Sadly it’s what the public seem capable of processing, which is a statement on science understanding in this country.
I blame the science teachers, should get them all back in school
Now I’m really not sure what you’re on about Rydster.
Oh no @exsee I still believe that the UK government chose not to be part of the scheme because it diluted the purity of their only reason for existence, that is brexit.
The incompetence seems to have been in their shifting story about why they didnt sign up to it in the first place.
And as both you & ernie have been unable to supply any other actual reasons for excluding ourselves from the scheme, I shalnt be issuing an apology (tho why Id need to do something so silly just because you dont like the government being critcised is beyond me!)
More false claims kimbers??
You need evidence not a belief. Jeebus wept.
here ya go exsee, from the horses mouth
brexit before health of the nation
Ill accept your apology in either just emojis on here or skywriting
I blame the science teachers, should get them all back in school
Me too, you ### slacker... Even a log plot would be nice, get to it!
It's my youngest nephew's birthday today. His school is "back", so he is going to be online, studying, and only after a solid school day, will he get a party with his three siblings. Poor kid.
Again, can we keep the noise to a minimum in what is otherwise a useful thread, please?
If your want to discuss the EU's role, get yerself another thread. They're free.
@kimbers. That's proof that NHS staff are being denied PPE based on ideological reasons is it?
What Del said, take you're nonsense to political thread.
No, it’s proof the government was keen not to be involved in an EU projects on ideological grounds.
The denial (well a lack of really) of PPE is down to incompetence.
I spent a long time working for the government, and some time in procurement. The resistance to change and unwillingness to look for better solutions was mind blowing.
I expect that the question was asked “Have we got enough PPE?” The answer would have fed back that “Yes, we have plenty. Our supply system is world class and our Just In Time methodology will ensure it gets where it needs”
An old military adage is that no plan survives first contact with the enemy. Imagine the Chaos in NHS Central Supply when in 24 hours every NHS trust puts in a demand for 10x it’s normal monthly supply in 1 go. Meltdown. I imagine that contract, like every other had been subject to Compulsory Competitive Tendering, hence awarded to the lowest bidder, running the least amount of staff.
Scientific fields are so complex now, you need years of training and loads of peripherical knowledge to properly understand many of them.
The crisis post-1960's (post-modernity) is one of trust in institutions and experts and is understandable given the context of some of the massive failures of technology such as Chernoybl, its shadow side (Holocaust), and many of the biases and racism which have been discovered packed into these intuitions.
Many people now - if they can't absolutely trust an expert - flip to the opposite position and unquestionably 'believe' what some charismatic idiot says on social media, hence you have the rise of anti-vaxxers and 5G conspiracies.
The solution isn't more science in school but better humanities and arts education. This allows people to live with doubt and their own fallibility and the fallibility of others. Except at the rarified level, STEM deals with binaries of true/false, hence why many very religious people are drawn to such education. It offers the same certainty. Almost all these nutjobs joining ISIS for example were STEM graduates.
Interesting release of stats about total deaths per week.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52278825
'Normal' at this time of year would be ca 10K (average per week across the year is about 12-13K, ca 650K deaths/year total)
Last week of ONS data (to 3rd April) was 16K so 6K extra.
Of this 6K, 3.5K were CV19 - so why another 2.5K ?
- some missed diagnosis of CV19 cases for sure
- people not getting help for conditions because of eg: fear of going to hospital
- mental health, etc.
I still believe that the UK government chose not to be part of the scheme because it diluted the purity of their only reason for existence, that is brexit.
Personally I believe they didn't join the scheme because they felt they didn't need to. We could sort out PPE better ourselves.
Is that true though, is there evidence that joining the EU scheme would actually get us "more" PPE on a quicker time scale.
Now I’m starting to think Rydster is a chat bot. 😂
Yes I am.
00011100001010101001
The science that is being used for decision-making is not so superficial
+1
Some degree of herd immunity, by a combination of exposure and, eventually, vaccination, is the inevitable end goal, so that outbreaks in subsequent years can be handled more like seasonal flu. But obviously, just opening the floodgates is not a practical short or medium term goal because of the vast numbers of excess deaths that would cause in the next six months.
The whole point of lockdown and curve flattening is to control the rate at which a significant proportion of the population is exposed to the virus, while maintaining capacity in the NHS to treat those who develop severe illness.
It is pointless to lockdown so early and so hard that virtually no-one gets it, as the wave of infection will come at some point, either now or in three months. All you can do is try to manage the proportion of the population exposed. The problem is that lockdowns are a blunt instrument, and we are still learning about their effectiveness in terms of disease spread and compliance.
The government has accepted the uncompromising strategy that its statisticians and clinical scientists have produced after modelling every scenario, including the ‘washover’ one, but communicating it directly to the public requires some finesse to avoid sounding callous.
+1
The "policy" (such as it is) in almost every country in the world is to flatten the curve so the Hospitals can cope and hope something turns up. (Treatment/Vaccine/Antibody Test)
The world *will* end up with herd immunity the degree to which that is by infection or vaccine won't be known form some months/years yet.
I’m still puzzled why Patrick Vallance came out with his decree that 60% of us must get infected.
I can answer that. Given the level of infectiousness 60pc is required to achieve herd immunity. (ie a level of resistance that gets the R0 below 1) (Measels is more infections so 95pc of us need resistance to achieve herd immunity.)
(For the "infected" bit please link to the text you're describing as a decree. My guess is you misread or misheard.)
No, Rydster and others have had and been shown the government plan many times now but here we are back to square one. Will herd immunity also play a part? Yes if/when a vaccine comes along but until then it’s still about controlling the spread.
+1
In other news, are people really infectious with asymptomatic CV? Early on we were told no. Then (on STW at least) the answer sort of flipped to yes without any evidence presented. Now it turns out that it's unlikely people are infectious when asymptomatic and the WHO can't find a single example of anyone who's contracted it from someone who's not showing symptoms. (Admittedly that's an argument from silence.)
(9m:40 in the latest episode here:
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-19/coronavirus-what-you-need-to-know-itv-news-podcast-with-information-advice-and-analysis-on-the-pandemic/
The one that starts: "Government's Chief Scientific Adviser admits..."
In other, other news, I heard on R4 Today that "Rapid Reinfection" is also very unlikely, for all the reasons many of us have been banging about on here.
Is that true though, is there evidence that joining the EU scheme would actually get us “more” PPE on a quicker time scale.
PPE yes, ventilators not yet, EU receiving PPE from scheme now & Raab admitted that we have shortage (rather than supply issues) at presser yesterday, but EU scheme also has long lead time on ventilators
we were also excluding ourselves from teh scheme even after it was acknowledged that we had shortages
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/13/timeline-of-uks-coronavirus-ppe-shortage
I agree with many of Rydster's points and think that philosphy in schools is one of the most important subjects. Teach kids to be critical of what they are presented with and make objective judgements about its value.
Yes I am.
00011100001010101001
😂
Personally I believe they didn’t join the scheme because they felt they didn’t need to. We could sort out PPE better ourselves.
Is that true though, is there evidence that joining the EU scheme would actually get us “more” PPE on a quicker time scale.
Given that at least 4 nations have 'confiscated' PPE headed to the UK for their own needs I'd have thought joining some kind of EU PPE pool would be a very, very bad idea. Admittedly that's with the benefit of hindsight.
You are misquoting the WHO on asymptomatic transmission, Outofbreath. This is what they actually said which is far from what you've said.
Flattening the curve has nothing to do with herd immunity, it's to prevent health service capacity being exceeded.
If 'flattening the curve' is a means to achieve the end of herd immunity then consider the counterfactual 'not flattening the curve':
Flattening the curve + time = herd immunity
Not flattening the curve + time = herd immunity
You agree?
This is why herd immunity cannot be a policy. It happens regardless of your policy decision (assuming certain things about the pathogen).
The “science” presented at those conferences is superficial at best. Sadly it’s what the public seem capable of processing, which is a statement on science understanding in this country.
I'm not sure it's realistic to expect the general population to grasp complex science, it's just not going to happen. It's not really a reflection on 'science understanding in this country' it's more about levels of intelligence and relevant education. I don't understand your modelling explanations and I'm educated to degree level, I'm not sure I'm thick, more that I'm not a scientist. Though I may be a bit dim also.
You might as well complain that the general public doesn't really 'get' metaphysics or philosophy. Or economics. I hate to break it to you, but the general public isn't great at any sort of complex, nuanced discipline. If you tried to explain that culturally this crisis is fundamentally about our relationship as a society with death, they wouldn't get that either.
What you should be able to reasonably expect though, is for complex scientific concepts to be presented in a way that makes sense to the general public. And for politicians to understand enough of the nuances of scientific modelling that they can make informed choices rather than just swallowing everything they're told by scientists as fact. I don't know if either is currently the case - what do you think?
You are misquoting the WHO on asymptomatic transmission, Outofbreath.
I'm quoting the source I linked to.
If you think the WHO have said something (recently) that contradicts my link, please *quote* it.
Here's my link:
(9m:40 in the latest episode here:
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-19/coronavirus-what-you-need-to-know-itv-news-podcast-with-information-advice-and-analysis-on-the-pandemic/
The one that starts: “Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser admits…”
What you should be able to reasonably expect though, is for complex scientific concepts to be presented in a way that makes sense to the general public
I would settle for the 'scientists' to be actually answering the questions that are put to them at the briefings, and not to slither off like slimy politicians.
The government has accepted the uncompromising strategy that its statisticians and clinical scientists have produced after modelling every scenario, including the ‘washover’ one, but communicating it directly to the public requires some finesse to avoid sounding callous.
also ignoring that the governments strategy has been informed by 3 groups, not just virologists & clinicians
including the behavioural scientists from the 'nudge unit',
& policy is decided by cabinet , PM & advisors, not just scientists
There's a schol of thought that we need way less than 60% infected for herd immunity...
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-comments-about-herd-immunity/?fbclid=IwAR2VbXgcF0daBeRbsQbqlx9DNdzirRdKmQi1Dm-5eolulcd7-XFQ_AA2Wq0
There’s a schol of thought that we need way less than 60% infected for herd immunity…
Do you even need herd immunity? Suppose 25pc of people had resistance [1] and that got the R0 down to 1.1. (Made up numbers for instance.)
If that was good enough to stop the hospitals overflowing you'd be achieving everything periodic lockdowns do with none of the downsides. It wouldn't be herd immunity but it would make the problem manageable.
Feels to me like we'd be on top of this virus before we got to R0<1.0.
[1] (by vaccination or infection or a combination
Is any PPE made in the U.K.? Or can it be? Especially the single use stuff, or is there any way of making re-usable/washable/sterilisable replacements ?
To use the gowns as an example, we used to use washable gowns many years ago then moved over to the blue disposable ones you see on the news footage now.
So all the washable gowns are gone. You’d need to set up production of them, distribute them, then have laundry facilities in place to cope with the volume. Our laundry no longer exists in any fit state on site. I used to work there many years ago and would spend hours and hours folding theatre gowns, you’d need a lot of laundry staff to cope with the volume they’re going through now!!
Then you’d need capacity in sterile services to cope with autoclaving them all.
Every solution has it’s problems!!
Following on from this, turns out we're donating our (non-disposable) lab coats for use on the wards now as we're dangerously low on disposable gowns 😲
What you should be able to reasonably expect though, is for complex scientific concepts to be presented in a way that makes sense to the general public
If you can't do this then you've failed as a scientist. I try to explain everything so anyone can understand. Whilst the modelling is complex, the answers are not. We describe data, to do that we need to estimate things about the epidemic like chance of dying if you get it. It's surprisingly hard to do that when things just keep growing, when they flatten a bit, we can be a bit more sure...
At the moment, we are sure we are at the peak, it won't get much worse if things stay the same. How long we sit on the peak is debatable but a week or so is an informed guess. If we release the hounds of contact, we'll be back to doubling every 2 days. Lockdown can't be relaxed until we are sure things are declining. That's at least three weeks away.
You don't need nuance. Politicians can't communicate clearly at the best of times. When they don't really undestand anything other than deaths went up/down today, then don't be surprised.
BTW all of the above have been communicated to officialdom. There's nothing confidential here.
The language of politics, like business, is to the ends of obscuring as much as explaining.
RichardKennerly - there seems to have been lots of local groups sewing scrubs, but it was specifically mentioned that Burberry were making Gowns. Initially I put that down to a mistake, but maybe they’ve decided we need some old fashioned type ones?
The EU one - if there is clear evidence of a constant pattern then we're at what would be the chances of that? It's a fast paced global crisis - there are a lot of things not going to go right. There would need to be a clear trends in decision making.
Herd immunity via infection - whilst it may not have been formally a policy it is reasonable for people to have seen it as a fairly serious contender. That's just based on who was talking about it and the coverage it had and has got. Did the genie just get out of the bottle because no one was fully on top of the situation. In a similar way to Dominic Cummings free styling civil service recruitment over Christmas. Or was it unleashed by the nudge unit - I'd have to go searching for the articles - but I'm pretty sure the unit has form in floating ideas to judge response.
Herd immunity by infection can't be held up as a government policy nor can it dismissed as a minority crack pot conspiracy theory.
Barbour are making blues.
What you should be able to reasonably expect though, is for complex scientific concepts to be presented in a way that makes sense to the general public
I believe they have but some people choose to ignore it, interpret different or just completely think the government is lying.
I’m not sure it’s realistic to expect the general population to grasp complex science
The French, Spanish and German governments don't let that stop them trying, or even admit that the scientists can't provide all the answers because they don't have them themselves. Perhaps more importantly the media don't try to dumb down, they just tell it like it is and let people make up their own minds about what the information means.
Just stick a microphone in front of professionals and they do a pretty good job of presenting their knowledge in a form people will understand. The doctors interviewed on Eins Extra get their facts across really well. Compare that with the medical professionals on the daily briefing that specialise in avoiding questions rather than conveying what they know. People can tell the difference between information and propaganda.
Sorry Drac - is Blues another word for scrubs?
Ooops! Yeah sorry.
The people at the top of the NHS/PHE are politicians, same as the military/police etc.
I believe they have but some people choose to ignore it, interpret different or just completely think the government is lying.
+1
It not complicated at the level punters like us need to understand it. Most of the gross misunderstanding is affected, IMHO.
Compare that with the medical professionals on the daily briefing that specialise in avoiding questions rather than conveying what they know.
Here's Sir Patrick Vallance conveying what he knows very recently:
https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-19/coronavirus-what-you-need-to-know-itv-news-podcast-with-information-advice-and-analysis-on-the-pandemic/
The one that starts: “Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser admits…”
If he's rubbish on the daily briefings listen to him in better forums.
It not complicated at the level punters like us need to understand it. Most of the gross misunderstanding is affected, IMHO.
Disputing or obscuring the messages seems to have become some people's raison d'etre in recent weeks.
Sure, I prefer the way Macron or Arden have put messages across, but I've been able to understand what we were being told and why!
A post from David Spiegelhalter.
https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196
A post from David Spiegelhalter.
Which seems to suggest that the age group likely to be hit hardest by “extra” deaths is 50-70 … which is also the main age range of people in the NHS and care system choosing to either put off retirement, or to re-enter service, to help us through this.
Selfless heroes.