Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: belton rover on February 22, 2021, 07:58:54 am
-
I think this is a mistake.
We will not be far enough into the vaccine programme.
Try telling teenagers it is okay to spend all day together at school but not out of school. No one seems to be considering the psychological effect of schools going back to ‘normal’. Rules will start to be broken as students and parents, quite understandably, relax their guards in other areas of socialisation too soon
I hope I’m wrong.
-
My lads 15 1/2 and he's hardly been out , despite groups of his schoolmates doing pretty much as they like. When hs walking to school, sitting in groups all day and walking home with his friends, it's going to be a difficult conversation as to why can't walk out at night with the same folk
-
The kids need to be in school. We have a serious risk of delaying them further again. They need social interaction and they need education, that is frankly more important than anything else and the correct first phase I think.
-
Agree to both bfyp, absolutely they do need to be back
-
We are getting on top of this now with vaccines, but not there yet. I think a staggered start with younger children first would have been much more sensible.
Of course our kids need to be back in school, but not at any cost. After Easter for secondary students would have been a better decision. We will have had much more of our society vaccinated by then.
-
Obviously the schools need to reopen but I was concerned reading that Chris Whitty was nor happy about simply opening them all at once.
Whether he wants more safeguards in place, staggered reopening to see how it goes I don't know. It's just very concerning that after all this the government is still overriding it's senior medical advisors.
-
Some very differing points of view here.
It just shows how hard it is to get it right.
You can never please everyone.
-
Difficult decisions to be made for sure, but thats what the PM is supposed to do, he got it wrong letting schools go back last time, which clearly helped the pandemic grow again. Personally I can’t see why we can’t get Easter out of the way first regarding schools. We have to open up at some point and I would hope this time there is no dithering if the figures start to rise again
-
Difficult decisions to be made for sure, but thats what the PM is supposed to do, he got it wrong letting schools go back last time, which clearly helped the pandemic grow again. Personally I can’t see why we can’t get Easter out of the way first regarding schools. We have to open up at some point and I would hope this time there is no dithering if the figures start to rise again
Not much hope of that Filo, when the noises coming out of government are this must be the last lockdown.
They can't make statements like that and still hope to be credible, this thing could so easily mutate and become vaccine resistant for one thing.
-
Difficult decisions to be made for sure, but thats what the PM is supposed to do, he got it wrong letting schools go back last time, which clearly helped the pandemic grow again. Personally I can’t see why we can’t get Easter out of the way first regarding schools. We have to open up at some point and I would hope this time there is no dithering if the figures start to rise again
Not much hope of that Filo, when the noises coming out of government are this must be the last lockdown.
They can't make statements like that and still hope to be credible, this thing could so easily mutate and become vaccine resistant for one thing.
I totally agree RD.
None of us like the lockdowns but I was just alluding to the different reasons people have for not wanting or wanting schools to reopen.
Whatever decisions are taken there will always be people who are unhappy about them.
-
Oh come on have none of you seen the groups of youngsters walking around the streets congregating at shops, benches etc.? It's not the youngsters that need to be worried about it's the health of the teachers
-
Yeah and the skate parks.
Amazing really that teenagers don’t seem to understand that they could be adding to the problems.
-
Difficult decisions to be made for sure, but thats what the PM is supposed to do, he got it wrong letting schools go back last time, which clearly helped the pandemic grow again. Personally I can’t see why we can’t get Easter out of the way first regarding schools. We have to open up at some point and I would hope this time there is no dithering if the figures start to rise again
Not much hope of that Filo, when the noises coming out of government are this must be the last lockdown.
They can't make statements like that and still hope to be credible, this thing could so easily mutate and become vaccine resistant for one thing.
I totally agree RD.
None of us like the lockdowns but I was just alluding to the different reasons people have for not wanting or wanting schools to reopen.
Whatever decisions are taken there will always be people who are unhappy about them.
Absolutely. How ever we come out of lock down will be met with divided opinion. I do think though, that the most important thing to get right is that we don’t have to go back into another one. Especially not for the sake of waiting a few more more weeks.
-
Difficult decisions to be made for sure, but thats what the PM is supposed to do, he got it wrong letting schools go back last time, which clearly helped the pandemic grow again. Personally I can’t see why we can’t get Easter out of the way first regarding schools. We have to open up at some point and I would hope this time there is no dithering if the figures start to rise again
Not much hope of that Filo, when the noises coming out of government are this must be the last lockdown.
They can't make statements like that and still hope to be credible, this thing could so easily mutate and become vaccine resistant for one thing.
I totally agree RD.
None of us like the lockdowns but I was just alluding to the different reasons people have for not wanting or wanting schools to reopen.
Whatever decisions are taken there will always be people who are unhappy about them.
Absolutely. How ever we come out of lock down will be met with divided opinion. I do think though, that the most important thing to get right is that we don’t have to go back into another one. Especially not for the sake of waiting a few more more weeks.
exactly, a few more week, say after Easter rather than potentially a few more months
-
Obviously, the longer in lockdown the better from a pure restriction in COVID infection rates angle.
From a children's education, General public health, mental health, economy, loss of businesses, loss of jobs angle we should go back as soon as the pros and cons weigh in favour of that direction.
It's an unprecedented situation, and no doubt there will be casualties whatever decision is made.
The reliability of the vaccine plays a big part in the success of returning to normal life.
-
We are getting on top of this now with vaccines, but not there yet. I think a staggered start with younger children first would have been much more sensible.
Of course our kids need to be back in school, but not at any cost. After Easter for secondary students would have been a better decision. We will have had much more of our society vaccinated by then.
Agree with all of that, Belton.
The issue is transmission rates, and the chance of further mutation.
Kids will act as a vector, spreading the virus to those more vulnerable, like their parents.
Work is going on to test kids with the jab...if that looks good, vax them up and send them back.
Massive risk to open schools without a greater number of the general population protected.
Selective return after Easter would be much more appropriate.
Running the risk of a further lockdown makes no sense to me.
Vaccines minister making a complete fool of himself on TV;
https://twitter.com/jonlis1/status/1363776578535247874
Ye Gods!
-
Was he Priti Patel's maths teacher?
-
I'm all for getting schools reopened as the very number one priority as we come out of lockdown. But it is worrying that, once again, there are whispers that the Govt is moving faster than SAGE are advising. Concerning thing is that, last September when schools and then Universities opened within a few weeks of each other, new case numbers went up tenfold in a month. But that was starting from a level of 1000 per day. As things currently stand, we already have 10,000 new cases a day, so there is absolutely no room for getting this wrong. On balance, it does feel too early. Keeping the lockdown on until after Easter would seem to make a lot more sense. By that time, at current rates, we'd have another 20 million people vaccinated and new infections would be down to around 1000 a day or so. This way, it is a big gamble. Let's hope it's one that the Govt finally gets right.
-
Chris Whitty supports schools going back on the 8th March.
-
Not according to reports BB;
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/chris-whitty-schools-reopening-boris-johnson-b920575.html
Same thing here:
https://metro.co.uk/2021/02/20/chris-whitty-very-unhappy-with-boris-johnsons-school-reopening-plan-14116367/
Sounds like a "sign or resign" decision, if he has changed his mind.
No-one likes a bully, do they?
-
Albie, I guess that might depend on whether people are on the same side as the bully.
-
Albie. Chris Whitty has just said on TV that he was completely misquoted.
-
BB,
Fair enough...didn't see that.
Hound,
No, not really.
A bully is a bully is a bully......never acceptable for me.
-
BB,
Fair enough...didn't see that.
Hound,
No, not really.
A bully is a bully is a bully......never acceptable for me.
Good to know :woohoo:
-
Well they are doing it on the 8th.
We know it is spread most easily by aerosols and that sitting all days indoors in groups gives the virus the best chance of transmitting. At least they plan to have the kids wearing masks.
I'll be asking the school to keep windows and doors open to increase ventilation as much as possible.
-
Fingers crossed my little one can finally start nursery, so important for their development.
-
45% of covid deaths in hospital currently are of people aged between 50 - 65.
If I were a teacher in that age bracket, I don't think I'd be very happy about being asked to return to work unvaccinated. The same goes for those who are younger but with underlying health conditions like asthma or diabetes.
-
The sad thing in all of this is it could've been avoided if Johnson had made the correct key decisions early on. He had several chances to close the gate before the horse bolted.
-
The sad thing in all of this is it could've been avoided if Johnson had made the correct key decisions early on. He had several chances to close the gate before the horse bolted.
That truly is the saddest thing. We've now been in this current lockdown for 7 weeks. We have just about got back down to the same number of new cases per day that we had before we totally lost control in December. And because of that lost control, there are about 30,000 more families missing a loved one than would have happened otherwise.
-
I hope I’m wrong but I think he’s gone too early again, I guess this will tell us how good the vaccine is. I feel for the 50 year old plus teachers that have to go back unvaccinated, lambs to the slaughter again
-
I hope I’m wrong but I think he’s gone too early again, I guess this will tell us how good the vaccine is. I feel for the 50 year old plus teachers that have to go back unvaccinated, lambs to the slaughter again
But how are you going to measure it? Obviously there will be more casualties when the lockdown is ended, that's inevitable whenever you end it, but how do we know that delaying coming out of lockdown isn't going to cause more damage to children's education, General public health, mental health, economy, loss of businesses and loss of jobs resulting in even more casualties in the future?
-
Well the Welsh Health Minister is confident that schools reopening is a good thing.
-
So is Keir Starmer.
-
good to see you supporting a rational leader bb
-
We most probably would be rationed under Keir Starmer, Skippy.
-
whilst there is plenty of uncleansed oysters available under johnson
-
Rather have him than us limpet under Starmer.
-
haven't learned anything from 10 years of oysterity under the tories bb?
-
Boris had full intentions of going away from austerity, skippy, and we would have been enjoying the benefits from it had it not been for the pandemic. To say he was for austerity is like saying Starmer is a war criminal.
To dismiss the comparison is a load of scallops.
-
And you are the right person to know bb
-
Given the options on this forum Skippy, I'd say yes.
-
I hope I’m wrong but I think he’s gone too early again, I guess this will tell us how good the vaccine is. I feel for the 50 year old plus teachers that have to go back unvaccinated, lambs to the slaughter again
But how are you going to measure it? Obviously there will be more casualties when the lockdown is ended, that's inevitable whenever you end it, but how do we know that delaying coming out of lockdown isn't going to cause more damage to children's education, General public health, mental health, economy, loss of businesses and loss of jobs resulting in even more casualties in the future?
Measure what, BB?
Delaying coming out of lockdown would be in order to minimise avoidable deaths.
Yes, there would be some losses to other considerations, but surely if these can be mitigated then that should be the objective of policy.
For example, the school term could be extended into the summer break, to recoup some of the contact time kids are missing.
There is a real risk that in disregarding the advice of SAGE (see the minutes), Trumpty plays the odds in favour of needing another lockdown, with all that it involves.
The option of delaying school return until after Easter greatly increases the odds in his favour in managing the epidemic.
There is a reason that you seek expert advice...and it is not to ignore it because you think you know better, despite having no expertise in the subject.
-
Boris had full intentions of going away from austerity, skippy, and we would have been enjoying the benefits from it had it not been for the pandemic....
Which this government has made worse by every measure. EVEN NOW the airports are not closed. EVEN NOW you don't have to scan track and trace to enter a super market. EVEN NOW, after TWENTY-TWO BILLION POUNDS spent on track and trace, it doesn't work. EVEN NOW we're not asking everyone who hasn't been tested to go and get tested, knowing full well 1 in 3 people with Covid are asymptomatic.
Anyone who still defends Boris needs to give their head a proper wobble.
-
Boris had full intentions of going away from austerity, skippy, and we would have been enjoying the benefits from it had it not been for the pandemic....
Which this government has made worse by every measure. EVEN NOW the airports are not closed. EVEN NOW you don't have to scan track and trace to enter a super market. EVEN NOW, after TWENTY-TWO BILLION POUNDS spent on track and trace, it doesn't work. EVEN NOW we're not asking everyone who hasn't been tested to go and get tested, knowing full well 1 in 3 people with Covid are asymptomatic.
Anyone who still defends Boris needs to give their head a proper wobble.
Hes indefensible, though I maintain all labour had to do was put up a credible alternative last election they should have walked it. Labour member who put Corbyn in position should also share a sense of responsibility here
-
Ldr.
Labour don't have Corbyn in charge now. The Tories are still ahead in the polls. Johnson is ahead of Starmer as Best PM.
Clearly Johnson is NOT indefensible.
-
I hope I’m wrong but I think he’s gone too early again, I guess this will tell us how good the vaccine is. I feel for the 50 year old plus teachers that have to go back unvaccinated, lambs to the slaughter again
But how are you going to measure it? Obviously there will be more casualties when the lockdown is ended, that's inevitable whenever you end it, but how do we know that delaying coming out of lockdown isn't going to cause more damage to children's education, General public health, mental health, economy, loss of businesses and loss of jobs resulting in even more casualties in the future?
Measure what, BB?
Delaying coming out of lockdown would be in order to minimise avoidable deaths.
Yes, there would be some losses to other considerations, but surely if these can be mitigated then that should be the objective of policy.
For example, the school term could be extended into the summer break, to recoup some of the contact time kids are missing.
There is a real risk that in disregarding the advice of SAGE (see the minutes), Trumpty plays the odds in favour of needing another lockdown, with all that it involves.
The option of delaying school return until after Easter greatly increases the odds in his favour in managing the epidemic.
There is a reason that you seek expert advice...and it is not to ignore it because you think you know better, despite having no expertise in the subject.
By measure I mean how can we measure a comparison in casualties between coming out of lockdown sooner in comparison to later when considering all the other aspects involved in lockdowns, such as the damage it causes to children's education, General public health, mental health, economy, loss of businesses and loss of jobs which could result in even more casualties in the future.
Of course, there is a risk that opening up schools will cause casualties. Boris Johnson along with the chief medical officer Chris Whitty expressed this vehemently. They are not ignoring the recommendations of SAGE, they are acting cautiously with those recommendations in mind.
Contrary to media lies regarding Chris Whitty's objections to the schools returning on March 8th, he said children had been badly disadvantaged by schools having to stop face-to-face teaching so he was "completely in favour of the move and was surprised it had been reported, given I had denied it."
"It is an illustration of the toxic debate that has surrounded the re-opening of schools with scientists and teaching unions arguing aggressively about what the evidence shows."
-
Ldr.
Labour don't have Corbyn in charge now. The Tories are still ahead in the polls. Johnson is ahead of Starmer as Best PM.
Clearly Johnson is NOT indefensible.
I can only speak for myself and to me he is indefensible. Though I note very few Labour members (not voters) will admit they were wrong about electing Corbyn leader. I know you didn't BST btw
-
I entirely agree Ldr, but that's down to them and their consciences. Many of them weren't Labour members before they joined specifically to elect Corbyn. Strange times, those were.
-
BB,
The discussion in SAGE modelled different scenarios in relation to relaxing lockdown;
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1363888315997556740
It is not a matter of measuring after the event, it is a matter of forecasting likely impacts using predictive tools.
The recommendations from SAGE are based upon a risk analysis, so that Government can make informed choices about risk.
Johnson does not understand risk assessment, and wants to give a positive spin on all decisions taken.
You cannot read the SAGE minutes, or the detailed modelling summary, and conclude he is "acting cautiously with those recommendations in mind"....the documents make this clear.
You can be in favour of the opening of schools, for the benefit of the kids, but still think the timing is wrong and opening to all on the same day is a mistake.
That's where I am!
-
The Easter Holidays begin on 26th March, 3 weeks after the schools starting back, add that to the 2 week easter break and we have 5 extra weeks to get the numbers down, it would be better in my opinion waiting until after Easter to go back and get those 3 weeks back during the summer holidays
-
Albie. SAGE is chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance and co-chaired by the Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty. BOTH were in attendance at yesterday's bulletin from Downing Street and BOTH vehemently agreed with the proposed plan of exiting lockdown.
That might not be good enough for you, but it is for me.
-
The Easter Holidays begin on 26th March, 3 weeks after the schools starting back, add that to the 2 week easter break and we have 5 extra weeks to get the numbers down, it would be better in my opinion waiting until after Easter to go back and get those 3 weeks back during the summer holidays
The schools are open for three weeks and then closed for two weeks. The two weeks closure will be a natural firebreak.
-
The Easter Holidays begin on 26th March, 3 weeks after the schools starting back, add that to the 2 week easter break and we have 5 extra weeks to get the numbers down, it would be better in my opinion waiting until after Easter to go back and get those 3 weeks back during the summer holidays
The schools are open for three weeks and then closed for two weeks. The two weeks closure will be a natural firebreak.
But the 3 weeks open will be a natural vector, why not start from a lower figure than possibly have that figure increase by three weeks and then have only a 2 week natural firebreak. I’m no expert by a long long way but that makes sense to me
-
I don't know, I'm no expert either, but that's what the experts have said. I trust them.
-
So in essence, the government ARE following the scientific advice here which they often get accused of not doing.
-
So in essence, the government ARE following the scientific advice here which they often get accused of not doing.
You missed where a I said in my opinion?
-
BB,
Both Whitty and Vallance are bound by collective responsibility, so the way in which their individual opinions are shown in the SAGE meetings is not always the same as the public face.
That is just a given in these situations.
This is the advice TO SAGE;
The discussion in SAGE modelled different scenarios in relation to relaxing lockdown;
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1363888315997556740
Here are the recommendations in the SAGE minutes;
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/963366/S1082_SAGE__79_Minutes.pdf
Points 32 and 33 cut to the chase.
To answer Hound, no they are not following the SAGE consensus, they are cherrypicking the science.
It helps if you actually read the links before posting.
-
Albie, I'll tell you what. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. I'm quite happy looking at the positives and you're quite happy looking at the negatives. I'm looking ahead to a good future, you're looking ahead to a bleak one.
-
So in essence, the government ARE following the scientific advice here which they often get accused of not doing.
You missed where a I said in my opinion?
I havent even read your post.
Its not all about you.
-
BB,
Both Whitty and Vallance are bound by collective responsibility, so the way in which their individual opinions are shown in the SAGE meetings is not always the same as the public face.
That is just a given in these situations.
This is the advice TO SAGE;
The discussion in SAGE modelled different scenarios in relation to relaxing lockdown;
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1363888315997556740
Here are the recommendations in the SAGE minutes;
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/963366/S1082_SAGE__79_Minutes.pdf
Points 32 and 33 cut to the chase.
To answer Hound, no they are not following the SAGE consensus, they are cherrypicking the science.
It helps if you actually read the links before posting.
Albie, i seldomly read links on this thread.
Whenever i have done, invariably they are of a very biased nature.
-
Hound.
That link is the minutes from a SAGE meeting. Are you not reading them because you think they are biased?
-
Hound.
That link is the minutes from a SAGE meeting. Are you not reading them because you think they are biased?
You obviously didnt read all of what i said BST, about why i rarely read links (from some posters) on the political threads.
-
Hound.
That link is the minutes from a SAGE meeting. Are you not reading them because you think they are biased?
So are you saying Chris Whitty is a liar?
-
Hound.
That link is the minutes from a SAGE meeting. Are you not reading them because you think they are biased?
So are you saying Chris Whitty is a liar?
Sage is a collective of experts, those minutes are the opinion of those experts, Whitty is one of those experts but his opinion goes against the body of experts, he’s also the man brought in to pass the Govt message, right or wrong
-
Hound. I read this.
"Albie, i seldomly read links on this thread.
Whenever i have done, invariably they are of a very biased nature."
In response to Albie pointing you to a link to SAGE minutes.
-
Hound.
That link is the minutes from a SAGE meeting. Are you not reading them because you think they are biased?
So are you saying Chris Whitty is a liar?
Sage is a collective of experts, those minutes are the opinion of those experts, Whitty is one of those experts but his opinion goes against the body of experts, he’s also the man brought in to pass the Govt message, right or wrong
SAGE is chaired by the Government Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance and co-chaired by the Chief Medical Officer, Professor Chris Whitty. BOTH were in attendance at yesterday's bulletin from Downing Street and BOTH vehemently agreed with the proposed plan of exiting lockdown.
Media reports saying there were conflicting opinions regarding schools returning on March 8th were strenuously denied by Chris Whitty.
So, it is either the media lying or Chris Whitty. Personally, without a shadow of a doubt, I suspect it's the media that is lying and those lies have been jumped on by people with an anti-government agenda.
-
BB,
Both Whitty and Vallance are bound by collective responsibility, so the way in which their individual opinions are shown in the SAGE meetings is not always the same as the public face.
That is just a given in these situations.
This is the advice TO SAGE;
The discussion in SAGE modelled different scenarios in relation to relaxing lockdown;
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1363888315997556740
Here are the recommendations in the SAGE minutes;
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/963366/S1082_SAGE__79_Minutes.pdf
Points 32 and 33 cut to the chase.
To answer Hound, no they are not following the SAGE consensus, they are cherrypicking the science.
It helps if you actually read the links before posting.
Albie, i seldomly read links on this thread.
Whenever i have done, invariably they are of a very biased nature.
Maybe this will help get your head around the subject of bias hound, if you care to read it that is and it may surprise you.
“The biases the media has are much bigger than conservative or liberal.
They're about getting ratings, about making money, about doing stories that
are easy to cover and keeping us in an uproar.”
https://www.fightingfake.org.uk/media-bias
-
Back to the point I made last night.
The SAGE minutes say that the consensus in SAGE is that re-opening schools will add 0.1-0.5 to the R number. And the real worry at the moment is that the data over the last 10 days seems to be saying that R is back up to something very close to 1.
If both those things are correct, then reopening schools will lead directly to an exponential rise in cases, and we will be back in lockdown by May.
At the very least, given the f**k up that we made in December, it would be sensible to get a clearer picture of what R is right now before taking such a big step.
If the CSA and CMO have briefed Johnson with that 0.1-0.5 figure from SAGE and not told him that means re-opening schools is a very big gamble, they are not doing their jobs. After that, the PM decides policy and, whilst still in post, it is not the job of advisers to publicly criticise. You note that neither of them were effusive in their support for the policy last night. Whitty said it was "a risk and an accepted risk" (note the very careful use of language).
-
Hound. I read this.
"Albie, i seldomly read links on this thread.
Whenever i have done, invariably they are of a very biased nature."
In response to Albie pointing you to a link to SAGE minutes.
BST.
You asked me if I wasn’t reading the link because they were biased.
I had said that I don’t often read links on the political threads because, very often, when I do they are of a biased nature.
I thought that would make it bleeding obvious why I hadn’t read the link.
-
Albie, I'll tell you what. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. I'm quite happy looking at the positives and you're quite happy looking at the negatives. I'm looking ahead to a good future, you're looking ahead to a bleak one.
Well, this thread has taken a weird turn since I was on here.
Anyway, I reckon BB has hit the nail on the head, although I'm not sure he meant to.
It is about belief for some.
Evidence only counts if it backs up your belief, if it poses a question, then ignore it.
All a bit Donald Trump for me!
I don't really see the positive v negative thing though.
For me, it is about weighing the evidence, then thinking what is likely to happen...probable rather than possible, if you like.
Each to their own, I guess.
-
Many, many links on here are not evidence at all. They are opinions (often extreme and very biased) dressed up as evidence for the sole purpose of backing up the poster’s own opinion in a feeble attempt to add some ‘evidential’ proof.
-
Many, many links on here are not evidence at all. They are opinions (often extreme and very biased) dressed up as evidence for the sole purpose of backing up the poster’s own opinion in a feeble attempt to add some ‘evidential’ proof.
Would you say the minutes of the Sage meeting is reliable evidence or not?
I would say a posters refusal to read a link to any evidence in case it goes against the said posters argument, invalidates their argument
-
Albie, I'll tell you what. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe. I'm quite happy looking at the positives and you're quite happy looking at the negatives. I'm looking ahead to a good future, you're looking ahead to a bleak one.
Well, this thread has taken a weird turn since I was on here.
Anyway, I reckon BB has hit the nail on the head, although I'm not sure he meant to.
It is about belief for some.
Evidence only counts if it backs up your belief, if it poses a question, then ignore it.
All a bit Donald Trump for me!
I don't really see the positive v negative thing though.
For me, it is about weighing the evidence, then thinking what is likely to happen...probable rather than possible, if you like.
Each to their own, I guess.
So are you saying Chris Whitty is a liar?
-
Filo. Mine was a general comment, not aimed at one particular argument. Also, I said many, not all.
Yes I do consider minutes from a SAGE meeting reliable evidence.
No I don’t think a poster’s refusal to read a link automatically invalidates their argument (or, most importantly, their opinion).
-
Filo. Mine was a general comment, not aimed at one particular argument. Also, I said many, not all.
Yes I do consider minutes from a SAGE meeting reliable evidence.
No I don’t think a poster’s refusal to read a link automatically invalidates their argument (or, most importantly, their opinion).
Thank you for your reply, we appear to be on the same page regarding the minutes of Sage
On another point that BB keeps mentioning regarding Chris Whitty (and I know he was answering another poster) I don’t think he’s lying at all, how can you lie about an unknown outcome, however, Whitty shouldn’t really be expressing is own personal opinion contradicting the minutes of the Sage meeting, as Albie pointed out points 32 and 33, in a Govt propaganda broadcast, he’s entitled to an Opinion of course, but not at the expense of the collective group of experts that the Govt always tells us they are following
-
Filo. Where does Chris Whitty contradict the minutes of the sage meeting?
-
Filo. Where does Chris Whitty contradict the minutes of the sage meeting?
Already mentioned in the previous post
-
Filo. Where does he express an opinion that is at the expense of the collective group of experts?
-
Filo. Where does he express an opinion that is at the expense of the collective group of experts?
Unlike BST I can’t be arsed with you and your little clique’s petty games of turning serious debates into childish games, crack on kid, get someone else to play
-
You see, the thing is, Chris Whitty didn't lie. He didn't express an opinion that opposed the SAGE meetings conclusions.
Albie cherry-picked points 32 & 33 of the minutes from the sage meeting to try and suggest that Whitty did. He didn't cherry-pick point 34 (for instance) which is exactly the action that the government is taking.
-
And that is another problem with links to evidence being seen as ultimate proof - post a link and ‘cherry pick’ facts from it to suit agenda.
Then say ‘the facts can’t be denied’, or something similar.
-
It's like only giving half a story to push your agenda. It's like the Doncaster Free Press printing 'Rovers score THREE goals against Hull', and the Hull Daily Mail printing 'Hull score THREE goals against Doncaster Rovers'!
Both are true but tell only half the story.
-
That SAGE meeting was also from about three weeks ago and there have been more encouraging statistics in favour of reducing restrictions since then.
-
BB. Odd of you to refer to paragraph 34 of those minutes (which is a general and obvious statement of principle) and refer to that as being "exactly the action the Govt is taking" while not mentioning paragraph 35.
I assume you didn't read paragraph 35, because if you DID and didn't mention it, that would be cherry-picking. So I'll post 34 and 35 here for you.
Seems to me the key take home is that SAGE warned that the very action that the Govt announced as Plan A on Monday could lead to yet another disaster.
34. As there are many uncertainties, including on what the effect of specific policies is on
transmission, changes to measures are best made based on epidemiological data
rather than based on predetermined dates. SAGE advises an “adaptive
management” approach, responding to data, for example setting levels of infection or
hospitalisation that would need to be reached before making changes. This makes it
more likely that the epidemic can be kept under control.
35. Modelling indicates that relaxation of measures over six or nine months results in
much smaller subsequent epidemic waves than relaxing measures over three
months. Relaxation of a significant number of restrictions over three months starting
from the beginning of April could lead to hospital occupancy higher than the January
peak whereas relaxation over nine months would result in a much smaller peak
(medium confidence).
-
Some very odd shapeshifting going on here.
No-one is saying Chris Whitty is lying. Equally he did not present the full range of opinion in SAGE in the briefing.
Time alone would not allow for that.
Anyone who has had to summarise to a committee, or presented evidence to an Inquiry (I have, as an expert witness), knows that there are limits to understanding in relation to the volume of technical detail.
The first doc (Sam Coates feed) is from Feb 7 is grim reading.
“Four scenarios have been modelled that differ in the speed of easing restrictions from current levels to minimal measures. All four scenarios modelled lead to a substantial resurgence in hospital admissions and deaths”. That’s in addition to the 130,000 or so deaths we already have.
There is more. “The scale and timing of these resurgences are critically dependent on very uncertain modelled assumptions, including real world vaccine effectiveness against severe disease and infection … Given this uncertainty, it would be inadvisable to tie changes in policy to dates instead of data”.
“Unless vaccine efficacy is significantly better than assumed here, it is highly likely that hospital occupancy would be higher than that seen in January 2021, if all restrictions are lifted by the start of May”.
Then a reminder: “As restrictions are relaxed virus transmission will increase. The more slowly restrictions are relaxed, the greater the number of hospitalisations and deaths prevented by vaccination and hence it would be less likely that restrictions would need to be reimposed later to avoid hospitals being put under extreme pressure”.
Now it is possible that vaccination will reduce transmission, as well as preventing anything more than mild symptoms in the vast majority of the population. The question is whether it is probable, and what degree of certainty you can give to that.
Ch5 News did a reasonable cover here;
https://twitter.com/5_News/status/1363923942172467201
This might be more use for people who don't like reading docs.
-
BST.
I referred to paragraph 34 because it provided enough evidence on its own that Albie was cherry-picking by only using the previous two paragraphs.
Regarding paragraph 35, I could have included that had it been required to do so in order to prove even further that Albie was cherry-picking paragraphs to suit his agenda. Paragraph 34 was evidence enough.
Paragraph 35 explains the obvious even to non-experts like me. Of course the longer we remain in lock-down the lesser the casualties will be of COVID. The government, along with Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick valance are fully aware of what could happen and if the worst scenario does happen they can start restrictions again. The target dates they have given are simply guides that they hope to get things back to normal but they rely entirely on future data. An advantage of starting sooner rather than later is that it will hopefully benefit children's education, General public health, mental health, economy, loss of businesses and loss of jobs.
Since that SAGE meeting of which the minutes produced 20 days ago, data from the effect of the vaccine has been unbelievable, and this must have been a consideration of Whitty and Vallance when they advised that schools going back on March 8th was the right decision.
-
BB.
I didn't think I'd need to spell this out, but the REALLY important thing about paragraph 35 is that it says that modelling suggests that opening up from lockdown over three months from April may lead to a more severe hospital crisis than occurred in January.
It is inconceivable that Whitty and Vallance wouldn't have communicated that information to Johnson. And Johnson then announces that Plan A is to open up from lockdown in 3.5 months from early March.
-
Of course Whitty and Valance aren't responsible for the economy and other political aspects Johnson is.
-
BB.
I didn't think I'd need to spell this out, but the REALLY important thing about paragraph 35 is that it says that modelling suggests that opening up from lockdown over three months from April may lead to a more severe hospital crisis than occurred in January.
It is inconceivable that Whitty and Vallance wouldn't have communicated that information to Johnson. And Johnson then announces that Plan A is to open up from lockdown in 3.5 months from early March.
BST, you didn't read my post, did you?
-
Yes I read it BB and I was writing before dashing off to a meeting.
You make the common fundamental error that there is a balance to be struck between controlling the virus and opening the economy. There isn't. There never has been. You control the virus or you have to go back into lockdown, damaging the economy.
The vaccine news is great but doesn't fundamentally change the narrative from those SAGE minutes. Currently, about 50million people in the country have yet to be vaccinated. If R goes back above 1 (and SAGE says it is likely to with schools going back) then the chances of us following the 3 month unlocking timetable are small. But here's the problem. Now that Johnson has set that aspiration, it will be bloody hard to backpedal from it if the data says we should. Evidence for that? It was clear from early December that we needed a hard lockdown but Johnson was wedded to a freer Xmas and delayed lockdown until the New Year. That has currently killed 30,000 people and made this unlocking much, much longer and harder than it needed to be. This feels very much like the same mistake being set up again.
-
BST. Every time we have been in lockdown the public has demanded that the government announce exit plans, including actual dates of when we're coming out of lockdown. Boris Johnson, along with the chief medical officer and chief scientific officer announced exit plans, and couldn't have stressed any more the point that the plans will only progress on those dates if the data permits it. Anyone who hasn't understood that are either a bit thick or are like you, gonna call the plan a failure if those dates don't work out.
The economy is only one aspect that suffers in lockdown. There is also children's education, General public health and mental health that suffers also. The loss of businesses and the loss of jobs is only a part of the consequences of lockdown.
But then you know all that, but your reluctance to give this government and anybody who works alongside it ANY credit or support whatsoever remain as it has all through the pandemic, simply because of your political agenda.
-
Grow up BB. Stop being such a petulant kid. I've given the Govt credit for a number of things. You said you reckoned it was part of a plan to make other criticisms look more believable, which is perhaps THE most batshit stupid thing I've ever seen on here, not to mention a disgusting thing to accuse someone of on this of all topics.
You need to get some perspective.
-
Thanks for that bit of grown-up advice BST. Any credit you've given the government has been a token one to cover your obsessive hatred, and there was always a 'but' not long after.
It's not you who I'm getting at in all honesty, it's those who might be swayed to believe your views. You're an intelligent bloke, but with intelligence comes responsibility.
I think you're a lost cause and your hatred for the Tory government has reached a point of no reasoning. You have become a pound shop Piers Morgan.
-
Anyone reading the comments on this forum are hardly going to listen to you over anyone are they bb?
-
Skippy, do you feel more important since you become a pound shop Susanna Reid?
-
just answer the question with a bit of honesty for a change
-
Thanks for that bit of grown-up advice BST. Any credit you've given the government has been a token one to cover your obsessive hatred, and there was always a 'but' not long after.
It's not you who I'm getting at in all honesty, it's those who might be swayed to believe your views. You're an intelligent bloke, but with intelligence comes responsibility.
I think you're a lost cause and your hatred for the Tory government has reached a point of no reasoning. You have become a pound shop Piers Morgan.
And there you go again. Accusing me not only of having a political agenda, but deliberately trying to hide it by lying. On THE most important issue we have, with tens of thousands of people dead.
I know you find it impossible to get any sense of perspective when you start ranting at me, but just stop for a moment and ask yourself if you truly believe that accusation.
-
BST. It's obvious now that you're not going to properly answer my post prior to the one where you told me to grow up, so let's do the usual thing where I just answer your posts.
I have accused you of having a political agenda because I absolutely believe that to be true. Ask yourself this. If we had a Labour party running the show would you attack it day after day, often repeating old attacks when you couldn't find anything new to attack it with? Or, would you defend it as much as you possibly could and accuse anyone who attacked it day after day, often repeating themselves, of being political in a pandemic that has caused thousands of deaths?
I say with confidence that your answer would be no for the first scenario and yes for the second one.
Regarding your lying, I haven't said that, and don't know what you mean by it.
-
BB.
You think I'd be uncritically supporting ANY Government that had taken us late into lockdown originally, brought fringe scientists in to advise the PM not to lockdown in September when things were getting out of control, refused to lockdown in December when things got totally out of control, presided over one of the worst death rates in the world and the worst economic hit of any major country as a result, given contracts to party donors then run up massive legal costs trying to prevent judicial oversight of the process?
Really? You reckon I am THAT politically partisan?
As for accusing me of lying, of course you have. You have said just a few posts up that I have given credit to this Govt as cover for what you consider to be my real agenda. So clearly you don't believe that I am being honest in giving that credit.
I've pointed out time after time that the criticisms AND the credit have ALWAYS been based on what I understand of the available facts. That's the bit that you won't accept because it don't chime with your insistence that I have an agenda.
-
BST.
I think you would defend the Labour party as much as you possibly could. For instance, You might not have dismissed the fact that we are the third most densely populated island in the world or the hub of world trade with more than our share of foreign visitors. Or that we have a high volume of older people. They are examples that you might have used to defend our high number of casualties, all of which you won't give the time of day in real life under the Tories.
I stand by my point that you have tended to take back your praises of the government. I refute your allegation of me calling you a liar.
-
How the hell can you refute it when you have said it yourself just up the page here?
When have I taken back my praise of the vaccination programme?
When have I taken back my praise of Sunak's original furlough scheme?
When have I taken back my comments on how effective this current lockdown has been?
As for the population density, that is a red herring. The first wave demonstrated everywhere around the world that cases doubled every three-four days without action being taken and halved every fortnight when lockdowns were imposed. That happened in the UK, in Denmark, in Italy, in Spain, in China, in Germany... We had the worst first wave in Europe because we locked down much later than every other country in Europe. Absolutely no question about that.
YOU are searching for excuses that do not stand up to scrutiny. Hong Kong and Singapore have similar population densities to GB and, per capita, have far more people travelling through them. But they locked down quickly and hard and have had a tiny fraction of the infection rates we have had. The population density issue is utterly irrelevant but you repeat it without any evidence and you accuse ME of being biased.
-
One more thing I will give the Govt credit for. The decision to prioritise getting first shots of the vaccine into as many arms as possible, rather than doubling up on the most vulnerable. That is looking more and more like an excellent decision.
-
You haven't taken back your praise of the vaccine programme, yet, though I never saw you go as far as to correct your cronies on here who said the vaccine programme wasn't down to the government, it was down to the NHS.
Other than that, I wait in anticipation to see what your reaction is at the first hint of a vaccine output decrease.
Regarding Sunak. Following your initial praise of him, you said: Sunak is deliberately choosing to mislead people.
You also said: "I was full of praise for Sunak's furlough scheme. Back in March, I also had some vigorous disagreements with people on here who are probably to the left of me, who were criticising Govt policy on dealing with COVID when I thought they should have been cutting them some slack."
"What I've done since then is to change my opinions when the facts demonstrated that they were right and I was wrong."
You've also since your praise of him said "Sunak seems determined to go back to the failed plan of saving our way out of the recovery from this crisis."
Regarding the current lockdown, where have you praised the government on the current effectiveness of the lockdown?
AS for the final two paragraphs of your post. That is precisely what I'm saying! There are far cleverer people than me who suggest the density, population size, obesity rate, and age of the population were factors in the high number of casualties. Wouldn't you have shared their opinion more eagerly if we had a Labour party in charge?
Even if you would never concede that they were cleverer than you, EVEN if like now you didn't agree with it, I think you would use it to defend a Labour government in the current predicament
Anyway, if this debate has done nothing it has at least encouraged you to come out in praise of the government more.
-
BB.
I've got a very busy couple of days, but let me just address the Sunak point for now. Because this is typical of interacting with you.
You don't seem to be able to process the fact that I can praise Sunak for one thing (the furlough) and criticise him for another (deliberately or ignorantly misleading the public on the issue of dealing with public debt). You take the latter as proof that I am being dishonest on the former. I think that goes to the heart of the problem. You have difficulty with nuance.
-
I have never said you were being dishonest! I said that for every praise you have given the government you have tended to castigate them sooner or later as if to maintain an unlevel playing field of criticism.
Anyway, I respect you're busy, and besides, the thread has gone way off in the wrong direction so I'll say no more on this subject.
-
BB.
Like I say, I praise when I think praise is due. I criticise when I think they are wrong. What exactly would you want me to do otherwise?
As for accusing me of being dishonest, how else is this supposed to be interpreted? "Any credit you've given the government has been a token one to cover your obsessive hatred."
That is an explicit accusation of me behaving dishonestly. If you are now saying that you retract that, then good.
-
BST.
That's a brilliant attribute when done without bias.
-
Going back ten or so posts, yes 50mil yet to be vaccinated. So yes opening schools on the 8th will raise the R rate.
The question is Billy how many will be vaccinated between now and 24days on from march 8??
Could be almost at 50% population by then and a very different outcome.
It's a calculated gamble, as every decision is. I feel like they are the right side (just) of caution this time rather than optimism? and hopeful of a much better outcome.
I really am banking on it for sure, working in aviation!
-
Impressive that you work in aviation.
I assumed you delivered leaflets :woot:
-
Auckley.
I take your point, but a couple of things worry me.
1) You need to wait two-three weeks before those vaccinated reach immunity. So as late as early-mid April you still have more than half the population vulnerable. Probably not to dying because most of the really vulnerable will be covered by then, but certainly to hospitalisation.
2) Then the other thing is the sudden massive slowdown in the rate at which positive cases have been coming down. It is looking already as though R is back up to something not very far short of 1. Opening schools seems bound to push it back above 1, which means we will see cases start to rise again from an already high base.
I truly hope I'm being overly pessimistic, but it feels like a hell of a gamble, and we haven't got a good record of getting these calls right over the past 12 months.
-
Waiting until after Easter would be a much more secure position from which to open up.
The gamble Bozo is taking is that immunisation will outpace and counteract the trend to increased overall rates of transmission from relaxing lockdown.
The further down the road with vaccination, the higher the prospect of success.
The point being that it is a gamble you do not need to take...a simple deferment moves the odds significantly in your favour.
-
We're also heading into the summer months which will help.
Compare this coming summer with last year's freedom (+eat out to help out), with 0 vaccinated,
This year looks more measured, we are better prepared and trained?! (Masks now standard, screens fitted to retail and transport) and with 30+million most at risk protected
It's got to be better??
-
Waiting until after Easter would be a much more secure position from which to open up.
The gamble Bozo is taking is that immunisation will outpace and counteract the trend to increased overall rates of transmission from relaxing lockdown.
The further down the road with vaccination, the higher the prospect of success.
The point being that it is a gamble you do not need to take...a simple deferment moves the odds significantly in your favour.
Bang on. Here's a sobering thought. We are still having about 10,000 new positive tests per day, even after nearly 8 weeks of lockdown because we started from such frighteningly high numbers in early Jan.
But it was clear from early December that things were getting out of control. Had we locked down, say on 10 Dec at which point we were having about 21,000 new cases a day and rising exponentially, we would have got down to where we are now by Xmas Day. Had we even locked down on Boxing Day by which time the cases were up to 43,000 per day, we'd have been where we are now more than a month ago. That what has been the consequence of delaying the lockdown and hoping for the best. None of this was hard to predict. But we gambled and we lost massively. For the third time. It does feel like a gamble again this time and I hope to God we don't screw it up once again.
-
I don't think they're gambling, BST. It's entirely consistent with their running it hot policy.
-
New data emerging which shows the early opening of schools may well be a mistake;
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1367744596504158208
Just not a risk we need to take.
Give the kids extra face time in school in the summer, not now.
-
New data emerging which shows the early opening of schools may well be a mistake;
https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1367744596504158208
Just not a risk we need to take.
Give the kids extra face time in school in the summer, not now.
6 months to a child is a huge amount of time. These kids are already suffering, they need to be in school.
-
BFYP,
I agree in the abstract, but in the particular the data is indicating a high risk of rising infections.
So the question is how best to manage competing claims, where bringing kids back early runs the risk of preventable deaths, long Covid for some, and possible further need for lockdown.
When new information comes to light, you amend responses to take into account that data. You do not carry on regardless, without consideration of revision.
-
BFYP,
I agree in the abstract, but in the particular the data is indicating a high risk of rising infections.
So the question is how best to manage competing claims, where bringing kids back early runs the risk of preventable deaths, long Covid for some, and possible further need for lockdown.
When new information comes to light, you amend responses to take into account that data. You do not carry on regardless, without consideration of revision.
I don't disagree, but I also don't think you disregard the mental health and development of millions of people and young ones at that.
-
It's not like they are just turning up for school as they usually did. They are being covid tested twice a week. My granddaughter goes in this afternoon solely for a covid test and all households with children of school age can get 2 rapid COVID-19 tests per person per week.
-
That is true Bentley. Hopefully, the extra precautions will prove to be enough to keep it at bay.
-
I hope so Belton. Obviously, there will be a higher number of cases just because of the fact there will be more testing. Probably some of those who go in for an initial test will be found to be positive before they go into class, and wouldn't have known otherwise.
Those figures might include those kids who never distanced while off school anyway and went out to meet their mates instead.
What is also inevitable is that when the figures do go higher the Boris haters will be out in force blaming the government.
-
On the drive to work this morning, I was expecting the roads to be busy, from parents driving the lazy little snot bags back to school.
But yet, still very quiet?!
-
I think most schools are staggering the return of students, Get, because of testing. I imagine it will be much busier during the school run tomorrow.
-
just drove past Bentley high street school , Kids out playing and all hugging each other and not 1 out of the 5 teachers i could see was wearing a face mask and know social distancing at all between the teachers
-
I think most schools are staggering the return of students, Get, because of testing. I imagine it will be much busier during the school run tomorrow.
Yeah, bit busier today. But still not back to normal levels yet.
-
just drove past Bentley high street school , Kids out playing and all hugging each other and not 1 out of the 5 teachers i could see was wearing a face mask and know social distancing at all between the teachers
At my kids primary school teachers all wear masks whilst greeting the kids / talking to parents, all parents have to wear masks on school grounds and everyone has to maintain social distancing in playground when dropping kids off by standing on marked spots.
Again, this is ineffective leadership/guidance from the top down enforcing certain rules / commons sense. These are the sorts of rules the education secretary should have insisted upton when speaking to school governing bodies and teachers unions.
-
Why should the government have to enforce common sense?
-
the government inforces road rules which most are just common sense don't they?
the government-local government enforce hygene rules for food handling most of which would be just common sense?
the government ....................... etc
-
People break those road rules. Is that the fault of the government?
-
good evasion but not the question
-
It is my question that if answered will provide an answer to your question.
-
your questions never give answers to anything
-
Questions aren't meant to give answers.
-
As you have nothing to add to the conversation may as well end it here
-
Another bail out.
-
another flacid comment from the team
-
Flaccid.
-
got it one hound
-
another flacid comment from the team
got it one hound
Which you didn’t.
-
As most of your comment are along the lines of great comment ............ to you team member of the moment, excuse me if I display a disinterest in what you put to paper hound
-
As most of your comment are along the lines of great comment ............ to you team member of the moment, excuse me if I display a disinterest in what you put to paper hound
Be my guest.
ps. I am still trying to decipher what you actually meant in the above post.
Like you, it is a bit confusing.
-
the government inforces road rules which most are just common sense don't they?
the government-local government enforce hygene rules for food handling most of which would be just common sense?
the government ....................... etc
Ths is what I wrote and as there are no rebuttals I'll take it you can't, either of you :)
-
BB did put you right on that.
-
great comment hound
-
The speed limit and food hygeine analogy is a good one.
National and local Govts set clear, unambiguous standards. Broadly, the whole country buys into them. Sanctions are imposed on those who break them.
Question is, would we as a nation be as good at broadly sticking to the speed limit if there were numerous prominent politicians, egged on by certain papers (see The Sun today...) screaming "We don't need speed limits! Folk should be free to drive down your street as fast as they want, regardless of what the so-called 'experts' say."
When you have that sort of background noise, I suggest that it encourages certain people to decide that the rules are wrong and can be ignored."
-
Why should the government have to enforce common sense?
The simple answer is, some people don't have common sense, and this virus is too f**king dangerous to rely on common sense.
Does that answer your WUM question?
-
Sanctions are imposed on motorists breaking the law efficiently and easily where police or cameras are present. As for pedestrians, common sense is relied on so they remain safe. I'm struggling to think of a pedestrian who was fined for being involved in an accident that was his fault. In such cases, common sense is relied on but not enforced.
Instead, they have the Green Cross Code or similar awareness campaigns to warn of the dangers of road misuse. Common sense is thereafter relied on, but it is not enforced by fining culprits.
Food hygiene is enforced, but I can't think of anyone who is opposed to that, unlike some who are opposed to social distancing. Food hygiene can be controlled far more easily than public behaviour towards social distancing rules.
That's why social distancing is relied on more than it is enforced.
That's why the speed limit and food hygiene analogy is a shit one.
-
I think someone got out of beddy-weddy the wrong side after their footy-wooty team lost last night, diddums.
-
Are you watching Filo?
Very good, very grown-up response there Billy lad.
-
Sometimes grown-ups have to adjust to who they are dealing with BB.
Point here being that in your rush to give a smart arse put down, you totally missed the point of my post.
-
That's very true BST, that's why I try to simplify my
conversations chats with you.
-
The point that you missed being that YES there are people who disagree with COVID measures. And these people get their view reinforced with lines that come from certain groups of politicians and certain sections of the Press.
Equally, there are people who want to be able to drive as fast as they want. But they are generally treated like social pariahs and they have no-one prominent supporting them.
Odd thing is BB, you have constantly banged the drum that criticising the Govt over COVID measures is wrong. Yet you never, ever criticise people who argue against lockdowns and social distancing.
Almost as if you only want to pick a fight with one group of people...
-
I only read the first line of your post which said "The speed limit and food hygiene analogy is a good one." That was enough for me to respond to, and correct you because the speed limit and food hygiene analogy is a shit one, and I explained why it was a shit one in reasonable detail.
I don't object to criticism of the government when it is due, but to look for criticism at every opportunity and repeat over and over and over and over and over the same f**king criticism when you can't find anything else to complain about is also adding reinforcement to the views and actions of the non-conforming fraternity.
There will be a time when an inquiry of the government's handling of the pandemic will take place, and hopefully, it will be carried out by a politically unprejudiced and unbiased and balanced jury, and not by people with a political agenda, like you.
-
Ignoring the proud boys and the deflection strategy, Whitty and Vallance are getting their cover in place in case it all goes wrong;
https://www.channel4.com/news/englands-chief-medical-officer-predicts-coronavirus-surge-if-lockdown-eased-too-fast
-
I'll remember in future that you don't read past the first sentence before deciding what to say BB. Makes a lot of things make sense, now I think about it.
-
BST, I write posts that are sharp and to the point. You write epics. The reason why I write short posts is because you will scrutinize every word if you're struggling for a proper answer, and if you can find faults, or invent them in order to change direction of the discussion, you will. If it's any consolation you're not the only one to do that.
Also, I like to take one point at a time so they can be answered one at a time and not ignored while in the process of answering other questions you might find easier to answer. That is, of course if or when you do decide to answer any. I never hold my breath in that regard.
-
And in doing so, you missed the whole point of the analogy.
Your call. Have fun. I've had more than enough for one day.
-
I read the rest of your post after, and it was still a rubbish analogy for the reasons I gave previously.
Now, I'm off to watch some paint dry.
-
This seems a bit of a silly policy.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56349116
It's well known that the lateral flow tests give a lot of false +ves and the whole point of following it up with a PCR test is to weed out the false +ves. What is the point in following up with a PCR test if you are then going to ignore it?
-
more wasted energy when it's just common sense really?
''Sex between coaches and teenagers in their care to be made illegal in England and Wales''
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk