| Is "following the science" 06:39 - Apr 18 with 7000 views | bluelagos |
an adequate defence to the charges / lost lives that will have occured due to our government's dithering?
We even had football authorities taking the tough decisions before our own politicians.
Or is it really acceptable that they wasted precious time when all around them the evidence was there for a need to act to reduce social contacts?
https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/04/eleven-days-may-have-tragically-cost-uk-fig [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 6:51]
|  |
| |  |
| Is on 06:54 - Apr 18 with 2596 views | TractorWood |
Excellent article. Nails it in my opinion.
This is the herd immunity stage that 'didn't happen'.
The Prem and schools closing of their own volition was my first thought that the Government are fiddling whilst Rome burns. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 6:55]
|  |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 07:06 - Apr 18 with 2560 views | gordon |
Here's the expert opinion of the UK government's justification for the delay that will have cost thousands of lives:
"We are writing as behavioural scientists to express concern about the timing of UK delay measures involving social distancing. As is clear from the disaster unfolding in Italy, there is a unique window for delaying the spread of COVID-19. Current government thinking seems to crucially involve the idea of “behavioural fatigue”. This is the worry that, if implemented too early, measures limiting social contact will be undercut just at the point at which they are most required, because people will have tired of the limitations and will revert to prior behaviour —in part precisely because those measures are effective in reducing spread and hence perceived risk.
While we fully support an evidence-based approach to policy that draws on behavioural science, we are not convinced that enough is known about “behavioural fatigue” or to what extent these insights apply to the current exceptional circumstances. Such evidence is necessary if we are to base a high-risk public health strategy on it. In fact, it seems likely that even those essential behaviour changes that are presently required (e.g., handwashing) will receive far greater uptake the more urgent the situation is perceived to be. “Carrying on as normal” for as long as possible undercuts that urgency.
More broadly, it appears that concerns about behavioural fatigue lead the government to believe that halting the spread of the disease is impossible, and the only solution is to slow the progress of the disease across most of the population, until herd immunity is achieved. But radical behaviour change may be able to do much better than this, and would, if successful, save very large numbers of lives. Experience in China and South Korea is sufficiently encouraging to suggest that this possibility should at least be attempted.
If “behavioural fatigue” truly represents a key factor in the government’s decision to delay high-visibility interventions, we urge the government to share an adequate evidence base in support of that decision. If one is lacking, we urge the government to reconsider these decisions.
Signed,
UK Behavioural Scientists
see here for signatories
https://sites.google.com/view/covidopenletter/home |  | | |
| Is on 07:08 - Apr 18 with 2560 views | bluelagos |
| Is on 06:54 - Apr 18 by TractorWood |
Excellent article. Nails it in my opinion.
This is the herd immunity stage that 'didn't happen'.
The Prem and schools closing of their own volition was my first thought that the Government are fiddling whilst Rome burns. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 6:55]
|
The fact that some places took their own decisions before the government is inescapable.
Not sure about the schools but we definitely had a period of inaction which they dressed up as it being around the need to maintain the lockdown.
But the logic doesnt stack as had we had an earlier lockdown, it would have been shorter and the deaths lower. A 90% observed lockdown will have reduced spread but better than no lockdown, that is indisputable imho. | |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 07:25 - Apr 18 with 2526 views | BloomBlue |
How do you know it cost lives?
You cannot base fact on theory, which that article is doing.
You're only way of proving it is turn the clock back and try a different option and compare.
You have to take the advice of science, different Counries will always take different approaches based on the science, neither Sweden or South Korea have done full lockdows, neither did China do a full Country wide lockdown
Nothing like this has happened before, hindsight is a wonderful thing, the important thing is learn from it.
Brown cost lives because he didnt save cash for a rainy day, he should have stockpiled cash incase we had a financial crash which happens every generation, hindsight is a wonderful thing
Plus dont expect any inquiry to do anything, Blair got away with the murder of British soldiers after a lie and not providing them with adequate supplies and his defence was 'I didnt read the report ' which the inquiry accepted as adequate defence
We live in a democracy at the next GE if you dont like the handling of this by the government vote for another party. |  | | |
| Is on 07:30 - Apr 18 with 2522 views | monytowbray |
I’ve been gaslighted on this forum for 5 weeks about it.
Hi.
I feel like there will be a battle for years to come to get the truth on what was and wasn’t said and done behind closed doors. The government backed inquest will almost certainly blame the CCP and the public for failing though.
Where have we seen this happen before Lagos? History will repeat itself sadly. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 7:33]
|  |
| |
| Is on 07:38 - Apr 18 with 2507 views | monytowbray |
| Is "following the science" on 07:25 - Apr 18 by BloomBlue |
How do you know it cost lives?
You cannot base fact on theory, which that article is doing.
You're only way of proving it is turn the clock back and try a different option and compare.
You have to take the advice of science, different Counries will always take different approaches based on the science, neither Sweden or South Korea have done full lockdows, neither did China do a full Country wide lockdown
Nothing like this has happened before, hindsight is a wonderful thing, the important thing is learn from it.
Brown cost lives because he didnt save cash for a rainy day, he should have stockpiled cash incase we had a financial crash which happens every generation, hindsight is a wonderful thing
Plus dont expect any inquiry to do anything, Blair got away with the murder of British soldiers after a lie and not providing them with adequate supplies and his defence was 'I didnt read the report ' which the inquiry accepted as adequate defence
We live in a democracy at the next GE if you dont like the handling of this by the government vote for another party. |
🤦â€â™‚ï¸ðŸ¤¦â€â™‚ï¸ðŸ¤¦â€â™‚ï¸
Everyone just won on their “desperate last resort Tory defence” bingo cards.
- “Can’t prove it.” - Yes you can. Will you support an investigation after?
- “No one did the same thing.” - Those who ignored warnings and WHO advice are doing worse though.
- “Nothing like this has happened before.” - Even more reason why we should have been cautious and listened.
- “DEMOCRACY! WILL OF THE PEOPLE!” - Then YOU should take even more responsibility personally if YOU voted for this shower. Will you?
- *Something irrelevant about Corbyn/Labour/Brown/Blair* is the centrepiece wildcard.
B B B B B B BINGO. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 7:46]
| |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 07:45 - Apr 18 with 2491 views | bluelagos |
| Is "following the science" on 07:25 - Apr 18 by BloomBlue |
How do you know it cost lives?
You cannot base fact on theory, which that article is doing.
You're only way of proving it is turn the clock back and try a different option and compare.
You have to take the advice of science, different Counries will always take different approaches based on the science, neither Sweden or South Korea have done full lockdows, neither did China do a full Country wide lockdown
Nothing like this has happened before, hindsight is a wonderful thing, the important thing is learn from it.
Brown cost lives because he didnt save cash for a rainy day, he should have stockpiled cash incase we had a financial crash which happens every generation, hindsight is a wonderful thing
Plus dont expect any inquiry to do anything, Blair got away with the murder of British soldiers after a lie and not providing them with adequate supplies and his defence was 'I didnt read the report ' which the inquiry accepted as adequate defence
We live in a democracy at the next GE if you dont like the handling of this by the government vote for another party. |
If you are arguing that a lockdown doesnt stop the spread of the virus and therefore save lives, then I will store you arguments in the "ignorance is bliss" category. I won't be arguing the toss, as I think that ship has since sailed. | |
| |
| Is on 07:51 - Apr 18 with 2483 views | bluelagos |
| Is on 07:30 - Apr 18 by monytowbray |
I’ve been gaslighted on this forum for 5 weeks about it.
Hi.
I feel like there will be a battle for years to come to get the truth on what was and wasn’t said and done behind closed doors. The government backed inquest will almost certainly blame the CCP and the public for failing though.
Where have we seen this happen before Lagos? History will repeat itself sadly. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 7:33]
|
What chances of the cabinet mèetings' minutes/discussions being released early and available to the public enquiry that will follow?
SFA is my bet.. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Is on 07:54 - Apr 18 with 2476 views | monytowbray |
| Is on 07:51 - Apr 18 by bluelagos |
What chances of the cabinet mèetings' minutes/discussions being released early and available to the public enquiry that will follow?
SFA is my bet.. |
It’ll go in the drawer with the Russia Report if they can’t get it in the shelved investigation bin like they did Islamophobia.
Also just realised Bloomers missed *Herd immunity strategy denial* and “but Other Countries have PPE issues” on his post, so if any of the usual suspects want to come call that number they are welcome. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 7:56]
| |
| |
| Is on 07:58 - Apr 18 with 2448 views | bluelagos |
| Is on 07:54 - Apr 18 by monytowbray |
It’ll go in the drawer with the Russia Report if they can’t get it in the shelved investigation bin like they did Islamophobia.
Also just realised Bloomers missed *Herd immunity strategy denial* and “but Other Countries have PPE issues” on his post, so if any of the usual suspects want to come call that number they are welcome. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 7:56]
|
Just refer them to Jeremy Hunt. He was quite clear when he challenged that policy and has been quite clear in saying that the government changed its policy.
Or do they believe he (an ex health minister, Tory MP) is mistaken or making it up? [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 8:00]
| |
| |
| Is on 08:03 - Apr 18 with 2414 views | monytowbray |
| Is on 07:58 - Apr 18 by bluelagos |
Just refer them to Jeremy Hunt. He was quite clear when he challenged that policy and has been quite clear in saying that the government changed its policy.
Or do they believe he (an ex health minister, Tory MP) is mistaken or making it up? [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 8:00]
|
DIDN’T HAPPEN.
Sort of like austerity wasn’t happening 5 years ago according to a few posters who go very quiet these days when you point out remembering their posts and claims from that period.
I genuinely think a few on here admire the Tory ability to lie and gaslight.
It is a skill set I guess, a sh1tty vile one but alas. | |
| |
| Is on 08:05 - Apr 18 with 2407 views | TractorWood |
| Is "following the science" on 07:45 - Apr 18 by bluelagos |
If you are arguing that a lockdown doesnt stop the spread of the virus and therefore save lives, then I will store you arguments in the "ignorance is bliss" category. I won't be arguing the toss, as I think that ship has since sailed. |
He must have missed the letter Gordon puts above with 640 Academic signatures.
'But they followed the science'.
This is turning into the UK's version of 'we can't do/discuss that because of national security'. Basically killing off any debate with a ridiculous catch-all that the public are too naïve to question. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 8:07]
| |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 08:05 - Apr 18 with 2405 views | gordon |
| Is "following the science" on 07:25 - Apr 18 by BloomBlue |
How do you know it cost lives?
You cannot base fact on theory, which that article is doing.
You're only way of proving it is turn the clock back and try a different option and compare.
You have to take the advice of science, different Counries will always take different approaches based on the science, neither Sweden or South Korea have done full lockdows, neither did China do a full Country wide lockdown
Nothing like this has happened before, hindsight is a wonderful thing, the important thing is learn from it.
Brown cost lives because he didnt save cash for a rainy day, he should have stockpiled cash incase we had a financial crash which happens every generation, hindsight is a wonderful thing
Plus dont expect any inquiry to do anything, Blair got away with the murder of British soldiers after a lie and not providing them with adequate supplies and his defence was 'I didnt read the report ' which the inquiry accepted as adequate defence
We live in a democracy at the next GE if you dont like the handling of this by the government vote for another party. |
The science is clear that the delay in lockdown has cost thousands of lives. | | | |
| Is "following the science" on 08:20 - Apr 18 with 2380 views | BloomBlue |
| Is "following the science" on 08:05 - Apr 18 by gordon |
The science is clear that the delay in lockdown has cost thousands of lives. |
I disagree that's theory not fact. We'll have to disagree, as I said if you dont like the way it's been handled at the next GE you can vote for another party.
Same as me when Blair did what he did at the next GE I didnt vote for Labour. | | | |
| Is "following the science" on 08:21 - Apr 18 with 2381 views | Ftnfwest |
| Is "following the science" on 08:05 - Apr 18 by gordon |
The science is clear that the delay in lockdown has cost thousands of lives. |
So you’re following the science? |  | | |
| Is "following the science" on 08:22 - Apr 18 with 2371 views | gordon |
| Is "following the science" on 08:21 - Apr 18 by Ftnfwest |
So you’re following the science? |
We're all following the science. | | | |
| Is on 08:26 - Apr 18 with 2364 views | gordon |
| Is "following the science" on 08:20 - Apr 18 by BloomBlue |
I disagree that's theory not fact. We'll have to disagree, as I said if you dont like the way it's been handled at the next GE you can vote for another party.
Same as me when Blair did what he did at the next GE I didnt vote for Labour. |
The reinfection rate before lockdown, after lockdown, and the case fatality rate are all pretty well established (albeit there's uncertainty around the estimates). It's a pretty simple calculation to estimate unnecessary deaths caused by the delay.
Obviously if it were based on hospital deaths it gives you a large underestimate of the range of unnecessary deaths. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 8:28]
| | | |
| Is on 08:32 - Apr 18 with 2351 views | BloomBlue |
| Is on 08:26 - Apr 18 by gordon |
The reinfection rate before lockdown, after lockdown, and the case fatality rate are all pretty well established (albeit there's uncertainty around the estimates). It's a pretty simple calculation to estimate unnecessary deaths caused by the delay.
Obviously if it were based on hospital deaths it gives you a large underestimate of the range of unnecessary deaths. [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 8:28]
|
No it doesnt because you do not know when those people actually caught it.
If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything
If any mistake the Gov should have stop all immigration, travel in/out of the country from Nov last year that would have stopped it coming into the country. | | | |
| Is "following the science" on 08:52 - Apr 18 with 2318 views | ElephantintheRoom |
On the other hand the first trial large-scale trial on the extent of corona virus infection in the community coming out of Stanford suggests that infection rates in the commuity may be 80 x higher than reported..... and consequently reported death rates are being vastly exagerrated.
If true it not only vindicates a certain 'herd immunity strategy' that one government was much criticised for and forced into an abrupt u-turn on - and illuminates a very clear pathway to come out of pointless partial lockdown.
Science, like statitistics, can be bent to show whatever you want. |  |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 08:53 - Apr 18 with 2313 views | BlueNomad |
| Is "following the science" on 07:25 - Apr 18 by BloomBlue |
How do you know it cost lives?
You cannot base fact on theory, which that article is doing.
You're only way of proving it is turn the clock back and try a different option and compare.
You have to take the advice of science, different Counries will always take different approaches based on the science, neither Sweden or South Korea have done full lockdows, neither did China do a full Country wide lockdown
Nothing like this has happened before, hindsight is a wonderful thing, the important thing is learn from it.
Brown cost lives because he didnt save cash for a rainy day, he should have stockpiled cash incase we had a financial crash which happens every generation, hindsight is a wonderful thing
Plus dont expect any inquiry to do anything, Blair got away with the murder of British soldiers after a lie and not providing them with adequate supplies and his defence was 'I didnt read the report ' which the inquiry accepted as adequate defence
We live in a democracy at the next GE if you dont like the handling of this by the government vote for another party. |
Strange |  | | |
| Is "following the science" on 08:56 - Apr 18 with 2302 views | WeWereZombies |
| Is "following the science" on 08:52 - Apr 18 by ElephantintheRoom |
On the other hand the first trial large-scale trial on the extent of corona virus infection in the community coming out of Stanford suggests that infection rates in the commuity may be 80 x higher than reported..... and consequently reported death rates are being vastly exagerrated.
If true it not only vindicates a certain 'herd immunity strategy' that one government was much criticised for and forced into an abrupt u-turn on - and illuminates a very clear pathway to come out of pointless partial lockdown.
Science, like statitistics, can be bent to show whatever you want. |
Bad science, like bad statistics, can be bent to show whatever you want.
Is that what you meant to say, or do you really want to throw the baby out with the bathwater? |  |
| |
| Is on 08:58 - Apr 18 with 2297 views | BlueNomad |
| Is on 08:32 - Apr 18 by BloomBlue |
No it doesnt because you do not know when those people actually caught it.
If you torture the data long enough, it will confess to anything
If any mistake the Gov should have stop all immigration, travel in/out of the country from Nov last year that would have stopped it coming into the country. |
You are now getting bizarre. Let’s blame immigrants and all the innocent travellers from November onwards! [Post edited 18 Apr 2020 9:00]
| | | |
| Is on 08:59 - Apr 18 with 2292 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Is on 07:51 - Apr 18 by bluelagos |
What chances of the cabinet mèetings' minutes/discussions being released early and available to the public enquiry that will follow?
SFA is my bet.. |
There will be a Royal Commission which will report in approximately 10 years. It is what Royal Commissions do!
 |  |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 09:25 - Apr 18 with 2254 views | Guthrum |
The lift-off in detected cases (increasing from 590 to 5,018) happened between 13th and 21st March (with deaths going from 10 to 233).
Given those detections represent people who were sick enough to be admitted to hospital, they caught the disease an absolute minimum of five, but more likely seven to ten days earlier. Thus they caught Covid-19 between about the 3rd and 14th March - and were spreading it after that date, as were all their contacts.
So, to be really effective, the lockdown would have to have been imposed on 1st March. When we had 12 known cases and no deaths, believing that penetration into the populace was still very low. And well before the ideas of unregulated herd immunity were trotted out.
The disease was already in and spreading before it was an issue.
In any case, how much public credibility would a politician have if they turned round to their leading scientists and said "You're wrong"? |  |
| |
| Is "following the science" on 09:28 - Apr 18 with 2237 views | ElephantintheRoom |
| Is "following the science" on 08:56 - Apr 18 by WeWereZombies |
Bad science, like bad statistics, can be bent to show whatever you want.
Is that what you meant to say, or do you really want to throw the baby out with the bathwater? |
No I suspect that Stanford University are applying some very good science to a blindingly obvious problem.... if you don't protect your population against a virulent virus - the population will catch it. And if you only test people with serious symptoms.... then you'll think its much more serious that it is - as you are ignoring the vast majority of the population happily getting on with their lives whilst living with the virus in a largely ineffectual partial lockdown.
That's the elephant in the room and always has been.... the virus is in the community, it is only in hospitals where people who have caught it in the community are taken there. IF 80% of people in lockdown have had the virus.... it makes a global response utterly wrong.
The only way to prove this hypothesis is an effective test for the antibody... which the government tried to get to back its herd immunity hypothesis.... unfortunaltely they bought 15 million ineffective ones.
But the underlying point is correct.... underprepared governments may be wildly over-exagerrating the deadliness of this pandemic .... and some honesty might be the best way out of all these lockdowns. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
