Corona Virus main thread

[Aggy 752]

35 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Well that is my point Aggy. And I have posted about it before. 

Yes I know - when I said “this is the point Sonyc” i meant the point you had made in the post you’d quoted.

 

15 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don't think this story makes chronological sense. Reading an account of SAGE's deliberations, based on its own reports, the initial aim, formulated  before March, was a low-key approach, which to an extent was aimed at building up a herd immunity, but on the understanding that tougher measures, including some form of lockdown, might be needed later but probably would be introduced gradually.

On March 12 Johnson issued his very-much-change-of-tone 'loved ones will die' warning, and on March 16 issued a plea to people to take lockdown measures, but with a crucial lack of detail or enforcement, so the plea was not effective. Yet this Bloomberg piece refers to Cummings making his intervention at SAGE on March 18:

According to two people involved, Cummings played far more than a bystander’s role at a crucial SAGE meeting on March 18, as the panel discussed social distancing options to tackle the Covid-19 outbreak. At the March 18 meeting, Cummings asked probing questions such as why the government should wait until the following week to impose a lockdown rather than doing so earlier, according to one of the people.

So this was two days after Johnson issued his lockdown plea. The idea that Cummings was asking SAGE on March 18 why the government should wait until the next week to impose a lockdown makes no sense.

Cummings would have had a point if he had told Johnson that the plea was way too wishy-washy  and would need to be made much more more definitive and detailed, and with stronger enforcement, but that was and always would be a political decision, with Johnson the decider, irrespective of what the scientists on SAGE thought.

Alternatively, SAGE hadn’t changed its advice regardless of Johnson’s comments on the 16th and Cummings was applying pressure to bring them in line with what the PM had said two days before. Who knows. But the point is at best (assuming no influence or pressure was put on SAGE) the government and the committee members allowed themselves to be put in a position which compromises or questions their integrity. At worst, there are misleading public statements and a lack of openness with the public about exactly how huge decisions were made.

[sonyc 5,491]

Cheers Aggy. I wasn't trying to be pointed just to agree with you but sometimes words aren't so good without eye contact are they.

[KiwiScot 1,436]

So how long should the lockdown go on for? Around another month I feel to push the numbers down and let the government get more time to organise.

[ricardo 7,345]

Well we can all enjoy good news.

A SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate would likely match all currently circulating strains
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.064774v1
The magnitude of the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the urgency for a safe and effective vaccine. Here we analyzed SARS-CoV-2 sequence diversity across 5,700 sequences sampled since December 2019. The Spike protein, which is the target immunogen of most vaccine candidates, showed 93 sites with shared polymorphisms; only one of these mutations was found in more than 1% of currently circulating sequences. The minimal diversity found among SARS-CoV-2 sequences can be explained by drift and bottleneck events as the virus spread away from its original epicenter in Wuhan, China. Importantly, there is little evidence that the virus has adapted to its human host since December 2019. Our findings suggest that a single vaccine should be efficacious against current global strains...

 

[BigFish 1,986]

36 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Sounds like you need to apply for the job.

probably before we reach pound / Euro parity.

😀I'll do that when this season is decalred null and void

[ricardo 7,345]

2 minutes ago, KiwiScot said:

So how long should the lockdown go on for? Around another month I feel to push the numbers down and let the government get more time to organise.

Some are getting itchy feet.

I went to the recyle bins today, the furthest Ive been from the back door in 5 weeks.

Had to wear a full length radiation suit and gas mask though.😀

[ricardo 7,345]

Just now, BigFish said:

😀I'll do that when this season is decalred null and void

Should be fairly soon then😂

[BigFish 1,986]

2 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Should be fairly soon then😂

With my yellow ang green spectacles it would suit me

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

14 minutes ago, Aggy said:

Alternatively, SAGE hadn’t changed its advice regardless of Johnson’s comments on the 16th and Cummings was applying pressure to bring them in line with what the PM had said two days before. Who knows. But the point is at best (assuming no influence or pressure was put on SAGE) the government and the committee members allowed themselves to be put in a position which compromises or questions their integrity. At worst, there are misleading public statements and a lack of openness with the public about exactly how huge decisions were made.

Aggy, I can only go on the Bloomberg report and that says Cummings was asking SAGE why the government should wait until next week to impose a lockdown when Johnson had already imposed a lockdown! Granted it was in the form of a vague plea rather than the kind of detailed lockdown other countries instituted but it was a lockdown of a kind.

It didn't matter whether SAGE gave its expert approval because the political decision had been taken. And all the way through this, for good or ill, it has been obvious that every decision has been political at bottom. It is inevitable, and I am not suggesting this government has got everything wrong because of that.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Boris dodging the public again at tea time. Wheres Bolly?

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Covid 19 Tracker App will not load. Both my Samsung phone and Amazon tablet both say the app is incompatible. And there doesn't appear to be one for Windows users.

[Yellow Fever 3,747]

34 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Aggy, I can only go on the Bloomberg report and that says Cummings was asking SAGE why the government should wait until next week to impose a lockdown when Johnson had already imposed a lockdown! Granted it was in the form of a vague plea rather than the kind of detailed lockdown other countries instituted but it was a lockdown of a kind.

It didn't matter whether SAGE gave its expert approval because the political decision had been taken. And all the way through this, for good or ill, it has been obvious that every decision has been political at bottom. It is inevitable, and I am not suggesting this government has got everything wrong because of that.

Exactly PC - I suspect that Cummings wanted the 'Scientific Advice' to tie up neatly and unambiguously (we know many can only see binary black and white not shades of grey) with the extant political decision - which was belatedly correct. Lock-down.

Edited April 29, 2020 by Yellow Fever
Cummings was doing his job - 'Fixer' in chief.

[Herman 9,713]

24 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Boris dodging the public again at tea time. Wheres Bolly?

His missis dropped his umpteenth child. 

[ricardo 7,345]

11 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Covid 19 Tracker App will not load. Both my Samsung phone and Amazon tablet both say the app is incompatible. And there doesn't appear to be one for Windows users.

**** government software, I blame Dom.

[sonyc 5,491]

 

[Barbe bleu 814]

Scientists, such as yellow fever, like to make evidence based decisions and likewise  to make recommendations also based on evidence. I don't think its unfair to say that this really is the point of science.

The evidence for lockdown in mid March was probably sketchy at best.  We didn't know if it would work,  how quickly it would work if it did or indeed how big a problem we had at the time. We also didn't know too much about what would happen if we let the virus spread with more limited suppression until the imperial report came out.

How can a scientist recommend a lockdown and all the problems that entails if there is so little evidence?

It wouldn't surprise me if government made a more instinctive decision and asked for cover.

The report does suggest some political interference in the science and I think that is far from ideal but if it led to the correct decision (and it's too early to say if it did) then its forgiven in my book. 

Whether Cummings actually had any influence is of course a different issue entirely and we wont know until publication and even then we might not.

 

 

 

 

[ricardo 7,345]

2 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Scientists, such as yellow fever, like to make evidence based decisions and likewise  to make recommendations also based on evidence. I don't think its unfair to say that this really is the point of science.

The evidence for lockdown in mid March was probably sketchy at best.  We didn't know if it would work,  how quickly it would work if it did or indeed how big a problem we had at the time. We also didn't know too much about what would happen if we let the virus spread with more limited suppression until the imperial report came out.

How can a scientist recommend a lockdown and all the problems that entails if there is so little evidence?

It wouldn't surprise me if government made a more instinctive decision and asked for cover.

The report does suggest some political interference in the science and I think that is far from ideal but if it led to the correct decision (and it's too early to say if it did) then its forgiven in my book. 

Whether Cummings actually had any influence is of course a different issue entirely and we wont know until publication and even then we might not.

 

 

 

 

You realise when Bill tiurns up you will be castigated as the duty Liar and your report will be scanned for spelling errors that may reveal you as an alternate log in for several other different posters don't you?

[Mark .Y. 351]

59 minutes ago, KiwiScot said:

So how long should the lockdown go on for? Around another month I feel to push the numbers down and let the government get more time to organise.

I think much earlier Kiwi, assuming the numbers continue to fall I think we will see some relief starting Monday  11th May, manufacturing and construction back to work with appropriate safety measures. Small shops opening the week after that and continued phased moves with the rider that the lockdown can be reimposed at any time.

I think the lockdown itself is already beginning to crack, hence you may as well start easing it before the trickle becomes a flood and you look completely out of control.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

**** government software, I blame Dom.

I object to my device saying I am incompatible. Incontinent maybe.

[sonyc 5,491]

Shops near us are already opening. Many have also indicated they intend to open in the first week of May. The roads are busier for sure as more people are working. Appears that people are unlocking themselves!

[T 190]

2 hours ago, Van wink said:

But aren’t they being recommended in Germany,

The federal govt recommended masks. The state goverments then individually gradually decided to turn that recommendation into an obligations to wear them for shopping and local public transport. No requirement to wear them generally. So I think the German view goes along with the general mixed and narginal view for masks for the general public. Key advice iis still hygiene and distancing and given the UK analysis just announced also very important to lose any excess weight .The fitter and healthier the better your body is going to be able to cope. 

Edited April 29, 2020 by T

[Yellow Fever 3,747]

4 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Scientists, such as yellow fever, like to make evidence based decisions and likewise  to make recommendations also based on evidence. I don't think its unfair to say that this really is the point of science.

The evidence for lockdown in mid March was probably sketchy at best.  We didn't know if it would work,  how quickly it would work if it did or indeed how big a problem we had at the time. We also didn't know too much about what would happen if we let the virus spread with more limited suppression until the imperial report came out.

How can a scientist recommend a lockdown and all the problems that entails if there is so little evidence?

It wouldn't surprise me if government made a more instinctive decision and asked for cover.

The report does suggest some political interference in the science and I think that is far from ideal but if it led to the correct decision (and it's too early to say if it did) then its forgiven in my book. 

Whether Cummings actually had any influence is of course a different issue entirely and we wont know until publication and even then we might not.

 

 

 

 

BB - I'm actually an engineer by training not a scientist (Ok - I'm a practical scientist) but my path has crossed and continues to cross for many years with some of the scientists that appear on this subject in the media among many others and I have to have some knowledge to at least talk the same language!

I'm very much convinced that all the scientists I talk to (yes they were focused on the immune system for cancer etc), chat too, have coffee with are pretty much of the opinion that we should of locked down earlier as a precautionary principle given what was already known from China, Italy etc.- however the economic, social and behavioural (yes even political) aspects are not the people I know and they may have differing views as represented on Sage.

However - if you put 20 people in a room with competing egos, interests, expertise and empires don't be at all surprised they will all struggle to agree. Just an observation of professors (and I have to be aware of the rivalries in my job). There isn't a right answer to Covid but a range of options. The final choice is always political.

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

BB - I'm actually an engineer by training not a scientist (Ok - I'm a practical scientist) but my path has crossed and continues to cross for many years with some of the scientists that appear on this subject in the media among many others and I have to have some knowledge to at least talk the same language!

I'm very much convinced that all the scientists I talk to (yes they were focused on the immune system for cancer etc), chat too, have coffee with are pretty much of the opinion that we should of locked down earlier as a precautionary principle given what was already known from China, Italy etc.- however the economic, social and behavioural (yes even political) aspects are not the people I know and they may have differing views as represented on Sage.

However - if you put 20 people in a room with competing egos, interests, expertise and empires don't be at all surprised they will all struggle to agree. Just an observation of professors (and I have to be aware of the rivalries in my job). There isn't a right answer to Covid but a range of options. The final choice is always political.

At the time it seemed to be the behavioural scientists that were concerned about locking down too soon. 

[Creative Midfielder 1,985]

28 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Shops near us are already opening. Many have also indicated they intend to open in the first week of May. The roads are busier for sure as more people are working. Appears that people are unlocking themselves!

Think that is to be expected as quite a few were never officially 'locked' in the first place but chose to lock themselves, either because they couldn't figure out a way to work safely or because they decided they wouldn't have any customers even if they opened (know of a couple of local businesses falling into that category).

But if they've figured out how to do it safely and they are in a sector that is permitted to open then there is nothing stopping them, and as you say the roads are definitely busier this week - that much is obvious even just walking locally to exercise the dog (and me!).

[sonyc 5,491]

The Guardian is running an "inside story" on Covid at the head of its online edition. I haven't copied it here but it's a useful complete timeline (with graphs annotated) if people are interested. Submitted at 15.00

[Van wink 2,994]

1 minute ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Think that is to be expected as quite a few were never officially 'locked' in the first place but chose to lock themselves, either because they couldn't figure out a way to work safely or because they decided they wouldn't have any customers even if they opened (know of a couple of local businesses falling into that category).

But if they've figured out how to do it safely and they are in a sector that is permitted to open then there is nothing stopping them, and as you say the roads are definitely busier this week - that much is obvious even just walking locally to exercise the dog (and me!).

Exactly, many are now implementing systems to assist with social distancing.

[Yellow Fever 3,747]

3 minutes ago, Van wink said:

At the time it seemed to be the behavioural scientists that were concerned about locking down too soon. 

Yes VW - It is my opinion (nobody else's) that the 'softer' behavioural scientists were more hesitant than the less subjectve ones. I think that was an error.

[Van wink 2,994]

A bit of research to back up the anecdotal stuff that has been flying around. We are a pretty unhealthy population and obesity is clearly a high risk factor in Cover 19, I believe I read we are the most obese nation in Europe. Undoubtedly this will have an impact on Covid 19 related death rates.

 

'Obese people hospitalised with coronavirus are almost 40 per cent more likely to die than slimmer patients, the first major study of such cases in Britain has found.

Researchers said the findings suggest that, for Covid-19 patients who end up in hospital, the virus is as deadly as Ebola.

The research on almost 17,000 people admitted to hospital showed that excess weight is one of the most deadly risk factors for survival.'

Edited April 29, 2020 by Van wink

[Van wink 2,994]

1 minute ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes VW - It is my opinion (nobody else's) that the 'softer' behavioural scientists were more hesitant than the less subjectve ones. I think that was an error.

So do I, at the time I was perturbed that we seemed to be hearing more from behavioural scientists than epidemiologists.

[Bill 1,788]

3 hours ago, Van wink said:

Bill says we shouldn't wear facemasks in supermarkets, how absurd that you should even consider suggesting an alternative view (which by the way is absolutely the correct one). Wash your mouth out with soap whilst singing happy birthday little weed!

No, that is yet another of your LIES

If you can post evidence where I have said that I will donate £100 to Pups - I won't ask you to donate a quid when you can't as at that rate you would soon be bankrupt

 

ps why is it that you, BB and RTB persistently lie ?