By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
On a recent TWTD poll 80% were in favour of the national lockdown, based mostly I suspect on the evidence presented by Johnson, Vallance & Whitty on Saturday Night, however some of the data used has already been proven to be incorrect and numerous Scientists, experts, and MPs are now calling them out on it and are claiming a National Lockdown is not required at this stage.
Professor Carl Heneghan of Oxford University has pointed out that :
- The projections were based on 3 week old data. - They have already proven to be incorrect. 1000 deaths forecast on 1st November, the actual number was around 200 ( official reporting now states 162 ). - 4000 deaths per day is a doomsday prediction was never a realistic number - Cases are Dropping or flatlining in the most affected areas, Manchester cases down 20% in the previous week. - The 3 Tier system therefore showing signs of working but has not been given the full enough time. - Non-covid excess deaths in the home are increasing, this will get worse in another lockdown.
Professor Tim Spector from Kings College London is another who has disputed the figures. Based on the Zoe study which surveys a million people in the UK weekly they have shown that that cases are far from rising exponentially and in fact are falling in the Northern hotspot areas. They also have the 'R' number dropping to around 1.
Professor David Livermore of UEA has said that the Government is using "clearly ropey statistics" that just "don't make sense"
Tory MP Peter Bone has said "There are lies, damn lies, and covid statistics' going on to add that the Government is using selective data to prove it's case and not getting a balanced range to get to the right decision.
Another Tory MP Sir Desmond Swayne is "devastated" about a second lockdown: "It's a disaster... people will be unemployed... their lives ruined and they'll die in greater numbers... it's mass hysteria".
Cases dropped overall last week for Suffolk and we know that other areas such as Cornwall have low numbers. Why do we need a National Lockdown when the tier system seems to be showing signs of success and other areas have falling numbers anyway?
Boris has claimed there is 'no alternative' to the National lockdown, this is simply not true and Boris is doing what he has proven over a long period of time that he does best - telling lies. History will show him to be one of the worst PMs this country has ever known.
The long term effects of this year are going to catastrophic in my view, and it will not be because of a new virus, it will be because of the direct actions the Government has taken, causing huge long term damage to their own Country and people.
Everybody is so fixated on Covid cases and deaths that I am concerned we are not seeing the bigger picture. I urge everybody to start looking at all of the evidence ( Julia Hartley Brewer on Talk Radio is worth a look ) and to then start questioning what is really going on and why?
[Post edited 6 Jan 2021 10:59]
0
National lockdown - the case against on 10:11 - Nov 4 with 3720 views
All I can tell you is that a very close friend of mine who works in the NHS (Liverpool) will happily explain to you that their Hospital is beyond capacity for Covid patients and is now have to take over other wards and reduce services to other areas of healthcare to cope with the number of Covid patients.
That alone tells you that if we don't manage it....we are screwed well beyond Covid.
Ade Akinbiyi couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo...
The bigger picture here is, if more people are sick and the health service is overwhelmed then the longer-term damage(heath-wise, socially and economically) will be even worse. We're struggling with capacity in the Eastern region and we're one of the least-affected areas in the country(to the point where the ITU at [redacted] have been taking out-of-area non-clinical transfers from other places because they ARE without capacity.
The issue here isn't lockdowns per se, it's the fact that we're doing it too late.
Again.
[Post edited 4 Nov 2020 16:03]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
Here in manchester - cases have levelled off ( weekly cases for week ending october 30th). However, given that we'd only been in tier 3 for 7 days at that point, I think its too soon to say that its having any effect at all - more likely is the impact of 2 weeks of half term holidays reducing the impact of schools. I expect to see a flat line for most of this week, and then the rise to begin again after that.
The problem with the lockdown is not the projections used to justify it, but that the restrictions are directed in the wrong place... we're closing down regulated safe spaces, such as gyms, leisure centres, and restaurants whilst having hundreds of kids mixing across families, spreading it to the adults in their houses - many of whom will then go to work and pass it on.
- Deaths were 397 yesterday, far higher than the number you decided to cite and still increasing.
- Why are most other comparable countries also implementing lockdowns if it's such an incorrect strategy?
- Nobody else has cited an R number of 1, why is that more valid than other studies? Furthermore an R of 1 still isn't great - it maintains the status quo which is tens of thousands of cases a day.
- You've not mentioned at all that the idea is not to overwhelmed the NHS - hospitals are saying they are close to their level but you focus on other things rather than their accounts.
- Quoting Tory MPs is not really relevant. It's not their fields of expertise and looks to have just been put there for emphasis.
- Why are the 3 scientists you've cited correct and the 100's of scientists globally who have the opposite opinion wrong?
What do you think should be done to get things under control then? It's the start of winter, if these rules aren't in place people are going to mix indoors which is proven to be ideal conditions for spreading C19. Have you seen this?
The "bigger picture" is that it's the same fringe group backed and funded by largey US-based right wing think tanks and individuals with links to private healthcare, who continue to push messages that haven't been validated scientifically. Due to their potential conflicts of interest, I'd be very cautious about taking at face value anything in these lobbying efforts by the likes of Carl Heneghan and his co-agitators like Sunetra Gupta and Karol Sikora.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:37 - Nov 4 by Swansea_Blue
The "bigger picture" is that it's the same fringe group backed and funded by largey US-based right wing think tanks and individuals with links to private healthcare, who continue to push messages that haven't been validated scientifically. Due to their potential conflicts of interest, I'd be very cautious about taking at face value anything in these lobbying efforts by the likes of Carl Heneghan and his co-agitators like Sunetra Gupta and Karol Sikora.
Viewpoints on C19 have often been a case study in confirmation bias. I am sure someone will make a good thesis from it at some point.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
0
National lockdown - the case against on 10:42 - Nov 4 with 3558 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:11 - Nov 4 by homer_123
All I can tell you is that a very close friend of mine who works in the NHS (Liverpool) will happily explain to you that their Hospital is beyond capacity for Covid patients and is now have to take over other wards and reduce services to other areas of healthcare to cope with the number of Covid patients.
That alone tells you that if we don't manage it....we are screwed well beyond Covid.
First of all I will say that people have very short memories. Every winter for as long as I can remember the NHS has been overextended beyond capacity, it has not suddenly happened with Covid.
The Government have had all Summer to look at NHS capacity and to prepare for Winter, it should not take locking people in their own homes and closing business to 'protect the NHS' and facilitate the management of a respiratory virus. And by the way I assume you know that deaths are around normal for the time of year and that Influenza has mysteriously all but disappeared this year?l
2
National lockdown - the case against on 10:43 - Nov 4 with 3543 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:42 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
First of all I will say that people have very short memories. Every winter for as long as I can remember the NHS has been overextended beyond capacity, it has not suddenly happened with Covid.
The Government have had all Summer to look at NHS capacity and to prepare for Winter, it should not take locking people in their own homes and closing business to 'protect the NHS' and facilitate the management of a respiratory virus. And by the way I assume you know that deaths are around normal for the time of year and that Influenza has mysteriously all but disappeared this year?l
This time last year our hospitals were at 92% capacity, the same time this year they are at 87%.
Either way, the last thing we need is to add a shedload more to those figures.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:17 - Nov 4 by LankHenners
Anyone who writes the phrase "the excellent Julia Hartley-Brewer on Talk Radio" has clearly lost the plot.
Or has a different opinion to you maybe?
So your quite happy to go with the proven falsehoods that Whitty, Vallance and Johnson have used to force another lockdown but it's me that has lost the plot. Ok.
-1
National lockdown - the case against on 10:47 - Nov 4 with 3533 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:42 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
First of all I will say that people have very short memories. Every winter for as long as I can remember the NHS has been overextended beyond capacity, it has not suddenly happened with Covid.
The Government have had all Summer to look at NHS capacity and to prepare for Winter, it should not take locking people in their own homes and closing business to 'protect the NHS' and facilitate the management of a respiratory virus. And by the way I assume you know that deaths are around normal for the time of year and that Influenza has mysteriously all but disappeared this year?l
Completely agree that the lack of competent leadership has contributed to the necessity for another lockdown.
When you say influenza has mysteriously disappeared, do you mean that it's prevalence has been dramatically reduced by the stringent measures in place to reduce the spread of respiratory disease?
7
National lockdown - the case against on 10:48 - Nov 4 with 3526 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:45 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
Or has a different opinion to you maybe?
So your quite happy to go with the proven falsehoods that Whitty, Vallance and Johnson have used to force another lockdown but it's me that has lost the plot. Ok.
What are the 'proven falsehoods' here?
The FACTS are, cases are rising, hospitalisations are rising, DEATHS are rising. Just carrying as we were with the failing 3 tier system was not an option, even for someone as inept as Boris.
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:42 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
First of all I will say that people have very short memories. Every winter for as long as I can remember the NHS has been overextended beyond capacity, it has not suddenly happened with Covid.
The Government have had all Summer to look at NHS capacity and to prepare for Winter, it should not take locking people in their own homes and closing business to 'protect the NHS' and facilitate the management of a respiratory virus. And by the way I assume you know that deaths are around normal for the time of year and that Influenza has mysteriously all but disappeared this year?l
I can assure you, that we are very much prepping for flu as well. Had my jab yesterday. We are currently in this country restricting export of flu vaccines to be abel to ensure meeting demand this winter.
I strongly suspect that government summer strategy was to try and force a 'herd immunity' with their endless exhortations to people to go to the shops, pub and office. all it's resulted in is what's we're seeing now.
[Post edited 4 Nov 2020 10:53]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:29 - Nov 4 by gordon
Carl Heneghan has been consistently wrong about COVID for months so I'm happy going with the opposite of what he says, cheers.
Nope, I think you will find it is sage that has been consistently wrong. Both Lockdowns have been ordered off the back of modelling that has been proven to be out but a long distance.
1
National lockdown - the case against on 10:54 - Nov 4 with 3486 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:51 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
Nope, I think you will find it is sage that has been consistently wrong. Both Lockdowns have been ordered off the back of modelling that has been proven to be out but a long distance.
What were the 'errors in modelling'?
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:51 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
Nope, I think you will find it is sage that has been consistently wrong. Both Lockdowns have been ordered off the back of modelling that has been proven to be out but a long distance.
You need to clarify this:
1) Proven to be wrong before the lockdown?
2) Proven to be wrong after the lockdown because the lockdown actually affected the modelling assumptions?
Once again - it's not just SAGE - the majority of governments scientists have reached the same conclusions as SAGE - are they all in on it or are they all incompetent as you seem to suggest? It would mean that the minority of scientists in the world are competent and remarkably they all seem to agree with you.
SB
Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula
3
National lockdown - the case against on 10:57 - Nov 4 with 3475 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:42 - Nov 4 by StokieBlue
Viewpoints on C19 have often been a case study in confirmation bias. I am sure someone will make a good thesis from it at some point.
SB
I get so fed of this and it seems to be exactly what's going on in this case. Just take the 1,000 deaths a day, being one of a number of scenarios generated by different models, all assuming no impact was taken. We don't see those numbers reached, unsurprisingly given measures are being taken. The scientists attacking it must know what they're doing. They're being dishonest about the nature of the original projections and they're being dishonest about where we are now and why. And of course, it's then jumped on and uncritically spread as 'proof' that the original modellers were 'lying'. And all this is being played out in the public domain on blog posts. It's not scientific. If they had genuine case to make we'd see this all coming through the peer-reviewed literature.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:33 - Nov 4 by StokieBlue
A few points as pretty busy at the moment:
- Deaths were 397 yesterday, far higher than the number you decided to cite and still increasing.
- Why are most other comparable countries also implementing lockdowns if it's such an incorrect strategy?
- Nobody else has cited an R number of 1, why is that more valid than other studies? Furthermore an R of 1 still isn't great - it maintains the status quo which is tens of thousands of cases a day.
- You've not mentioned at all that the idea is not to overwhelmed the NHS - hospitals are saying they are close to their level but you focus on other things rather than their accounts.
- Quoting Tory MPs is not really relevant. It's not their fields of expertise and looks to have just been put there for emphasis.
- Why are the 3 scientists you've cited correct and the 100's of scientists globally who have the opposite opinion wrong?
What do you think should be done to get things under control then? It's the start of winter, if these rules aren't in place people are going to mix indoors which is proven to be ideal conditions for spreading C19. Have you seen this?
What is your main objection to lockdown? You've said it will be "catastrophic" in the long run but you've not been precise.
SB
Disappointing that you chose to downvote my post Stokie. I appreciate you do not agree but you have always asked people on here who post alternative views to provide some evidence which I have done.
It has been shown that the 4000 deaths a day scenario was incorrect and Vallance and Whitty even admitted to this yesterday, but the damage has been done now, public opinion has been swayed, MPs have been swayed and we will get another National Lockdown based on very ropey evidence. Can you not see that they have cherry picked data and again used worst case scenarios not based on reality to scare the public?
I have addressed the NHS question in another post, this is on the Government and they have no right to punish the people for it. The NHS is overwhelmed most winters, we don't usually lockdown as a result though.
397 deaths is still nowhere near the projected figure, I used the figure because it tied in with the date of the interview I used, no other reason.
It is not just the three scientists I have quoted, there are many more that agree, the Great Barrington Declaration should tell you that. the point is there is not a consensus.
I don't know why putting over a different viewpoint is met with such hostility on here, I have already been called a mentalist just for putting across a reasoned and evidenced point of view. This place seems to be turning into a bit of an echo chamber of late and I get the idea that certain people on here quite like it like that, which is a shame.
when you get time I would genuinely like you to listen to the Heneghan interview and tell me if you honestly believe there is no merit to what he is saying.
[Post edited 4 Nov 2020 11:17]
2
National lockdown - the case against on 11:13 - Nov 4 with 3433 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:51 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
Nope, I think you will find it is sage that has been consistently wrong. Both Lockdowns have been ordered off the back of modelling that has been proven to be out but a long distance.
Wait, so this second wave is actually just an anomaly caused by the weekend case counting lag, then?
0
National lockdown - the case against on 11:17 - Nov 4 with 3422 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:45 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
Or has a different opinion to you maybe?
So your quite happy to go with the proven falsehoods that Whitty, Vallance and Johnson have used to force another lockdown but it's me that has lost the plot. Ok.
You understand at last
0
National lockdown - the case against on 11:18 - Nov 4 with 3415 views
National lockdown - the case against on 10:45 - Nov 4 by Harry_Palmer
Or has a different opinion to you maybe?
So your quite happy to go with the proven falsehoods that Whitty, Vallance and Johnson have used to force another lockdown but it's me that has lost the plot. Ok.
I'm pretty comfortable holding different opinions to someone like JHB, yes.
Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand.
National lockdown - the case against on 10:37 - Nov 4 by Swansea_Blue
The "bigger picture" is that it's the same fringe group backed and funded by largey US-based right wing think tanks and individuals with links to private healthcare, who continue to push messages that haven't been validated scientifically. Due to their potential conflicts of interest, I'd be very cautious about taking at face value anything in these lobbying efforts by the likes of Carl Heneghan and his co-agitators like Sunetra Gupta and Karol Sikora.
Saw the BBC US Covid response documentary last night. Blimey, what an incompetent cock-up.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
