|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 24, 2020 13:12:52 GMT 1
Some of the pubs I know could easily organise social distancing inside as well. Certainly in the day. Just a question of selecting the appropriate time and avoiding Friday and Saturday nights! Yes, it's just the activities that are very popular (the seaside, cinema, Saturday nights) that are going to be difficult to reintroduce. Many things will be self regulating, people have learned, some won't go, but the seaside when the sun shines and Saturday nights is when people's guard might drop. I'd accept my local pub offering booking slots of perhaps a couple of hours a day when I'm allowed access. However, I do recognise that known serious drinkers may then be given priority and stay there all day! There's no easy solution. |
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Apr 24, 2020 17:29:08 GMT 1
unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/i am sorry if somone else has posted this interview on a very different perspective on handling the coronavirus. "Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks: UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based" well worth listening to and i have to say he made me rethink the approach we have gone down.he also makes some very valid ponits on the sustainability of this approach. the numbers have increased and Sweden has a by law that has been enforced in restraunts that at the present time tables have to be 5ft appart, you dont go to the bar to be servred drinks you sit at the table eat your meal and your drinks are brought to you, two reason for the higher number of deaths in residential homes was atributed to been slow to ban relatives from visiting and that in sweden residential homes tend to be very large and have hundreds of residents. as Sweden is the only country to use this approach they have faced sever crticisim from the rest of europe, his observations on the reserach that made the uk goverment perfporm a u turn are intresting. in the interview Professor John Gleasecke said that it would be a good idea to hold an intervie in a years time were he predicted that the % of moratalities per head of population would be the same acroos the world, regardless of lockdown or no lockdown. from the mail "Sweden reports record number of new coronavirus infections for the second day in a row, 812; 4.8 percent rise on the previous day The country also saw an additional 131 new deaths, leaping from 84 on Thursday Major Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet declared ‘the corona curve is going in the wrong direction’ New figures as country to close bars and restaurants that do not follow social distancing recommendations This, as top disease expert Anders Tegnell said it was 'hard to understand' how a lockdown would have stopped virus reaching care homes where visits are already banned"
|
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Apr 24, 2020 17:56:57 GMT 1
there has been a lot of crticisim of premership footballers and i personaly think in the main it is justified but many are doing there bit to help.
from the mail
As the coronavirus crisis hit, Marcus Rashford felt obligated to do something Growing up Rashford needed free school meals service as his family struggled Now, the Manchester United star is determined children should not go hungry Piling resources together, Rashford's charity scheme has hit the £20m mark
"Rashford realised that children like him who relied on free meals were going hungry while schools closed down due to the virus, and wanted to make sure they were still being fed.He used his profile to seek donations, contacted companies about surplus products and threw his support behind food distribution charity FareShare."
well done that young man
|
|
|
|
Post by zenfootball2 on Apr 25, 2020 6:53:27 GMT 1
unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/i am sorry if somone else has posted this interview on a very different perspective on handling the coronavirus. "Professor Johan Giesecke, one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, advisor to the Swedish Government (he hired Anders Tegnell who is currently directing Swedish strategy), the first Chief Scientist of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and an advisor to the director general of the WHO, lays out with typically Swedish bluntness why he thinks: UK policy on lockdown and other European countries are not evidence-based" well worth listening to and i have to say he made me rethink the approach we have gone down.he also makes some very valid ponits on the sustainability of this approach. the numbers have increased and Sweden has a by law that has been enforced in restraunts that at the present time tables have to be 5ft appart, you dont go to the bar to be servred drinks you sit at the table eat your meal and your drinks are brought to you, two reason for the higher number of deaths in residential homes was atributed to been slow to ban relatives from visiting and that in sweden residential homes tend to be very large and have hundreds of residents. as Sweden is the only country to use this approach they have faced sever crticisim from the rest of europe, his observations on the reserach that made the uk goverment perfporm a u turn are intresting. in the interview Professor John Gleasecke said that it would be a good idea to hold an intervie in a years time were he predicted that the % of moratalities per head of population would be the same acroos the world, regardless of lockdown or no lockdown. from the mail "Sweden reports record number of new coronavirus infections for the second day in a row, 812; 4.8 percent rise on the previous day The country also saw an additional 131 new deaths, leaping from 84 on Thursday Major Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet declared ‘the corona curve is going in the wrong direction’ New figures as country to close bars and restaurants that do not follow social distancing recommendations This, as top disease expert Anders Tegnell said it was 'hard to understand' how a lockdown would have stopped virus reaching care homes where visits are already banned" it is not very palatable when you hear that the cornoavirus would kill 20,000 whatever measuers you put in and that a large% would have died this year and the virus merely acelerated the process,he also made the point that the flue also kills young people( somthing i was unaware of) it is not palatble to me for a personal reason im in the group who have been advised to isolate for 12 weeks but equally if the proper measuers are put in place through shielding then up to a point it reduces the chances, equally at some point i will need to leave my bubble of self isolation www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/flu-children-us-deaths-outbreak-america-why-coronavirus-a9323866.html"Hundreds of young people have died from the virus over the last several years as doctors attempt to predict the best vaccines to combat the annual outbreak." when an acurate antibody test is widley availabe we will then know the true exetent of how many were infected, it seems logical due to its small population that the research is done in iceland. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 8:20:54 GMT 1
www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19The prime minister’s chief political adviser, Dominic Cummings, and a data scientist he worked with on the Vote Leave campaign for Brexit are on the secret scientific group advising the government on the coronavirus pandemic, according to a list leaked to the Guardian. It reveals that both Cummings and Ben Warner were among 23 attendees present at a crucial convening of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) on 23 March, the day Boris Johnson announced a nationwide lockdown in a televised address. Multiple attendees of Sage told the Guardian that both Cummings and Warner had been taking part in meetings of the group as far back as February. The inclusion of Downing Street advisers on Sage will raise questions about the independence of its scientific advice. The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” Sage participants told the Guardian the Downing Street advisers were not merely observing the advisory meetings, but actively participating in discussions about the formation of advice.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2020 8:48:01 GMT 1
www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19The prime minister’s chief political adviser, Dominic Cummings, and a data scientist he worked with on the Vote Leave campaign for Brexit are on the secret scientific group advising the government on the coronavirus pandemic, according to a list leaked to the Guardian. It reveals that both Cummings and Ben Warner were among 23 attendees present at a crucial convening of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) on 23 March, the day Boris Johnson announced a nationwide lockdown in a televised address. Multiple attendees of Sage told the Guardian that both Cummings and Warner had been taking part in meetings of the group as far back as February. The inclusion of Downing Street advisers on Sage will raise questions about the independence of its scientific advice. The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” Sage participants told the Guardian the Downing Street advisers were not merely observing the advisory meetings, but actively participating in discussions about the formation of advice. Saw this yesterday. This seriously needs looking at. |
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Apr 25, 2020 9:13:35 GMT 1
Seems Cummings has indeed been attending meetings but to say he is a member is laughable.
No doubt the Guardians article will have set many into a frenzy with Cummings being public enemy number one for many after the EU referendum vote and the recent general election.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 9:40:08 GMT 1
Seems Cummings has indeed been attending meetings but to say he is a member is laughable. No doubt the Guardians article will have set many into a frenzy with Cummings being public enemy number one for many after the EU referendum vote and the recent general election. What then is his justification for attending what is supposed to be an independent scientific committee? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2020 9:54:40 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 10:20:42 GMT 1
and here's a possible reason as to why Ben Warner is on that committee -
Nuffield’s Ada Lovelace Institute last week produced a damning summary of the exuberance around digital contact tracing.
“Inaccurate, irresponsible or imprecise use of data or technology can undermine public health strategies,” wrote the authors of a report. “[They] exacerbate the spread of the pandemic or erode public trust and confidence in authority and government,”
Diverting resources to the technology “may undermine the pandemic response” the Ada Lovelace Institute warned.
Director Carly Kind suggest Britons may not adopt a contact tracing app with even the limited enthusiasm of Singaporeans. She notes that a supportive paper from Oxford’s Big Data Institute was co-authored by staff from the NHS contractor Faculty.AI – which is helping NHSX write the app – and questions its independence.
Faculty.AI was founded by Marc Warner, the chief executive, whose brother Ben was recently recruited to advise the government on data science. Ben Warner previously modelled the Vote Leave campaign and the Conservative’s 2019 General Election campaign.
Daily Telegraph.
|
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Apr 25, 2020 10:46:53 GMT 1
Seems Cummings has indeed been attending meetings but to say he is a member is laughable. No doubt the Guardians article will have set many into a frenzy with Cummings being public enemy number one for many after the EU referendum vote and the recent general election. What then is his justification for attending what is supposed to be an independent scientific committee? I would imagine the justification for attendance is their ability to turn something bad into something the British public buy into. They had great success with Brexit and returning a Conservative government. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 10:52:07 GMT 1
What then is his justification for attending what is supposed to be an independent scientific committee? I would imagine the justification for attendance is their ability to turn something bad into something the British public buy into. They had great success with Brexit and returning a Conservative government. Maybe so, but as for his sidekick Warner, the Telegraph article above indicates that he might have more than a passing interest in promoting the use of mobile tracing apps to the committee. |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Apr 25, 2020 10:57:29 GMT 1
I would imagine the justification for attendance is their ability to turn something bad into something the British public buy into. They had great success with Brexit and returning a Conservative government. Maybe so, but as for his sidekick Warner, the Telegraph article above indicates that he might have more than a passing interest in promoting the use of mobile tracing apps to the committee. " director Carly Kind suggest Britons may not adopt a contact tracing app with even the limited enthusiasm of Singaporeans". - Britons will adopt the app in their droves with Warner and Cummings promoting it. |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Apr 25, 2020 11:01:41 GMT 1
The above would seem to explain why we have been following SAGE and not WHO. Been stated before, WHO have experience gained from SARS, Ebola, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 11:19:32 GMT 1
Maybe so, but as for his sidekick Warner, the Telegraph article above indicates that he might have more than a passing interest in promoting the use of mobile tracing apps to the committee. " director Carly Kind suggest Britons may not adopt a contact tracing app with even the limited enthusiasm of Singaporeans". - Britons will adopt the app in their droves with Warner and Cummings promoting it. They will certainly do that if the choice lies between a tracking app or a further 12 months staying at home! |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Apr 25, 2020 12:15:05 GMT 1
What are people's views about our "advisors"? They seem to be quoted in the papers as "Professor X says Briton should stay in lockdown for years", etc.
It's their job to advise, it's the Governments job to decide the policy. Whatever the Governmednt decide, there will be an "advisor" who will say I told them not to do that.
Are "advisors" getting above themselves, or just having their every word snatched uo by the media eager for a story?
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 12:48:34 GMT 1
What are people's views about our "advisors"? They seem to be quoted in the papers as "Professor X says Briton should stay in lockdown for years", etc. It's their job to advise, it's the Governments job to decide the policy. Whatever the Governmednt decide, there will be an "advisor" who will say I told them not to do that. Are "advisors" getting above themselves, or just having their every word snatched uo by the media eager for a story? I'd certainly be more than happy not to hear anything further from Professor Neil Ferguson and his modelling! His track record in predicting the effects of earlier viruses is questionable to say the least, and yet this Government seems in thrall to him. In 2005, Ferguson said that up to 200 million people could be killed from bird flu. He told the Guardian that ‘around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak… There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably.’ In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009. How did he get this forecast so wrong? In 2009, Ferguson and his Imperial team predicted that swine flu had a case fatality rate 0.3 per cent to 1.5 per cent. His most likely estimate was that the mortality rate was 0.4 per cent. A government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the disease would lead to 65,000 UK deaths. In the end swine flu killed 457 people in the UK and had a death rate of just 0.026 per cent in those infected. Why did the Imperial team overestimate the fatality of the disease? In 2001 the Imperial team produced modelling on foot and mouth disease that suggested that animals in neighbouring farms should be culled, even if there was no evidence of infection. This influenced government policy and led to the total culling of more than six million cattle, sheep and pigs – with a cost to the UK economy estimated at £10 billion. It has been claimed by experts such as Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, that Ferguson’s modelling on foot and mouth was ‘severely flawed’ and made a ‘serious error’ by ‘ignoring the species composition of farms,’ and the fact that the disease spread faster between different species. Does Ferguson acknowledge that his modelling in 2001 was flawed and if so, has he taken steps to avoid future mistakes? In 2002, Ferguson predicted that between 50 and 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. He also predicted that number could rise to 150,000 if there was a sheep epidemic as well. In the UK, there have only been 177 deaths from BSE. Does Ferguson believe that his ‘worst-case scenario’ in this case was too high? If so, what lessons has he learnt when it comes to his modelling since? Ferguson’s disease modelling for Covid-19 has been criticised by experts such as John Ioannidis, professor in disease prevention at Stanford University, who has said that: ‘The Imperial College study has been done by a highly competent team of modellers. However, some of the major assumptions and estimates that are built in the calculations seem to be substantially inflated.’ Has the Imperial team’s Covid-19 model been subject to outside scrutiny from other experts, and are the team questioning their own assumptions used? What safeguards are in place? On 22 March, Ferguson said that Imperial College London’s model of the Covid-19 disease is based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code, that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. How many assumptions in the Imperial model are still based on influenza and is there any risk that the modelling is flawed because of these assumptions? The Spectator. www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4?r=US&IR=T |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2020 13:56:17 GMT 1
www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-dominic-cummings-on-secret-scientific-advisory-group-for-covid-19The prime minister’s chief political adviser, Dominic Cummings, and a data scientist he worked with on the Vote Leave campaign for Brexit are on the secret scientific group advising the government on the coronavirus pandemic, according to a list leaked to the Guardian. It reveals that both Cummings and Ben Warner were among 23 attendees present at a crucial convening of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) on 23 March, the day Boris Johnson announced a nationwide lockdown in a televised address. Multiple attendees of Sage told the Guardian that both Cummings and Warner had been taking part in meetings of the group as far back as February. The inclusion of Downing Street advisers on Sage will raise questions about the independence of its scientific advice. The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” Sage participants told the Guardian the Downing Street advisers were not merely observing the advisory meetings, but actively participating in discussions about the formation of advice. Another non story being whipped into a frenzy |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 14:07:43 GMT 1
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256249/No-evidence-recovered-covid-patients-infected-World-Health-Organisation-says.htmlThe prime minister’s chief political adviser, Dominic Cummings, and a data scientist he worked with on the Vote Leave campaign for Brexit are on the secret scientific group advising the government on the coronavirus pandemic, according to a list leaked to the Guardian. It reveals that both Cummings and Ben Warner were among 23 attendees present at a crucial convening of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) on 23 March, the day Boris Johnson announced a nationwide lockdown in a televised address. Multiple attendees of Sage told the Guardian that both Cummings and Warner had been taking part in meetings of the group as far back as February. The inclusion of Downing Street advisers on Sage will raise questions about the independence of its scientific advice. The government’s former chief scientific adviser Sir David King said he was “shocked” to discover there were political advisers on Sage. “If you are giving science advice, your advice should be free of any political bias,” he said. “That is just so critically important.” Told that Cummings was in the 23 March meeting, King replied: “Oh my goodness. Isn’t this maybe why they don’t want us to know who was there?” Sage participants told the Guardian the Downing Street advisers were not merely observing the advisory meetings, but actively participating in discussions about the formation of advice. Another non story being whipped into a frenzy The other non-stories being? Meanwhile, here's another one you might wish to attach the same label to. Antibody tests. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8256249/No-evidence-recovered-covid-patients-infected-World-Health-Organisation-says.htmlAccording to the WHO's latest advice the data gathered may now only be useful for judging the 'symptomatic' proportion of the population, as results can't be relied on to send people back to work. A statement from the World Health Organisation explained that while most people appear to have produced antibodies to the Covid-19 virus in their recovery, it is not known if the presence of these antibodies in the blood is enough to stop a second infection. Perhaps other stories in the news today such as the Government Test Site being overwhelmed in 15 minutes or care homes death rates blamed on order to take back Covid-19 patients are also non-stories? |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 25, 2020 14:25:00 GMT 1
Reorienting the NHS to focus on the Covid-19 emergency was essential but indirect deaths are mounting fast and now threaten to eclipse the carnage wreaked by the virus itself.
A new analysis by Edge Health, a leading provider of data to NHS trusts, warns that a second and then a third wave of “non-corona” deaths are about to hit Britain. Unless radical solutions can be found to resume normal service and slash waiting lists, the NHS may be forced to institute a formal regime of rationing.
The “second wave” is already breaking. It is made up of non-coronavirus patients not able or willing to access healthcare because of the crisis. Based on ONS and NHS data, Edge Health estimates these deaths now total approximately 10,000 and are running at around 2,000 a week.
They include a wide range of typical emergency admissions, including stroke and heart attack patients, as well as those with long term chronic conditions such as diabetes who are not able to access the primary or secondary care services they need. Many are sadly dying in their homes. Others are just getting to hospital too late.
This second wave of deaths is likely to roll on for as long as the NHS needs to be on a battlefooting with Covid-19 despite appeals by doctors for the sick to continue to access emergency services. Should the bottleneck stretch into the winter months, the monthly count of these indirect deaths can be expected to accelerate further.
There will then be a “third wave” of deaths for Britain to contend with. This is made up, not of emergency cases, but of people who are developing conditions such as cancer and heart disease which are going undiagnosed because of the Covid crisis.
These patients would normally have face-to-face access to a GP and then rapid referral to secondary care for diagnosis and treatment where needed. But this vital, life-saving process has all but ground to a halt.
Currently endoscopies, which are used to diagnose some forms of cancers, have been stopped entirely due to the risk of aerosolising Covid-19, for example. MRI scans have also fallen off a cliff.
Ministers point out that the NHS has not been “overwhelmed” by Covid-19 in the same way as hospitals in Northern Italy but this has been achieved at the expense of suspending tens of millions of regular check-ups, tests, operations and treatments.
Daily Telegraph.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 26, 2020 11:34:53 GMT 1
Any further evidence that this Government treats the British population as children/idiots can be found here:
'The Sunday Telegraph understands that Downing Street is preparing to ditch its current "stay at home" slogan for the "second phase" of its response, with Isaac Levido, the Australian strategist who masterminded the Conservatives' election win, working on a new appeal to the public'.
The whole campaign seems to be based around mantra.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 26, 2020 12:08:42 GMT 1
I'd certainly be more than happy not to hear anything further from Professor Neil Ferguson and his modelling! His track record in predicting the effects of earlier viruses is questionable to say the least, and yet this Government seems in thrall to him. In 2005, Ferguson said that up to 200 million people could be killed from bird flu. He told the Guardian that ‘around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak… There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it up to around 200 million people probably.’ In the end, only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009. How did he get this forecast so wrong? In 2009, Ferguson and his Imperial team predicted that swine flu had a case fatality rate 0.3 per cent to 1.5 per cent. His most likely estimate was that the mortality rate was 0.4 per cent. A government estimate, based on Ferguson’s advice, said a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ was that the disease would lead to 65,000 UK deaths. In the end swine flu killed 457 people in the UK and had a death rate of just 0.026 per cent in those infected. Why did the Imperial team overestimate the fatality of the disease? In 2001 the Imperial team produced modelling on foot and mouth disease that suggested that animals in neighbouring farms should be culled, even if there was no evidence of infection. This influenced government policy and led to the total culling of more than six million cattle, sheep and pigs – with a cost to the UK economy estimated at £10 billion. It has been claimed by experts such as Michael Thrusfield, professor of veterinary epidemiology at Edinburgh University, that Ferguson’s modelling on foot and mouth was ‘severely flawed’ and made a ‘serious error’ by ‘ignoring the species composition of farms,’ and the fact that the disease spread faster between different species. Does Ferguson acknowledge that his modelling in 2001 was flawed and if so, has he taken steps to avoid future mistakes? In 2002, Ferguson predicted that between 50 and 50,000 people would likely die from exposure to BSE (mad cow disease) in beef. He also predicted that number could rise to 150,000 if there was a sheep epidemic as well. In the UK, there have only been 177 deaths from BSE. Does Ferguson believe that his ‘worst-case scenario’ in this case was too high? If so, what lessons has he learnt when it comes to his modelling since? Ferguson’s disease modelling for Covid-19 has been criticised by experts such as John Ioannidis, professor in disease prevention at Stanford University, who has said that: ‘The Imperial College study has been done by a highly competent team of modellers. However, some of the major assumptions and estimates that are built in the calculations seem to be substantially inflated.’ Has the Imperial team’s Covid-19 model been subject to outside scrutiny from other experts, and are the team questioning their own assumptions used? What safeguards are in place? On 22 March, Ferguson said that Imperial College London’s model of the Covid-19 disease is based on undocumented, 13-year-old computer code, that was intended to be used for a feared influenza pandemic, rather than a coronavirus. How many assumptions in the Imperial model are still based on influenza and is there any risk that the modelling is flawed because of these assumptions? The Spectator. www.businessinsider.com/neil-ferguson-transformed-uk-covid-response-oxford-challenge-imperial-model-2020-4?r=US&IR=TNo chance. He's off on another one of his doomsday modelling predictions again! 'The number of deaths from coronavirus could reach 100,000 in the UK if the nationwide lockdown is lifted too soon, Professor Neil Ferguson warned yesterday. The Imperial College epidemiologist said it was impossible to send the young and healthy back to work while keeping the vulnerable in lockdown without seeing a huge increase in deaths'. www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8258043/Professor-Neil-Ferguson-warns-100-000-UK-coronavirus-deaths-lockdown-lifted-soon.html |
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Apr 26, 2020 12:47:10 GMT 1
Any further evidence that this Government treats the British population as children/idiots can be found here: 'The Sunday Telegraph understands that Downing Street is preparing to ditch its current "stay at home" slogan for the "second phase" of its response, with Isaac Levido, the Australian strategist who masterminded the Conservatives' election win, working on a new appeal to the public'. The whole campaign seems to be based around mantra. It's a strategy that won the election, why would they change it? |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 26, 2020 13:03:29 GMT 1
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/26/will-boris-johnsons-brush-with-death-prompt-him-to-talk-more-honestly-andrew-rawnsleyBoris has lived his life to Winston Churchill’s maxim: “Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.” His career is potholed with scandals, betrayals and mendacities that would have undone many another politician, but he somehow always bounced back. His party did not make him leader because they thought he would be a diligent administrator, a wise head or a safe pair of hands in a national emergency. His party made him leader because they thought he was a lucky mascot, he was their best communicator and they were desperate for someone to cheer them up after the mirthless agonies of the May years. I lost count of the Tory MPs who voted for him saying: “Boris is a terrible man, but he will be great fun.” The voters confirmed him as prime minister not because they thought he had the qualities necessary to handle a pandemic. He was returned to Number 10 because he was an energetic frontman for the Tories up against a deeply unpopular opponent. Even when he did finally announce a lockdown, it was with obvious reluctance as he lamented “taking away the ancient and inalienable right of every freeborn Englishman to go to the pub”. The arguments boiling up within the cabinet about rival versions of an “exit strategy” cannot be contained behind closed doors for any longer. The prime minister faces a host of complicated choices about when and how to ease the lockdown that all add up to one giant decision. Is the aim to maximise the repression of the disease at an ever-escalating cost to the economy and with rising deaths from other causes? Or does he choose to experiment with a more permissive relaxation of the restrictions at the risk of a resurgence in infection, leading to the much-dreaded second wave? To magnify the challenge, the scientists are candid that there is much that they still do not fully comprehend about the virus. There are no easy outcomes here, none that can be compressed into simple three-word slogans. All paths are perilous and the decision about which to take will have to be made without completely reliable information. One of the first things Boris Johnson has to decide when he returns to Number 10 is whether to start being frank with the country about the horribly difficult decisions that lie before us.
|
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Apr 26, 2020 13:22:50 GMT 1
The mortality rate is about 3.5% The flu virus is less than 1%. I still find it odd that young children are not disproportionately affected but that is what the data says. So if 6.5 million people get ill with it that is in the region of 230,000 fatalities. So this is why its spread needs to be reduced because the fatality numbers involved are potentially big. Currently the number of cases doubles every six days. Given the mortality rate we get to 100,000 deaths worldwide sometime early April (I think). Not bad - we hit 100,000 global deaths on 10th April 2020. |
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Apr 26, 2020 13:38:57 GMT 1
So in the next 12.5 days there are going to be an average of 960 new cases a day and 65 deaths a day in the UK ? The current averages of 23 new cases a day since February 21st and 0.4 deaths would seem to say otherwise ? On March 26th there were 2129 new confirmed cases in the UK and 115 deaths. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 26, 2020 14:47:17 GMT 1
The only relevant stat seems to be the number of patients in hospital with coronavirus. Encouragingly, this seems to have gone down a couple of thousand to 16,000 recently.
All other stats are all over the place. They've finally removed China's stats from the charts they show at the daily briefings after shamefully having given them credence for weeks. Russia's and Iran's figures are also almost certainly away with the fairies. North Korea's are a bad joke.
Our stats don't include deaths in care homes or in the community. That's estimated to be between two and eight thousand, which if true could in due course put us with only USA ahead of us in the number of deaths.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 26, 2020 18:37:47 GMT 1
www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/26/no-evidence-no-10-advisers-attended-sage-during-previous-crises-coronavirus-dominic-cummingsDowning Street’s political advisers have never before attended meetings of the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), according to a review of all publicly available minutes of meetings over the last decade. The Guardian revealed on Friday that the prime minister’s chief adviser, Dominic Cummings, and another No 10 aide who worked with him on the Vote Leave campaign have been attending Sage meetings. The government has been adopting an unusually combative approach to journalists in recent weeks after a slew of articles by investigative reporters raised questions about how ministers are responding to the Covid-19 pandemic.
|
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Apr 26, 2020 18:43:06 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2020 19:44:58 GMT 1
Not sure they need answering to be honest, the CMO and CSO all seem quite happy with the situation.... a big non story being whipped up pretty much the same as why did Boris not attend COBRA until 2nd March |
|
