Coronavirus - Overall



  • @Billy-Tell do you think that is ... significant?



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Crucial said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    it consistently heaps praise on Boris

    The ultimate sin....

    Secondly they refer a lot to meetings and discussions as claims of 'action'.

    What do you expect them to do? Not have meetings and simply rush into action without discussions? Ignore the (then) advice from experts - inc critics like Horton - not to rush to take action as it wasn't a big problem?

    I agree that it isn't fair to claim that they were dismissing a threat but if you look at a chart of the 'R' rate in the UK, it was over 4 for a couple of weeks before lockdown.

    Can you post a link to the chart? I thought I heard Chris Whitty, in response to a question on the R rate before lock-down, that there was no useable data on this

    They may have done lots of planning and talking but weren't decisive when it counted.

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    Comparisons with NZ suffer fatally from the inherently different circumstances.

    The international flow of visitors/proximity to major outbreaks/reliance on mass transit/differences in urban population density are just a few.

    From what I can gather there were a number of asymptomatic [super] spreaders in the UK for quite a while below the radar. The problem that causes is that once a sufficient number of infections is in such a system it's too late for the NZ style approach to be particularly effective.

    Another slightly behavioural factor, is that the European governments were all getting up to speed around the same time. Italy went into national lockdown on 10 March. I very doubt there would have been buy in in the UK for a lockdown before then. So whilst hindsighted scientists might say they argued for more in February, at WORST UK was in practical terms two weeks late, and more objectively probably only a week, being when France went.

    NZ had the luxury of low levels of infection, and even whilst locking down after Western Europe it was much earlier in the spreading phase, so test and trace was still a viable strategy.

    As I said earlier, in the round I think UK Government went OK.



  • @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    As I said earlier, in the round I think UK Government went OK.

    Time will tell.

    We don't know how many lives have been saved by the scheme to isolate 1m vulnerable people. There's also the need to balance out the health risks resulting from lock-down as the Three Wise Men & Jenny keep telling us.



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Crucial said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    it consistently heaps praise on Boris

    The ultimate sin....

    Not my point. The point was that by doing so the release set out with 'protective' and partisan intent which colours the facts.

    Secondly they refer a lot to meetings and discussions as claims of 'action'.

    What do you expect them to do? Not have meetings and simply rush into action without discussions? Ignore the (then) advice from experts - inc critics like Horton - not to rush to take action as it wasn't a big problem?

    I didn't say that at all. The release refutes the premise that the govt didn't take decisive action with a counter that they were still deciding.

    I agree that it isn't fair to claim that they were dismissing a threat but if you look at a chart of the 'R' rate in the UK, it was over 4 for a couple of weeks before lockdown.

    Can you post a link to the chart? I thought I heard Chris Whitty, in response to a question on the R rate before lock-down, that there was no useable data on this

    I think it was in the FT. The chart was of estimations though and the range was between 3 and 4, dropping to under 1 after lockdown. I did say that my comment was with the benefit of hindsight.

    They may have done lots of planning and talking but weren't decisive when it counted.

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    Scientific advice adds to the information provided to assess risk. It was up to the govt to decide the risks that they would take. By March 12 it was also well known that spread was fast and that the current numbers were likely the tip of the iceberg. That isn't the scientific evidence, that is the factual evidence.

    In case you are reading this with the tone of criticism, that isn't my intent. It is more to explain the consequence of delay in decisive action which can now be clearly seen.

    I do think that the evidence points to indecision. It may have been done under poor advice, it may have been done from a different risk weigh up of virus vs society/economy. There are likely explainable reasons, but the result was a delay that assisted the spread.



  • @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    Economic advice too.

    There's a big correlation between high death rates and economic problems which needs to be squared against lock-downs.



  • Every now and then Ted Cruz comes out with a great tweet:



  • Has Neil Ferguson (Imperial College)exploits been mentioned on this thread

    It seems Fauci and Birx relied on his flawed projections (to push Trump to close down the US economy = 30 million lost jobs). Maybe his mind was distracted elsewhere





  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    As I said earlier, in the round I think UK Government went OK.

    Time will tell.

    We don't know how many lives have been saved by the scheme to isolate 1m vulnerable people. There's also the need to balance out the health risks resulting from lock-down as the Three Wise Men & Jenny keep telling us.

    For me they need to get military on care homes, and then go Swedish.



  • They may have done lots of planning and talking but weren't decisive when it counted.

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    Scientific advice adds to the information provided to assess risk. It was up to the govt to decide the risks that they would take. By March 12 it was also well known that spread was fast and that the current numbers were likely the tip of the iceberg. That isn't the scientific evidence, that is the factual evidence.

    In case you are reading this with the tone of criticism, that isn't my intent. It is more to explain the consequence of delay in decisive action which can now be clearly seen.

    I do think that the evidence points to indecision. It may have been done under poor advice, it may have been done from a different risk weigh up of virus vs society/economy. There are likely explainable reasons, but the result was a delay that assisted the spread.

    I'm not sure the evidence points to indecision. For whatever reason it WAS decided NOT to lockdown in the week of the 10th March.

    I personally am unaware of the UK having locked down in peacetime during the last century. It certainly didn't during the Hong Kong flu in 1968, which BTW killed 80,000.

    A big question they would have faced was whether or not the populace would comply. As you say, at that stage only the tip of the iceberg was present. They were also concerned that a hard lockdown could only be sustained for so long, and wanted to do it when most effective.

    There were also trying to make track and trace work as late as that week. It appears the scientists by the Friday were still equivocal about lockdown, whist Dominic Cummings had become convinced that trace and trace wouldn't cut it.

    By the time they went a fortnight later people had read about Italy, Spain and France and were ready to accept the measure.

    All that said, I thought Cheltenham/continued football was a mistake at the time, and still do.

    But all said and done, there were no easy answers.



  • @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    For the public mask wearing won't stop ingestion of CV particles in the air around one. Face covering can limit the 'spray' of coughs, and thereby limit spread.

    I think what UK is struggling with is how the public would respond to the message that wearing a mask won't protect the wearer, it's only to protect the others.



  • @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    For the public mask wearing won't stop ingestion of CV particles in the air around one. Face covering can limit the 'spray' of coughs, and thereby limit spread.

    I think what UK is struggling with is how the public would respond to the message that wearing a mask won't protect the wearer, it's only to protect the others.

    The Asian angle (Taiwan and China for example) was that the population felt safer with the masks on, which was seen as a benefit



  • @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    For the public mask wearing won't stop ingestion of CV particles in the air around one. Face covering can limit the 'spray' of coughs, and thereby limit spread.

    I think what UK is struggling with is how the public would respond to the message that wearing a mask won't protect the wearer, it's only to protect the others.

    The Asian angle (Taiwan and China for example) was that the population felt safer with the masks on, which was seen as a benefit

    I think where they're headed here is PPE MASKS in hospitals, but FACE COVERINGS on public transport, which I expect to be compulsary.



  • @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    For the public mask wearing won't stop ingestion of CV particles in the air around one. Face covering can limit the 'spray' of coughs, and thereby limit spread.

    I think what UK is struggling with is how the public would respond to the message that wearing a mask won't protect the wearer, it's only to protect the others.

    The Asian angle (Taiwan and China for example) was that the population felt safer with the masks on, which was seen as a benefit

    I think where they're headed here is PPE MASKS in hospitals, but FACE COVERINGS on public transport, which I expect to be compulsary.

    If I was riding the tube everyday I think I'd feel happier wearing one too



  • Fucken hell what are the people who moan about the burka/niqab going to say about that?



  • @canefan yes, when I head back to London I’ll probably mask up ((c) - Brian Fantana). No need out here.

    One of those things I’m not sure s government can really control



  • @Bones said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Fucken hell what are the people who moan about the burka/niqab going to say about that?

    "Where can I buy one of those? "



  • @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Bones said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Fucken hell what are the people who moan about the burka/niqab going to say about that?

    "Where can I buy one of those? "

    It will be quite hilarious.



  • @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    For the public mask wearing won't stop ingestion of CV particles in the air around one. Face covering can limit the 'spray' of coughs, and thereby limit spread.

    I think what UK is struggling with is how the public would respond to the message that wearing a mask won't protect the wearer, it's only to protect the others.

    The Asian angle (Taiwan and China for example) was that the population felt safer with the masks on, which was seen as a benefit

    I think where they're headed here is PPE MASKS in hospitals, but FACE COVERINGS on public transport, which I expect to be compulsary.

    If I was riding the tube everyday I think I'd feel happier wearing one too

    Then wear one. But don't force others to.

    The world has gone form one mad extreme (seriously ill people traveling on public transport etc) to the other one (healthy people being forced to wear masks) The key is to stop sick people traveling or working. Or going out and spreading all their germs about. Protecting and supporting vulnerable people. But then let the rest get on with their lives. Without wearing silly masks.

    Otherwise where will it all stop. Maybe ban cars etc. Or stop all risky activities like mountain climbing.

    I hate the nanny state and nanny state control freak leaders.



  • @Crucial

    The point was that by doing so the release set out with 'protective' and partisan intent which colours the facts.

    The Sunday Times article attacked BoJo as not being interested in the crisis and lacking leadership. It's entirely appropriate for the rebuttal to reject that and point out he was "at the helm" during this crisis. The resposnse contains bare uncoloured facts - dates actions, meeting attendees, quotes and tweets.

    The release refutes the premise that the govt didn't take decisive action with a counter that they were still deciding.

    The response points out additional PPE was ordered on 27 Jan. A quick google shows on 3 Feb the government started vaccine development, on 10 Feb forcible quarantine measures were enacted, and schools and hospitals given guidance and NHS pandemic plans enacted. That was when the total no. of UK cases was 8.

    I think it was in the FT.

    Looks to be one of the scenarios they modelled on Coronavirus impact and not hard (or even soft) data. Straight lines of graphs should be treated with great suspicion...

    Scientific advice adds to the information provided to assess risk. It was up to the govt to decide the risks that they would take.

    Not sure what this means. What information other than scientific/medical/public behavioral advice was provided? They followed the scientific advice on risks. Are you saying they should have ignored that advice?

    I do think that the evidence points to indecision.

    The only evidence is that scientific advice- inc.timing - was followed and decisions taken when appropriate. You don't announce an unprecidented lock-down of 67 million people in 2 days time or a 4,000 bed hopsital being built in 10 days time in mid-March without weeks of planning and action.

    The decisions and advice on timing were certainly anything but 100% right, and Ministers have been open about not getting things right, but the indecision argument just doesn't hold water.



  • @Bones said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Fucken hell what are the people who moan about the burka/niqab going to say about that?

    Or, for that matter, the shareholders in Facial Recognition tech firms?



  • UK Government has announced ministers won't be allowed to appear on Good Morning Britain anymore.

    The interviews all went the same. Morgan would ask questions, allow the minister to get in 3-4 words before interrupting and shouting. Would then find something the minister didn't know / didn't think appropriate to comment on which and then blow it up massively and that's all anybody would talk about.

    Public learned nothing, Morgan got airwaves & according to him, popularity.

    Not what its supposed to be about. Journalists should ask the government hard questions, undoubtedly. But we should also be able to learn something.



  • @MajorRage said in Coronavirus - Overall: Journalists should ask the government hard questions, undoubtedly. But we should also be able to learn something.

    There're your mistakes: 1) Equating Morgan with Journalism 2) expecting to learn anything from Morgan as host



  • @MajorRage

    One of the big eye-openers for me is how so many eminent people in the professions, universities and "serious media" have strong political agendas and think it OK to pursue them in an unprecedented health crisis without people noticing.



  • @MajorRage said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    UK Government has announced ministers won't be allowed to appear on Good Morning Britain anymore.

    Disagree with this.

    They are missing the opportunity of interacting with The World's Greatest Epidemiologist, Piers Morgan.



  • @SynicBast said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @MajorRage said in Coronavirus - Overall: Journalists should ask the government hard questions, undoubtedly. But we should also be able to learn something.

    There're your mistakes: 1) Equating Morgan with Journalism 2) expecting to learn anything from Morgan as host

    I think the government has genuinely tried to be open and honest with the media, warts and all, and the latter has seems more interested in, inane or "gotcha" questions and has completely missed the public mood.



  • A real worry that on Thursday 7th May the media is full of 'stories/facts/opinions/fake news' on what Boris is going to deliver to the UK on Sunday.

    There's a real de-mob happy vibe being put out there which could go disastrously wrong if Boris tells us we still have to stay in.



  • I'd really like to know why some of the British cabinet are the only world leaders to have gotten it.



  • @MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    I'd really like to know why some of the British cabinet are the only world leaders to have gotten it.

    It only takes 1...



  • @Winger said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @canefan said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @nzzp said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Even if "decisive" action was against scientific advice? There has been criticism that sports events like Cheltenham should have been stopped, but the scientific advice at the time was to let it continue.

    One of the real challenges is that there's lots of different scientific advice, and it often conflicts. FFS, we can't even agree if mask wearing is a good thing or not.

    For the public mask wearing won't stop ingestion of CV particles in the air around one. Face covering can limit the 'spray' of coughs, and thereby limit spread.

    I think what UK is struggling with is how the public would respond to the message that wearing a mask won't protect the wearer, it's only to protect the others.

    The Asian angle (Taiwan and China for example) was that the population felt safer with the masks on, which was seen as a benefit

    I think where they're headed here is PPE MASKS in hospitals, but FACE COVERINGS on public transport, which I expect to be compulsary.

    If I was riding the tube everyday I think I'd feel happier wearing one too

    Then wear one. But don't force others to.

    The world has gone form one mad extreme (seriously ill people traveling on public transport etc) to the other one (healthy people being forced to wear masks) The key is to stop sick people traveling or working. Or going out and spreading all their germs about. Protecting and supporting vulnerable people. But then let the rest get on with their lives. Without wearing silly masks.

    Otherwise where will it all stop. Maybe ban cars etc. Or stop all risky activities like mountain climbing.

    I hate the nanny state and nanny state control freak leaders.

    I agree.

    The horrendous problem is that asymptomatic infectees can cough mildly once or twice in a tube journey and potentially infect most of the carriage.

    I expect those choosing not to wear face covering on public transport to get evil eye.



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @MajorRage

    One of the big eye-openers for me is how so many eminent people in the professions, universities and "serious media" have strong political agendas and think it OK to pursue them in an unprecedented health crisis without people noticing.

    It's all a desparate emotional backlash against Brexit.

    None so blind as those which see.



  • @MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    A real worry that on Thursday 7th May the media is full of 'stories/facts/opinions/fake news' on what Boris is going to deliver to the UK on Sunday.

    There's a real de-mob happy vibe being put out there which could go disastrously wrong if Boris tells us we still have to stay in.

    Yes, agree, this is a right fuck up. Lots of people will expect a mass loosening next week so will go nuts on the long weekend.

    @MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    I'd really like to know why some of the British cabinet are the only world leaders to have gotten it.

    Something to do with shaking hands would be my guess

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @MajorRage

    One of the big eye-openers for me is how so many eminent people in the professions, universities and "serious media" have strong political agendas and think it OK to pursue them in an unprecedented health crisis without people noticing.

    It's all a desparate emotional backlash against Brexit.

    None so blind as those which see.

    100% this.



  • @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @MajorRage

    One of the big eye-openers for me is how so many eminent people in the professions, universities and "serious media" have strong political agendas and think it OK to pursue them in an unprecedented health crisis without people noticing.

    It's all a desparate emotional backlash against Brexit.

    None so blind as those which see.

    I thought you were being ironic for a while there. But then Professor Helen Ward who's often in the media attacking the government on Coronavirus said on Twitter.

    "professional academic me - is inseparable from the me that cares about kicking out the tories, stopping brexit and supporting Labour" Twitter 7 Dec 2019

    Def. one who's opinion is to be valued then...



  • @MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    I'd really like to know why some of the British cabinet are the only world leaders to have gotten it.

    There was a article I read comparing the UK to places like the US, France & Germany. They have medical teams dedicated to the countries leaders & cabinets with, in the US's case, daily testing. The UK PM & Cabinet doesn't.

    I recall there were many questions asked about Hancock & BoJo jumping the testing queue when they were tested. Time some people grew-up methinks.



  • @MiketheSnow said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    A real worry that on Thursday 7th May the media is full of 'stories/facts/opinions/fake news' on what Boris is going to deliver to the UK on Sunday.

    There's a real de-mob happy vibe being put out there which could go disastrously wrong if Boris tells us we still have to stay in.

    Guido makes this point by taking the piss out of The Telegraph.

    https://order-order.com/2020/05/07/fourth-time-lucky-telegraph/



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @MajorRage

    One of the big eye-openers for me is how so many eminent people in the professions, universities and "serious media" have strong political agendas and think it OK to pursue them in an unprecedented health crisis without people noticing.

    It's all a desparate emotional backlash against Brexit.

    None so blind as those which see.

    I thought you were being ironic for a while there. But then Professor Helen Ward who's often in the media attacking the government on Coronavirus said on Twitter.

    "professional academic me - is inseparable from the me that cares about kicking out the tories, stopping brexit and supporting Labour" Twitter 7 Dec 2019

    Def. one who's opinion is to be valued then...

    I read one of her shocking 'exposes' in the Guardiad.

    Was not shocked to find that it was almost entirely highsight assertion and anti-Government vindictive.

    Most of these 'experts' don't even seem to have clocked that a PPE Tsar has been appointed to sort out PHE/NHS logistical brain fade.



  • @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Most of these 'experts' don't even seem to have clocked that a PPE Tsar has been appointed to sort out PHE/NHS logistical brain fade.

    One senses any failings of the NHS/PHE won't be investigated, addressed and improved, sadly.

    Far too precious a national institution to come under any serious scrutiny.



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @MajorRage

    One of the big eye-openers for me is how so many eminent people in the professions, universities and "serious media" have strong political agendas and think it OK to pursue them in an unprecedented health crisis without people noticing.

    It's all a desparate emotional backlash against Brexit.

    None so blind as those which see.

    I thought you were being ironic for a while there.

    All was a bit over the top, which I know is frowned upon here, but definitely much of it!

    But then Professor Helen Ward who's often in the media attacking the government on Coronavirus said on Twitter.

    "professional academic me - is inseparable from the me that cares about kicking out the tories, stopping brexit and supporting Labour" Twitter 7 Dec 2019

    Def. one who's opinion is to be valued then...



  • @Victor-Meldrew said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    @pakman said in Coronavirus - Overall:

    Most of these 'experts' don't even seem to have clocked that a PPE Tsar has been appointed to sort out PHE/NHS logistical brain fade.

    One senses any failings of the NHS/PHE won't be investigated, addressed and improved, sadly.

    Far too precious a national institution to come under any serious scrutiny.

    It’s pissing me off big time this.

    I’ve not seen one single criticism to anybody in the NHS, it’s all going straight at the government. What’s the point if senior staff there if they face zero criticism?

    Surely if you are senior in the NHS you should be looking outside the tunnel. That’s what senior responsibility is about. Looking long term, doing your own research and ensuring you aren’t blindsided. If senior hospital staff weren’t ordering extra PPE from December and relying on the govt, they serve no purpose.


Log in to reply