| The SAGE / Government dispute 08:35 - Jul 17 with 2703 views | gordon |
that is bubbling up is pretty mind-boggling - Apparently SAGE decided a full lockdown was needed on the 13th March, but didn't tell the government until the 16th March.
Then for the next week they didn't speak up and let anyone know they'd come to this conclusion (it's basically come to light now), while lots of other epidemiologists who were arguing that the delay going in to lockdown was going to cost thousands of lives were being shouted down by the 'following the science' crowd.
Meanwhile, Matt Hancock is now saying that the lockdown started on the 16th March.
|  | | |  |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:40 - Jul 17 with 1827 views | gordon |
E.g here's one distinguished public health expert asking a member of SAGE why he was complicit in the deaths of thousands of people, basically.
Not a great look. | | | |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:45 - Jul 17 with 1796 views | tractordownsouth |
Only thing I can think of is the "advisers advise, ministers decide" mantra?
Perhaps if they'd spoken up it would have undermined the govt's strategy |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:50 - Jul 17 with 1785 views | gordon |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:45 - Jul 17 by tractordownsouth |
Only thing I can think of is the "advisers advise, ministers decide" mantra?
Perhaps if they'd spoken up it would have undermined the govt's strategy |
Assuming what they are saying is true re making this decision on the 13th, then I think in this case if they had communicated, en masse, on the 13th March that a lockdown was needed pronto, it would have saved a lot of lives.
Sure Cummings could have tried to replace them all with Chris Grayling or something, but I think in hindsight they probably wish they'd gone about things a bit differently. | | | |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:55 - Jul 17 with 1775 views | giant_stow |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:50 - Jul 17 by gordon |
Assuming what they are saying is true re making this decision on the 13th, then I think in this case if they had communicated, en masse, on the 13th March that a lockdown was needed pronto, it would have saved a lot of lives.
Sure Cummings could have tried to replace them all with Chris Grayling or something, but I think in hindsight they probably wish they'd gone about things a bit differently. |
There was always a question about how good our experts were. |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:56 - Jul 17 with 1768 views | Herbivore |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:55 - Jul 17 by giant_stow |
There was always a question about how good our experts were. |
We've had enough of experts. |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:58 - Jul 17 with 1769 views | monytowbray |
Political point Scoring.
Revelling in the dead.
Trust the science. |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:58 - Jul 17 with 1765 views | giant_stow |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:56 - Jul 17 by Herbivore |
We've had enough of experts. |
Maybe we should have transfered in some foreign ones? | |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:04 - Jul 17 with 1746 views | longtimefan |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:45 - Jul 17 by tractordownsouth |
Only thing I can think of is the "advisers advise, ministers decide" mantra?
Perhaps if they'd spoken up it would have undermined the govt's strategy |
Sounds like classic Public service behaviour from the 60s. We won’t bother disturbing them now, we’ll wait for next weeks meeting! |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:06 - Jul 17 with 1740 views | gordon |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:55 - Jul 17 by giant_stow |
There was always a question about how good our experts were. |
The point is more that they were a bit naive in assuming their advice would actually be acted upon, and they wouldn't be used as a human shield - in hindsight they should have assumed complete incompetence from the govt. right from the start, and definitely shouldn't have allowed the following the science line to be used, given they are now saying it was a bare faced lie. | | | |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:10 - Jul 17 with 1729 views | gordon |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:04 - Jul 17 by longtimefan |
Sounds like classic Public service behaviour from the 60s. We won’t bother disturbing them now, we’ll wait for next weeks meeting! |
Yes, couldn't believe that! They concluded that a lockdown was needed on a Friday, but didn't want to spoil anyone's weekend so didn't send the email till Monday?!
Unless Dom or one of his minions was actually at the SAGE meeting. | | | |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:12 - Jul 17 with 1717 views | giant_stow |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:06 - Jul 17 by gordon |
The point is more that they were a bit naive in assuming their advice would actually be acted upon, and they wouldn't be used as a human shield - in hindsight they should have assumed complete incompetence from the govt. right from the start, and definitely shouldn't have allowed the following the science line to be used, given they are now saying it was a bare faced lie. |
Fair enough in one sense. In another, you could say that an eminent scientist might be expected to be more aware of the how their opinions might be used (or not). Part of the required skillset in a very public role? | |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:22 - Jul 17 with 1676 views | gordon |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:12 - Jul 17 by giant_stow |
Fair enough in one sense. In another, you could say that an eminent scientist might be expected to be more aware of the how their opinions might be used (or not). Part of the required skillset in a very public role? |
Absolutely. | | | |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 10:10 - Jul 17 with 1605 views | bournemouthblue |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:55 - Jul 17 by giant_stow |
There was always a question about how good our experts were. |
One of the big problems they had earlier on was the quality of data they were presented, obviously we weren't really testing anyone in great enough numbers to understand the full extent of the outbreak |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 10:36 - Jul 17 with 1574 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:40 - Jul 17 by gordon |
E.g here's one distinguished public health expert asking a member of SAGE why he was complicit in the deaths of thousands of people, basically.
Not a great look. |
Even had they acted on those timings, it's still a failure. We knew all about it by the time SAGE got round to advising the Govt on the 16th. Italy, especially, was splashed all over the news.
I've just checked my calendar, we kept our kids out of school from the 12th, our workplace made the decision to WFH on the 13th, starting on Monday 16th. And I personally started WFH on the 19th. People and organisations were left to make decisions off the back of what they were seeing in the news. |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 10:51 - Jul 17 with 1548 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:50 - Jul 17 by gordon |
Assuming what they are saying is true re making this decision on the 13th, then I think in this case if they had communicated, en masse, on the 13th March that a lockdown was needed pronto, it would have saved a lot of lives.
Sure Cummings could have tried to replace them all with Chris Grayling or something, but I think in hindsight they probably wish they'd gone about things a bit differently. |
Yes, they'd have been out of a position on SAGE. Like when Van Tam was critical of the approach in a press briefing and we never saw him again.
Maybe they thought they could do more good by toeing the line, as they'd certainly be no use on the outside (as proven by how the Govt ignored a large part of the wider scientific community here and internationally)?
Or maybe it was just vanity that trumped conscience and they wanted to retain their positions come what may? Who knows? I was suspicious that some had sold their souls when listening to some of the nonsense Jenny Harries was spouting. | |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:36 - Jul 17 with 1484 views | itfcjoe |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:50 - Jul 17 by gordon |
Assuming what they are saying is true re making this decision on the 13th, then I think in this case if they had communicated, en masse, on the 13th March that a lockdown was needed pronto, it would have saved a lot of lives.
Sure Cummings could have tried to replace them all with Chris Grayling or something, but I think in hindsight they probably wish they'd gone about things a bit differently. |
The Times Insight investigation said that the Givernment decided a lockdown was required on 14th and implemented it on 23rd. In tht time infections went from 200k to 1.3m |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:39 - Jul 17 with 1476 views | Mullet |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 09:10 - Jul 17 by gordon |
Yes, couldn't believe that! They concluded that a lockdown was needed on a Friday, but didn't want to spoil anyone's weekend so didn't send the email till Monday?!
Unless Dom or one of his minions was actually at the SAGE meeting. |
I thought Cummings sat on but didn't advise on all of those meetings from the off? |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:42 - Jul 17 with 1472 views | Pinewoodblue |
When did the lockdown start. We went to a gig in Eastleigh in 14th March over 50% of those who purchased tickets attended. We stayed overnight and were due to visit friends in the area the following day. My wife received an email telling her to isolate overnight so we cancelled the visit and drove home after breakfast. Never seen the M25 so devoid of traffic.
Sensible people would have followed lockdown from 16th March. Bit like mask wearing must be warn in shops from ne t week but sensible people are doing it now.
Worth pointing out that is probably a generational thing which would explain why the average age of new COVID-19 keeps falling. |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:44 - Jul 17 with 1463 views | Herbivore |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:42 - Jul 17 by Pinewoodblue |
When did the lockdown start. We went to a gig in Eastleigh in 14th March over 50% of those who purchased tickets attended. We stayed overnight and were due to visit friends in the area the following day. My wife received an email telling her to isolate overnight so we cancelled the visit and drove home after breakfast. Never seen the M25 so devoid of traffic.
Sensible people would have followed lockdown from 16th March. Bit like mask wearing must be warn in shops from ne t week but sensible people are doing it now.
Worth pointing out that is probably a generational thing which would explain why the average age of new COVID-19 keeps falling. |
Lockdown started on the 23rd of March, although officially the legislation came in on the 26th. | |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:44 - Jul 17 with 1463 views | jaykay |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 08:58 - Jul 17 by monytowbray |
Political point Scoring.
Revelling in the dead.
Trust the science. |
i remember back at the start, you were called this |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:48 - Jul 17 with 1448 views | Pinewoodblue |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:44 - Jul 17 by Herbivore |
Lockdown started on the 23rd of March, although officially the legislation came in on the 26th. |
That is why I added the comment about masks. You know something is coming so you act accordingly. Do you wear a mask yet or are you waiting until the date set? | |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:51 - Jul 17 with 1432 views | Herbivore |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:48 - Jul 17 by Pinewoodblue |
That is why I added the comment about masks. You know something is coming so you act accordingly. Do you wear a mask yet or are you waiting until the date set? |
Depends on where, not in Pret obviously.
I think you're trying to deflect from really unclear and poor messaging from the government. They've essentially done the opposite of what effective public health messaging should look like. | |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:57 - Jul 17 with 1413 views | Oldsmoker |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:48 - Jul 17 by Pinewoodblue |
That is why I added the comment about masks. You know something is coming so you act accordingly. Do you wear a mask yet or are you waiting until the date set? |
I've been wearing masks for some time now but I don't get out that much.
I think there seems to be some people under the impression that the goverment have agreed a cease-fire with Covid19 until July 24th after which date the war is back on. |  |
| |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:57 - Jul 17 with 1410 views | Pinewoodblue |
| The SAGE / Government dispute on 11:51 - Jul 17 by Herbivore |
Depends on where, not in Pret obviously.
I think you're trying to deflect from really unclear and poor messaging from the government. They've essentially done the opposite of what effective public health messaging should look like. |
Sadly the government has, far too often, been willing to rely on people’s common sense mainly due to an inability to enforce compliance.
When we have the nannie state you crave things will be better. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
