^^ This.
The mixed messages are confusing - on the one hand 60% of the country "needs" to get it to build immunity, on the other hand as soon as you show symptoms, you have to self-isolate to prevent it spreading.
Some companies, businesses etc are shutting down/WFH, some are carrying on "as normal" (with extra hand sanitisers), some people are obviously still travelling around, some are quite strict about self-isolation. It's all a mess.
Ooof! From the Guardian live feed..
A councillor in an English village where one of the first UK cases of coronavirus was confirmed has described the government’s strategy of tackling the disease as “a crime against our country”.
Samantha Flower, who is a member of the Conservative party and a social care manager for Sheffield City council, said: “I’m very concerned. They [the UK government] are saying they want as many people to get this disease to create a herd immunisation. But it won’t. My suspicion is that they don’t have the money for social care or NHS so that the weak and the old die.
“I’m saying that as a Conservative councillor and I don’t care if I get sacked. You judge a society by how they treat their vulnerable people. You judge leadership by how it treats its most vulnerable people.
“How do we care for them – by saying it would be better for pretty much everyone to get this disease when we know that our loved ones are going to die? It’s not OK.”
Flower is a Conservative councillor on High Peak borough council and represents the Derbyshire village of Burbage, where one of the first known UK cases of Coronavirus was confirmed. Burbage primary school and a nearby medical centre were temporarily closed after a parent tested positive for the virus on 27 February, when just 15 cases had been confirmed in the UK.
She added: “We could follow the World Health Organization’s advice and stop this now but the government’s chosen not to. Our prime minister has just said to us ‘your loved ones are going to die’ and that’s not OK. It’s abhorrent. It’s a crime against our country. We have the measures and capabilities to prevent this.
“I’m not trying to be an alarmist but the World Health Organization has set very comprehensive guidance and we’re not following it.”
You might want to read up on Quantitative Easing. That’s exactly what they did for years following the banking and Greek debt crisis.
That’s exactly what they do. Money is created ‘with the stroke of a pen’
Happy enough to have that discussion but this thread isn't the place, probably the pub is. Suffice to say, I disagree, I might be wrong.
they quite rightly do the very simple maths which tells them that at least hundreds of thousands will die, maybe even millions
So what do you/others recommend we do instead and how will it work out longer term say over the next 12 months ?
My uni is closed from Monday but I'm still going on placement to school. No plans to shut schools at the moment.
Flower is a Conservative councillor on High Peak borough council
And a leading epidemiologist in her spare time? If not, who gives a flying fig what she says?!
This thread is so so so bad...
“You can see the fear in Chris Witty’s face. He knows whats coming.”
What we’re actually seeing is a guy who along with Patrick Vallance and their team have been working crazy hours since January to build the models and analytics required to make informed decisions. This is familiar ground to Whitty – he is one of the main reasons that Ebola was stopped in its tracks in 2009:
https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/ebola-emergence-epidemic-and-the-global-response
Whitty is quite literally one of the best epidemiologists in the world and the government is doing what they should be doing – listening to the experts who’ve spent their whole careers studying this sort of stuff – rather than making policy decisions that satisfy the siren cries of shouty people on the internet / Daily Mail.
bears repeating given signal/noise ratio on this thread. As do explanations of herd immunity. Doesn't mean the CMO's beyond challenge - but google to see who you're challenging, and his track record, as an academic, clinician (still practising fwiw) and adviser on science and policy to handle earlier epidemics. It's his job in this situation to advise the govt on what to do, not to help them do what they've already decided on for whatever nefarious reasons.
So what do you/others recommend we do instead and how will it work out longer term say over the next 12 months ?
We follow official WHO advice to do everything we can to contain it, and follow other countries such as China, Italy and Denmark in mobilising a massive collective effort to minimise the spread, with transparent information sharing, mass testing, social distancing and avoidance of mass gatherings. And we do it for as long as it takes to prevent the exponential infection of the greater population and the subsequent collapse of health and social care systems. If we do that people will respond positively, because they don't want their relatives and friends to die. They will also feel engaged and useful, rather than powerless and fearful. No one is pretending that it can be stopped entirely, but it can be delayed, and it can be fought, and lives can be saved.
Or we can just let people die in the hope that it will eventually die out through lack of people to infect.
Which of these strategies seems most sensible?
Or we can just let people die in the hope that it will eventually die out through lack of people to infect.
No one is suggesting that at the moment are they?
If not, who gives a flying fig what she says?!
She may well have an insight into how the care system in her area will cope with the various scenarios.
Questioning why the WHO isn’t being listened to (they have experts as well you know) by the government is exactly what a ‘politician’ with responsibility towards the elderly and other at risk groups should be doing.
From the WHO epidemic status announcement :
The second reason is that despite our frequent warnings, we are deeply concerned that some countries are not approaching this threat with the level of political commitment needed to control it.
Let me be clear: describing this as a pandemic does not mean that countries should give up. The idea that countries should shift from containment to mitigation is wrong and dangerous.
On the contrary, we have to double down.
This is a controllable pandemic. Countries that decide to give up on fundamental public health measures may end up with a larger problem, and a heavier burden on the health system that requires more severe measures to control.
Which of these strategies seems most sensible?
I have no idea mate, but i'm hoping the science nerds telling the government what to do have a pretty decent idea. I honestly doubt they're doing it just to kill people off simply because they just don't matter any more.
No one is suggesting that at the moment are they?
It's the logical end result of pursuing 'herd immunity'.
I honestly doubt they’re doing it just to kill people off simply because they just don’t matter any more.
I don't think that either, and I'm not pretending to know more than Boris's advisors, but I am questioning why we're not doing what other countries are. We probably will end up doing all that, so why the delay? And why are they keeping information from us and not being honest about what they think will happen?
It’s the logical end result of pursuing ‘herd immunity’.
I am not so sure. I trust that the NHS, lead by Vallance and Witty have a better understanding of this than you and I and they are trying to manage this to spread the infection and manage the long term recurrence.
I agree with you though that the communication has been terrible. I do wish you would keep the cheap political shots off this thread. It doesnt really help people?
Self important ignorance seems to reign on this thread now
Suffice to say, I disagree, I might be wrong.
You are, but so are most people. Money is something everyone uses but no one understands.
if you borrow £100 from the bank, and it credits your account with the amount, ‘new money’ has been created. It didn’t exist until it was credited to your account.
This also means as you pay off the loan, the electronic money your bank created is “deleted” – it no longer exists. You haven’t got richer or poorer. You might have less money in your bank account but your debts have gone down too. So essentially, banks create money, not wealth.
That quote is from the well-known conspiracy website, the Bank of England. Banks create money as debt and a central bank is the government's bank. Money is created and then circulates around the economy, before being cancelled out through taxation. Governments can print as much as they like, and so long as there is demand in the economy, it will not cause inflation (although it does debase a currency over time, hence why my dad earned 10 pounds a week in 1960, etc.) Again, a struggling NHS or schools having to beg pens off parents because they don't have any money is a political choice not an economic one, despite propaganda convincing people otherwise. But you're right, not the time and place. If you're interested in how it works, check out the documentary Money As Debt. It looks dated but the content is accurate and it's pretty mindblowing.
Vallance and Witty have a better understanding of this than you and I
Of course they do. Now consider what the WHO are also saying.
…we are deeply concerned that some countries are not approaching this threat with the level of political commitment needed to control it.
The idea that countries should shift from containment to mitigation is wrong and dangerous.
This is a controllable pandemic.
Christ, this thread is moving faster than I can read it.
I am questioning why we’re not doing what other countries are.
Because we aren't other countries?
I'm far from an expert on such matters, but is it not perhaps over-simplistic to assume that the correct measures in a country with our unique healthcare system and given population density would be identical to those in, say, the USA? I mean, they may well be, but they might not.
China went into lockdown because it could, if Westmonster tried a stunt like that most of the UK would go "bugger that" and be off down to the Winchester for a pint waiting for it all to blow over.
And why are they keeping information from us and not being honest about what they think will happen?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6530867.stm
Westfield shoppers injured in midnight stampede chaos were trying to get their hands on vouchers for COFFEE and free parking hidden in balloons (from the DM so I won't link)
No idea why you wouldn't want to to tell people.
UK postpones local elections. France's to go ahead.
How does this fit the narrative of mainland europe closing anything and everything, while Britain soldiers on towards the cliff?
Just told my lad it's not a good idea that he brings round my new grandson to see his nan.
It's an utterly crap decision to have to make but my 90 year old mother is genuinely scared of the three of them coming into see her as much as she wants them to.
So... video calling will take its place. My lad totally understands as i said this might be coming.
60% infection needed for herd immunity..ok fine,I do get it.... but I'm determined that I'll do all I can to make sure my mother isn't one of the many that will pay the price for that immunity.
If anyone says my morality is questionable or I'm being overly paranoid I don't really care at this stage.
Good luck all and just try and look after each other as best we can, eh, even on here.
UK postpones local elections.
I heard, and posted, the opposite earlier today.
Electoral Commission proposed that they should be postponed, but “Number Ten” briefing that wouldn’t be happening.
Has there been an update?
How does this fit the narrative of mainland europe closing anything and everything, while Britain soldiers on towards the cliff?
It doesn't. But it does fit the narrative of the EU being more democratic than the UK, and of Tories being quite keen to dismantle democracy.
We probably will end up doing all that, so why the delay?
They said this in the press conference - they have modelled the behaviour of the British public and they are not confident people will stick to isolation for long enough.
And why are they keeping information from us and not being honest about what they think will happen?
If 80% of the population get it, and 1% of them die, that's half a million people. If you put that number out there, the Mail and Express latch onto that instead of telling people the messages needed to be got into the populations head.
I heard, and posted, the opposite earlier today.
Electoral Commission proposed that they should be postponed, but the “Number Ten” briefing that wouldn’t be happening.
Has there been an update?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51876269
they have modelled the behaviour
As Jeremy Hunt said… show us that modelling if you’re using it in such a risky fashion.
Has there been an update?
Oh, a wise turn around. We should be glad they’re thinking on their feet I suppose. A bit of coordination in Number Ten might be wise though.
I heard, and posted, the opposite earlier today.
Electoral Commission proposed that they should be postponed, but “Number Ten” briefing that wouldn’t be happening.
Has there been an update?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51876269
Good luck all and just try and look after each other as best we can, eh, even on here.
Yep
If you put that number out there,
Err, it's already out there. People can do primary school maths.
People can do primary school maths.
Not as common as you might hope, IME.
From that reliable source FB:
Rory Stewart, the Independent London Mayoral candidate, a former tory, is saying plainly that the WM policies on COVID 19, are not, in fact, based on science, but on social modelling, and that they are finding it preferable to allow some half a million vulnerable patients to die quickly, rather than have it drag out.
That’s what gov sources have been saying… no? Depending on the way the wind is blowing that moment of course.
Rory Stewart, the Independent London Mayoral candidate
And an epidemiologist, I presume?
Anyone thinking of not sending their kids into school next week?
Governments can print as much as they like, and so long as there is demand in the economy, it will not cause inflation.
In a nutshell you are so correct.
But the book balancing liars of the Tory party don't want to be part of this.
Money isn't finite - resources are.
But they sure as hell could put the money into economy very rapidly if they wanted to.
Politicians across the spectrum struggle with how the money system works. They describe the system like a Household and it's nothing like.
There has to be the resources and employment available - but like the fed they can be instructed to crack on. Fed does it all the time for the military. Let's vote on what to spend the money on - ding.
The market has demonstrated it's failure and clearly will not solve human needs I'm this sort of scenario. As with the smack down of 2008 the Government will have to step in.
It could and it should.
The Tories just simply don't want to act big Government about it - but it's exactly want we need.
What about the epidemiologists at the WHO and other countries? Or are ours better
Doesn't matter really, if people on here seem to put more trust in Rory Stewart, Brenda from Bristol and Mystic Meg
Put your trust in 2 definites?
Hygiene and staying away from people as much as you possibly can.
Doesn’t matter really, if people on here seem to put more trust in Rory Stewart, Brenda from Bristol and Mystic Meg
People are listening to experts all over the world… fight to contain this, and reduce the extend and speed of the epidemic, or pay the price.
Hygiene and staying away from people as much as you possibly can.
Yep. Within sensible reason. Particularly old folks if you feel rough.
Twodogs
And an epidemiologist, I presume?
A bloke with better connections to what the thinking is in the inner circles of the govt than an epidemioligist maybe?
A bloke with better connections to what the thinking is in the inner circles of the govt than an epidemioligist maybe
Don't forget your tinfoil hat when you go out
I wonder if those people who are obliged to walk down stairs in their H and S gone mad offices are still duly following the same rule and walking up and down the stairs with hand contact on the banister at all times
You and a few hundred potential carriers rubbing your sweaty mits together
Also, those extrapolated infection numbers also seem iffy. Surely if you you remove huge swaves of the populace the distancing has an effect, and as the numbers ramp up a great deal more will hibernate to avoid catching anything, increasing distancing again and lowering cross contamination.
Loads of people fall and hurt themselves on the stairs.
Watching BBC World News… they’re going through each country one by one detailing the restrictions they are putting in place. The contrast with the UK is stark.
Surely if you you remove huge swaves of the populace the distancing has an effect,
Didn’t we have a referendum on this very topic?
🤷♂️🤪
