| Lockdown exit strategy 12:39 - Apr 15 with 3977 views | Guthrum |
How can the Government (or anyone else) set out a lockdown exit strategy when we can't yet say where we are in the progress of C-19 in the UK, when we have little (non-Chinese) info on the effects of doing so? We have no timeline and no route map yet to base anything on. |  |
| |  |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:57 - Apr 15 with 859 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:41 - Apr 15 by Darth_Koont |
"The only hope is that the disease dies down of its own accord, sufficiently that things can be relaxed."
We knew that from the start. So what is the plan now that we have a lot more data around the diseases and our healthcare resources along with the ability to do immunoassay testing?
What is the plan (with an element of detail) so people, businesses and public services can also make rough plans and be more ready? |
We still don't know that it will. China is the only model we have to go on of somewhere that has supposedly happened. Quite apart from questions of data reliability, they locked down one region very tightly for an extended period (two and a half months), which is not the case in the UK.
We don't have a effective immunoassay test yet. All the ones trialled so far have not proven reliable enough.
How can anybody make a viable plan when there is little information on what can be done, let alone when? This crying out from businesses is just them jumping the gun because they are hurting. They need certainty, but there isn't any available yet.
There's probably a month and a half of this lockdown to go yet. That is what businesses need to be planning for, to survive the extended hiatus in normal operations. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:57 - Apr 15 with 855 views | Andrew4445 |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:54 - Apr 15 by itfc_bucks |
Strikes me that we should have the outline of a plan - "If things progress as we anticipate, the plan will be x. If things deviate from where we expect, the contingency is a,b,c". |
Indeed. We will aim to open core sectors of the ecnomy first - we consider 'construction, education and small retailing to be core'.
We will then wait 14 days to see what effect this has and will then look to include....
Seems eminently sensible to me. |  | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:57 - Apr 15 with 853 views | Darth_Koont |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:53 - Apr 15 by Beckets |
I'm reminded of the quote attributed to Dominic Cummings "herd immunity, protect the economy and if some old pensioners die, too bad". |
The harsh reality is that's it in a not very empathetic nutshell. Lockdowns are only really to prevent healthcare resources being swamped and losing control of the deathrate/creating panic. |  |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:58 - Apr 15 with 858 views | Kievthegreat |
Surely it's a perfect situation to prove the adage, "plans are useless, planning is essential".
It's not about knowing that it ends exactly in 3 weeks and it needs to be concrete. However it would be useful if people and businesses can expect HOW restrictions are to be rolled back, as opposed to exactly when.. I mean knowing that the first restriction to end is schools would be useful. similarly if they are going to open up non-essential work, but keep certain businesses like Cafes and restaurants closed would be vital to affected business. |  | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:03 - Apr 15 with 835 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:46 - Apr 15 by gordon |
So we shouldn't have a plan because it will be scrutinised? |
There's a difference between scientific scrutiny and being picked apart by people (including journalists) who are actually just expressing their boredom and frustration - even fear - about the lockdown. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:04 - Apr 15 with 833 views | Darth_Koont |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:57 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
We still don't know that it will. China is the only model we have to go on of somewhere that has supposedly happened. Quite apart from questions of data reliability, they locked down one region very tightly for an extended period (two and a half months), which is not the case in the UK.
We don't have a effective immunoassay test yet. All the ones trialled so far have not proven reliable enough.
How can anybody make a viable plan when there is little information on what can be done, let alone when? This crying out from businesses is just them jumping the gun because they are hurting. They need certainty, but there isn't any available yet.
There's probably a month and a half of this lockdown to go yet. That is what businesses need to be planning for, to survive the extended hiatus in normal operations. |
None of which actually takes into account the rest of the year and the state we'll be at with an over-cautious lockdown. Economically but also with associated healthcare impact.
This is my concern that we're politically paralysed by a need to minimize deaths in a typical politician's way of thinking about headlines, rather than taking the adult and likely harder decisions that we need to take. And certainly by being transparent about the overall information we need to be looking at.
Let's see what is being discussed and let's properly address the options. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:11 - Apr 15 with 823 views | factual_blue |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:58 - Apr 15 by Kievthegreat |
Surely it's a perfect situation to prove the adage, "plans are useless, planning is essential".
It's not about knowing that it ends exactly in 3 weeks and it needs to be concrete. However it would be useful if people and businesses can expect HOW restrictions are to be rolled back, as opposed to exactly when.. I mean knowing that the first restriction to end is schools would be useful. similarly if they are going to open up non-essential work, but keep certain businesses like Cafes and restaurants closed would be vital to affected business. |
Indeed. A strategy isn't a plan, nor is it a timetable.
I think many are concerned that boris will stumble or charge out of lockdown, just as he stumbled into it. |  |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:11 - Apr 15 with 814 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:04 - Apr 15 by Darth_Koont |
None of which actually takes into account the rest of the year and the state we'll be at with an over-cautious lockdown. Economically but also with associated healthcare impact.
This is my concern that we're politically paralysed by a need to minimize deaths in a typical politician's way of thinking about headlines, rather than taking the adult and likely harder decisions that we need to take. And certainly by being transparent about the overall information we need to be looking at.
Let's see what is being discussed and let's properly address the options. |
That's the horns of the dilemma.
How many extra people will die if we release the lockdown? If we continue it a bit longer, might the numbers start to drop? How much damage can we afford to do to the economy?
It's real lives balanced against real livelihoods.
I'm just not sure I trust the media to be sensible about such a debate. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:17 - Apr 15 with 797 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 13:42 - Apr 15 by itfcjoe |
There isn't enough money to sit half the country in furlough for many more months, so there will have to be contingency plans in place.
We can't sit here for 18 months waiting for a vaccine with the Government picking up the tab |
But what's the alternative - another 10,000 deaths?
As for the money side of things, I'm convinced there's going to have to be some sort of shenanigans to get us - and the rest of the world - out of this situation. It's too far gone already for just a dose of austerity. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:33 - Apr 15 with 776 views | gordon |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:03 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
There's a difference between scientific scrutiny and being picked apart by people (including journalists) who are actually just expressing their boredom and frustration - even fear - about the lockdown. |
But preventing scientific scrutiny of something so important because you don't want Robert Peston to ask daft questions seems a bit counter-productive. |  | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:34 - Apr 15 with 774 views | gordon |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:17 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
But what's the alternative - another 10,000 deaths?
As for the money side of things, I'm convinced there's going to have to be some sort of shenanigans to get us - and the rest of the world - out of this situation. It's too far gone already for just a dose of austerity. |
It'll be more like 20,000 - 25,000 deaths so far, at a minimum. | | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:37 - Apr 15 with 767 views | gordon |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:11 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
That's the horns of the dilemma.
How many extra people will die if we release the lockdown? If we continue it a bit longer, might the numbers start to drop? How much damage can we afford to do to the economy?
It's real lives balanced against real livelihoods.
I'm just not sure I trust the media to be sensible about such a debate. |
We really don't have a choice - of course it's a massively important and difficult question, no one is saying otherwise. But regardless, in democracies, this type of decision is scrutinised, debated and challenged, for good or ill. | | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:38 - Apr 15 with 763 views | Darth_Koont |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:11 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
That's the horns of the dilemma.
How many extra people will die if we release the lockdown? If we continue it a bit longer, might the numbers start to drop? How much damage can we afford to do to the economy?
It's real lives balanced against real livelihoods.
I'm just not sure I trust the media to be sensible about such a debate. |
Sure, the UK media is generally as crap as the politicians. That’s why we need to bypass them and avoid having this whole debate between politicians and the media. That invariably has led to poorer decisions in recent years.
I’d like to hear the wider scientific and economic community have a look at the options being discussed and the data being used. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:50 - Apr 15 with 746 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:33 - Apr 15 by gordon |
But preventing scientific scrutiny of something so important because you don't want Robert Peston to ask daft questions seems a bit counter-productive. |
You don't have to. The scientific community can be brought into the process through wide consultation. After all, most of the experts are well-known within their fields and not that hard to get hold of. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:55 - Apr 15 with 741 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:34 - Apr 15 by gordon |
It'll be more like 20,000 - 25,000 deaths so far, at a minimum. |
Might be that kind of figure in total. Altho the daily rate of new positive tests has stabilised since the high-point of 10th April (8,681), fluctuating between 4,342 and 5,288. Which suggests the lockdown is having a beneficial effect on halting the escalation of the disease's spread. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:01 - Apr 15 with 725 views | Darth_Koont |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:50 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
You don't have to. The scientific community can be brought into the process through wide consultation. After all, most of the experts are well-known within their fields and not that hard to get hold of. |
I think there needs to be more transparency than that. They could be getting in pollsters and basing the decisions on that for all we know. Or on the needs of major party donors, lobbyists etc. Similarly the media can interpret and write what it wants based on their circulation figures and clickbait.
Let's be open-source and honest about this. After all, this is based on incomplete, changing data and projections rather than anyone knowing exactly how things are going to pan out. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:18 - Apr 15 with 702 views | Guthrum |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:01 - Apr 15 by Darth_Koont |
I think there needs to be more transparency than that. They could be getting in pollsters and basing the decisions on that for all we know. Or on the needs of major party donors, lobbyists etc. Similarly the media can interpret and write what it wants based on their circulation figures and clickbait.
Let's be open-source and honest about this. After all, this is based on incomplete, changing data and projections rather than anyone knowing exactly how things are going to pan out. |
But that, in itself, is part of the problem. The media and political debate does not deal well with moving goalposts and changing situations. Politicians are going to fight shy of exposing themselves to accusations they "got it wrong" or "U-turned".
You only have to look at the ongoing rows about "herd immunity". It was semi-announced as a primary approach, then the figures coming out of Italy proved it was badly misjudged. The policy was swiftly dropped and social distancing introduced instead. Was there and gone so quickly it probably, at that early stage, made little difference to the outcome (given we were doing containment as well). More of a problem was the initial halfway-house of voluntary social isolation, before the formal lockdown was introduced. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:25 - Apr 15 with 701 views | eireblue |
The example I would give is Matt Hancock’s target for number of tests.
He made a very clear statement, he had a target for the end of April.
Having and publicising a target is somewhat similar to having a strategy.
Except of course, a strategy is something that the Government has to develop, execute on, and based on circumstances revise planning to meet the objective. Trouble is, then it would be transparent what is and isn’t happening.
Setting a target is not really a plan or a strategy, and it will be interesting to see what happens if that target is missed. I would assume since that target was mentioned publicly, it is equally well known what happens when the target is met, or missed.
I am quite a fan of scientific thinking, but that isn’t the same as trusting an individual view or falling into the appeal to authority trap.
It was group think, and a lack of strategic and effective planning that somewhat led to the 2008 crash, and the Iraq war.
There were scientific advisors that had a different view within SAGE.
Seems to me you can have a strategy in place, especially if you are happy to publish targets.
Without a plan or strategy to hit a target, and what you do when the target is met, exceeded, or missed, is a bit worthless. You may as well say ITFC have a target to win the champions league in 3 years, and being really confident that it will happen. |  | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:30 - Apr 15 with 693 views | Darth_Koont |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:18 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
But that, in itself, is part of the problem. The media and political debate does not deal well with moving goalposts and changing situations. Politicians are going to fight shy of exposing themselves to accusations they "got it wrong" or "U-turned".
You only have to look at the ongoing rows about "herd immunity". It was semi-announced as a primary approach, then the figures coming out of Italy proved it was badly misjudged. The policy was swiftly dropped and social distancing introduced instead. Was there and gone so quickly it probably, at that early stage, made little difference to the outcome (given we were doing containment as well). More of a problem was the initial halfway-house of voluntary social isolation, before the formal lockdown was introduced. |
I think you read the herd immunity completely differently from me. They were also talking about social distancing and lockdowns so it was a case of timing. The government and media then did what they do which is get in a fudge. Because as you say the data and situation change.
Neither the politicians nor the media were prepared for that. So maybe we should have been talking about goalposts and changing situations and options all along.
Our democracy is barely functional at the best of times. Now, in a pandemic, it looks so far out of its depth that we should be talking science first and options before we wait for a "strong and stable" people's decision.
You would never employ BoJo and his cabinet or the media to scrutinise and solve this tough and unprecedented problem. So why are they in sole charge of the process, the information being used and a solution that they can barely hint at now? | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:39 - Apr 15 with 678 views | Andrew4445 |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:18 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
But that, in itself, is part of the problem. The media and political debate does not deal well with moving goalposts and changing situations. Politicians are going to fight shy of exposing themselves to accusations they "got it wrong" or "U-turned".
You only have to look at the ongoing rows about "herd immunity". It was semi-announced as a primary approach, then the figures coming out of Italy proved it was badly misjudged. The policy was swiftly dropped and social distancing introduced instead. Was there and gone so quickly it probably, at that early stage, made little difference to the outcome (given we were doing containment as well). More of a problem was the initial halfway-house of voluntary social isolation, before the formal lockdown was introduced. |
Herd immunity was based on a paper by I think 'Imperial' but that might be wrong so apologies if it is. When it was finally published, well after the Italian deaths were apparent it became clear they had massivly underestimated the requirement for ICU intervention and at that point the model showed the health service would be overwhelmed.
Peer review helps to idenitfy these errors earlier and helps to prevent them becoming policy that actually leads to deaths.
The Government had the examples of Italy, China and S Korea well before they finalised their herd immunity approach, they based it on the incorrect report which is why they keep saying 'it is based on the science'. That only works if the science is available for challenge and scrutiny. | | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:42 - Apr 15 with 669 views | Andrew4445 |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 14:55 - Apr 15 by Guthrum |
Might be that kind of figure in total. Altho the daily rate of new positive tests has stabilised since the high-point of 10th April (8,681), fluctuating between 4,342 and 5,288. Which suggests the lockdown is having a beneficial effect on halting the escalation of the disease's spread. |
I think this is interesting. The confirmations of covid-19 and prescribed deaths from it are far lower then the actual shift in the daily UK death rate would suggest. The average death rates are comparable across multiple years and ours is spiking well above the average. They may not be allocated to covid in the daily death count but it is a hell of a coincidence. | | | |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:51 - Apr 15 with 654 views | Trequartista |
We are behind Italy and Spain so we can seeing what happens there will help. There has to be a plan, the order and timings of which things are lifted, even if it is not known yet when to execute it |  |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 15:59 - Apr 15 with 635 views | ElephantintheRoom |
For the simple reason that you never, ever should start something without knowing why you are doing it or where you are going.
It's a free hit for Starmer because nobody in the government has any idea what this partial lockdown can achieve as their dithering entrenched the virus in the community before the lockdown was put into effect, making the 'lockdown' fairly pointless and downright dangerous for everyone whilst removing the focus from the deranged approach to healthcare and care in the community that has left us all so vulnerable..
Other countries can plan for an escape route because they have integrated healthcare - we don't and we dont even know the infection rates - though the suspicion is, thanks to dithering, it is the highest in europe... and will lead to the highest death rates because of a lack of joined up thinking coupled with disastrous and incompetent leadership.
The honest answer is that everyone is waiting until 700 deaths a day is acceptable..then they can bullsh!t about a plateau... and hey presto we all go back to work. | |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 16:02 - Apr 15 with 631 views | MaySixth |
Scientific assumption?
That's what they have apparently based all their decisions on for the last month. [Post edited 15 Apr 2020 16:37]
|  |
| |
| Lockdown exit strategy on 16:06 - Apr 15 with 632 views | Herbivore |
I honestly don't think it's asking too much for a broad strokes picture of how we plan to come out of lockdown. We really do have such a low bar when it comes to expectations of our government sometimes. Of course plans can and will be subject to change but the situation being uncertain doesn't justify not developing a plan (or plans) to ultimately ease restrictions. [Post edited 15 Apr 2020 16:39]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
