" bandwagon, you know the thing most people did for the NHS, only to see the government shit on them a couple of months later, doesn't seem the appropriate way to do it.
> I was a fan of clapping for the NHS, because it was the only way I could personally show my appreciation, Johnson f*cked that up for me, and I feel I've been duped, christ knows how NHS staff must feel. Betrayed doesn't cover it.
It is Covid that has shat on all of us. I'm no fan of Johnson nor his party, but I think you need to separate your dislike of him/them from Sir Tom's action. Johnson is the Leader of the Government at the moment and it is entirely appropriate that as PM he should have led the call for a tribute to Sir Tom. Whether or not you chose to clap is entirely up to you or anyone else.
The Government's mishandling of the pandemic is separate matter which I hope will be the subject of an independent inquiry when it's over
In reply to Trangia:
This is from Johnson.
The PM added: "Tonight let's clap together for Captain Tom at 6pm and let's clap for the spirit of optimism that he stood for.
"But let's also clap for all those he campaigned for, our brilliant NHS staff and care workers.
"Let's do everything we can to carry on supporting them, because if we stay at home, protect our NHS and save lives then in the words of Captain Tom, 'Tomorrow will be a good day.'"
It simple makes my want to punch someone, preferably Johnson himself.
It's sickening, even if I wanted to clap, and if I lived near Tom's relatives I probably still would, I couldn't because of the shite above.
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> I dunno - if I get to 100 would I be prepared to take risks for a last holiday in Barbados? I think it might be a very rational thing to do. His marbles seem pretty intact, maybe you underestimate him?
I suspect a last look at the alpenglow on Mont Blanc might suit better?
In reply to Pete Pozman:
Are you offering to drag me up, Pete?
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
> Are you offering to drag me up, Pete?
Definitely me being dragged, but then it always was😕
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...