Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[Doon frae Troon]

True enough - and that's exactly what England has done! Scotland/FM initially attempted to ride the challenge by those downgraded, but fairly quickly decided it was better to stay with the School gradings - and let Universities etc sort the mess out! Exactly as England did!

U-Turns all round! No credit to either leader imo!

Do you not think that the English politicians should have looked at what happened in Scotland and anticipated the same happening to them.
Virtually the same system, you did'nt have to be a genius to see what was coming.

Scotland endured a week of screaming and howling from the unionistas re exam results..........they suddenly went very very quiet when Williamson followed suit.

BTW I notice that Switzerland has now been added to the UK ban list two weeks after Scotland Government called it.

 

[PNWokingham]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/27/europe-last-waking-lockdown-folly/

 

[Foxholer]

Do you not think that the English politicians should have looked at what happened in Scotland and anticipated the same happening to them.
Virtually the same system, you did'nt have to be a genius to see what was coming.

Scotland endured a week of screaming and howling from the unionistas re exam results..........they suddenly went very very quiet when Williamson followed suit.
...

I'm sure they (and their civil servants) did! That's why it was so daft to repeat Scotland's blunder!

 

[Kellfire]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/27/europe-last-waking-lockdown-folly/

Sadly I don’t pay a penny to this rag so I’ll have to miss out on its hateful rants.

 

[PNWokingham]

Sadly I don’t pay a penny to this rag so I’ll have to miss out on its hateful rants.

fly away snowflake troll and go read your cotton-candy trotskyite fantasy comics

 

[Hacker Khan]

Sadly I don’t pay a penny to this rag so I’ll have to miss out on its hateful rants.

I see the Telegraph were printing Qanon conspiracy theories about pizza emojis the other day, so that's the kind of level they now seem to have descended to.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

Guys play nice or we won’t be playing at all
?

 

[Kellfire]

I see the Telegraph were printing Qanon conspiracy theories about pizza emojis the other day, so that's the kind of level they now seem to have descended to.

I’m not sure how I’d avoided learning about QAnon until about two weeks ago but now I am astounded at just how widespread these notions are!

 

[Hacker Khan]

I’m not sure how I’d avoided learning about QAnon until about two weeks ago but now I am astounded at just how widespread these notions are!

From some of the people they interviewed at the march in London the other day on the protest against chuff knows what, Bill Gates seemed to be a common target for the heinous crime of trying to make it easier to vaccinate kids against diseases that could kill them, it is frightening how much people seem to believe something they have read on Facebook nowadays. Independent thought and critical analysis seem to be an increasingly disappearing skill.

 

[GreiginFife]

From some of the people they interviewed at the march in London the the day on the protest against chuff knows what, Bill Gates seemed to be a common target for the heinous crime of trying to make it easier to vaccinate kids against diseases that could kill them, it is frightening how much people seem to believe something they have read on Facebook nowadays. Independent thought and critical analysis seem to be an increasingly disappearing skill.

As a number of posters on here demonstrate admirably, why research or analyse when someone else can do it (badly) for you or to play to their own bias?

 

[Ethan]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/27/europe-last-waking-lockdown-folly/

I don’t have access to this either, but did she advance an alternative to lockdown that still achieves the objective of stopping circulation?

Either you stop the virus circulating, which means minimising person to person contact through suicidal distancing snd thd like, or you accept a de facto herd immunity strategy. Despite much initial hoopla that Sweden pulled off the no lockdown version, their death rates have turned out to be much higher than their neighbours of similar size and culture.

 

[PNWokingham]

I don’t have access to this either, but did she advance an alternative to lockdown that still achieves the objective of stopping circulation?

Either you stop the virus circulating, which means minimising person to person contact through suicidal distancing snd thd like, or you accept a de facto herd immunity strategy. Despite much initial hoopla that Sweden pulled off the no lockdown version, their death rates have turned out to be much higher than their neighbours of similar size and culture.

Europe is at last waking up to its lockdown folly
As battening down the hatches fast loses favour, we can at least take this as a glimmer of hope

Did you hear it? Beyond the second wave sirens and the schools debate, the sound of the penny dropping on the global stage. In recent days, world leaders have hinted at an extraordinary admission: lockdowns are a disaster, and we can’t afford to repeat the mistake.

Still, when that spiritless reverend of the global order Angela Merkel delivered this confession a few days ago, she was so officiously ambiguous that the world paid no attention. “Politically, we want to avoid closing borders again at any cost, but that assumes that we act in coordination,” she droned at a summit in the Mediterranean. And with that, an earthquake: saving lives “at any cost” has been excised from the lexicon of liberal internationalism. Instead the aim is to save the economy. This means “acting in coordination” to kill off second lockdowns.

Emmanuel Macron was the first leader to drop this little bombshell. Last week he said that France can’t cope with the “collateral damage” of a second lockdown, explaining that “zero risk never exists in any society”. Italy joined in three days later, with the health minister hinting that the country will not return to national hibernation. Meanwhile, after lauding China’s draconian lockdown, the World Health Organisation (WHO) is imploring countries to avoid battening down the hatches again.

About time. Lockdowns are officially indefensible. Sweden has won the international experiment, as its firms outperform even the German Großunternehmen while Covid deaths plummet in line with the rest of Europe. Scientists caution that it may take years to develop a vaccine. Economists warn that even the richest economies in the world cannot afford national lockdowns costing up to 3 per cent of GDP per month.

Perhaps even doom-mongering politicians have twigged that civilisation threatens to evaporate into a mushroom cloud of psychoneurotic delirium. Polling reveals that Westerners on average believe 6 per cent of their national populations have died from Covid-19. The real figure is around 100 times lower.

Or maybe global leaders have been terrified by their instinct to protect the status quo. After all, seasonal travel shutdowns are an existential threat to a borderless Europe. Italy’s collapse following another lockdown would bankrupt the Eurozone. The banal rituals of cosmopolitanism are under threat – from the professional class’s daily pilgrimage into the cities to Starbucks lattes in reusable cups.

The trouble is, if Britain is any guide, leaders will struggle to persuade the masses to keep calm and carry on. Risk-averse statesmen aren’t ideal poster children for the message that we must all learn to live with more risk.

More importantly, no leader dare tackle the toxic relationship between mass panic and “the science”. Take the problem of dodgy Covid statistics. The bizarre failure of politicians to explain to people the basic fact that “rising” cases could partly reflect an increase in testing is a scandal. So is their inability to point out that, far from being cause for alarm, mild upticks may be an encouraging sign that testing and tracing is working, as the system becomes more effective at picking up localised spikes.

Nor do governments have a handle on the spurious second wave modelling that could yet drive us into another lockdown. It is, however, a myth that politicians are helpless against the judgment of career scientists. In Britain and beyond, politicians have never followed the modelling; modelling has always followed the politicians.

As the pandemic hit, officials across the world requested forecasts for long-term worst-case scenarios, even though it is widely held in expert circles that statistical models are only accurate for roughly two-week stretches. Worse, part of the reason the science has come up with ridiculous solutions is that politicians have asked ridiculous questions.

As government adviser Prof Mark Woolhouse recently told a parliamentary committee:“We are not aiming the models at the right target; we are aiming them at everyone when in fact the burden of this disease is very concentrated.” Perhaps the number crunchers would do better to model social distancing measures directed at the vulnerable rather than population-wide lockdowns.

Sadly, world leaders are less interested in taking the science debate forward than in covering their backs. Their expediency will only fuel paranoia. After an intriguing U-turn from the WHO, face masks are being rolled out as a mass market placebo from Britain to Spain. The notion that they reassure more people than they alarm – let alone the evidence that they work – is risible. Still, they usefully distract from the incompetence of Western states when it comes to the routine mass testing that could genuinely quiet hysteria and avert new lockdowns.

And so the Covid saga rumbles on. A grim tale of Machiavellian idiocy, statistical illiteracy, and robotic leaders who have no idea how to level with voters. Still, at least they have realised their lockdown error. It’s a glimmer of hope to which we must cling.

 

[Ethan]

Europe is at last waking up to its lockdown folly
As battening down the hatches fast loses favour, we can at least take this as a glimmer of hope

Did you hear it? Beyond the second wave sirens and the schools debate, the sound of the penny dropping on the global stage. In recent days, world leaders have hinted at an extraordinary admission: lockdowns are a disaster, and we can’t afford to repeat the mistake.

Still, when that spiritless reverend of the global order Angela Merkel delivered this confession a few days ago, she was so officiously ambiguous that the world paid no attention. “Politically, we want to avoid closing borders again at any cost, but that assumes that we act in coordination,” she droned at a summit in the Mediterranean. And with that, an earthquake: saving lives “at any cost” has been excised from the lexicon of liberal internationalism. Instead the aim is to save the economy. This means “acting in coordination” to kill off second lockdowns.

Emmanuel Macron was the first leader to drop this little bombshell. Last week he said that France can’t cope with the “collateral damage” of a second lockdown, explaining that “zero risk never exists in any society”. Italy joined in three days later, with the health minister hinting that the country will not return to national hibernation. Meanwhile, after lauding China’s draconian lockdown, the World Health Organisation (WHO) is imploring countries to avoid battening down the hatches again.

About time. Lockdowns are officially indefensible. Sweden has won the international experiment, as its firms outperform even the German Großunternehmen while Covid deaths plummet in line with the rest of Europe. Scientists caution that it may take years to develop a vaccine. Economists warn that even the richest economies in the world cannot afford national lockdowns costing up to 3 per cent of GDP per month.

Perhaps even doom-mongering politicians have twigged that civilisation threatens to evaporate into a mushroom cloud of psychoneurotic delirium. Polling reveals that Westerners on average believe 6 per cent of their national populations have died from Covid-19. The real figure is around 100 times lower.

Or maybe global leaders have been terrified by their instinct to protect the status quo. After all, seasonal travel shutdowns are an existential threat to a borderless Europe. Italy’s collapse following another lockdown would bankrupt the Eurozone. The banal rituals of cosmopolitanism are under threat – from the professional class’s daily pilgrimage into the cities to Starbucks lattes in reusable cups.

The trouble is, if Britain is any guide, leaders will struggle to persuade the masses to keep calm and carry on. Risk-averse statesmen aren’t ideal poster children for the message that we must all learn to live with more risk.

More importantly, no leader dare tackle the toxic relationship between mass panic and “the science”. Take the problem of dodgy Covid statistics. The bizarre failure of politicians to explain to people the basic fact that “rising” cases could partly reflect an increase in testing is a scandal. So is their inability to point out that, far from being cause for alarm, mild upticks may be an encouraging sign that testing and tracing is working, as the system becomes more effective at picking up localised spikes.

Nor do governments have a handle on the spurious second wave modelling that could yet drive us into another lockdown. It is, however, a myth that politicians are helpless against the judgment of career scientists. In Britain and beyond, politicians have never followed the modelling; modelling has always followed the politicians.

As the pandemic hit, officials across the world requested forecasts for long-term worst-case scenarios, even though it is widely held in expert circles that statistical models are only accurate for roughly two-week stretches. Worse, part of the reason the science has come up with ridiculous solutions is that politicians have asked ridiculous questions.

As government adviser Prof Mark Woolhouse recently told a parliamentary committee:“We are not aiming the models at the right target; we are aiming them at everyone when in fact the burden of this disease is very concentrated.” Perhaps the number crunchers would do better to model social distancing measures directed at the vulnerable rather than population-wide lockdowns.

Sadly, world leaders are less interested in taking the science debate forward than in covering their backs. Their expediency will only fuel paranoia. After an intriguing U-turn from the WHO, face masks are being rolled out as a mass market placebo from Britain to Spain. The notion that they reassure more people than they alarm – let alone the evidence that they work – is risible. Still, they usefully distract from the incompetence of Western states when it comes to the routine mass testing that could genuinely quiet hysteria and avert new lockdowns.

And so the Covid saga rumbles on. A grim tale of Machiavellian idiocy, statistical illiteracy, and robotic leaders who have no idea how to level with voters. Still, at least they have realised their lockdown error. It’s a glimmer of hope to which we must cling.

OK, thanks. I think that article has a few problems.

It may be true that, so far, the Swedish economy has suffered less, but this is a middle distance race rather than a sprint. It is too early to declare winners, and before we do so, we need to know what counts as success. If it is numbers of dead, Sweden has not won. Sweden paid for that economic benefit with a death toll of 571 per million, which is more than 5 x Denmark, and more than 10 x Norway, its two neighbours. Still, a bit less than the UK, to be fair. It may also be presumed that the long term complications of Covid in survivors are also proportional to case numbers.

In the first phase of Covid, when we did not know if herd immunity was even possible, i.e. whether an antibody response would result from infection, it would have been utterly reckless to allow the disease to run rampant. Arguably, if we had restricted inward travel to the UK fast, and applied strict quarantine, we might have got away with fewer cases and then relaxing lockdown would have been less risky because there would have been less virus circulating around. That was essentially the lesson of Spanish flu a hundred years ago.

It is true that normality has to return. The Govt has placed a great emphasis on schools, knowing that allowing shops, pubs and restaurants to stay open in untenable if the public is told schools can't stay open. And resuming economic activity is important. But even if we accept that a second lockdown must be avoided, it doesn't mean that the first one was wrong or a mistake. Different stages in the response require different strategies.

She also says a vaccine could take years to develop. That is unlikely to be accurate. There are several plausible candidates in late development which have passed the critical step of showing they generate neutralising (i.e. virus killing) antibodies and production is already taking place. It is also untrue that rising case numbers are explained by increased testing. Testing numbers have actually fallen back recently, and the discerning statto knows that the key figure to determine whether rising numbers is explained by rising testing is the percentage positive rate. If this is falling while case numbers rise, it is because of greater dilution of positive cases by wider testing. This is not currently the case here or in the US.

The whole article is dropping with condescension, from references to Merkel droning to Starbucks latte drinkers to, natch, lots of anti-European sentiment. The Telegraph has done some good journalism on Covid. Her rant is not such a piece.

 

[Kellfire]

OK, thanks. I think that article has a few problems.

It may be true that, so far, the Swedish economy has suffered less, but this is a middle distance race rather than a sprint. It is too early to declare winners, and before we do so, we need to know what counts as success. If it his numbers of dead, Sweden has not won. Sweden paid for that economic benefit with a death toll of 571 per million, which is more than 5 x Denmark, and more than 10 x Norway, its two neighbours. Still, a bit less than the UK, to be fair. It may also be presumed that the long term complications of Covid in survivors are also proportional to case numbers.

In the first phase of Covid, when we did not know if herd immunity was even possible, i.e. whether an antibody response would result from infection, it would have been utterly reckless to allow the disease to run rampant. Arguably, if we had restricted inward travel to the UK fast, and applied strict quarantine, we might have got away with fewer cases and then relaxing lockdown would have been less risky because there would have been less virus circulating around. That was essentially the lesson of Spanish flu a hundred years ago.

It is true that normality has to return. The Govt has placed a great emphasis on schools, knowing that allowing shops, pubs and restaurants to stay open in untenable if the public is told schools can't stay open. And resuming economic activity is important. But even if we accept that a second lockdown must be avoided, it doesn't mean that the first one was wrong or a mistake. Different stages in the response require different strategies.

She also says a vaccine could take years to develop. That is unlikely to be accurate. There are several plausible candidates in late development which have passed the critical step of showing they generate neutralising (i.e. virus killing) antibodies and production is already taking place. It is also untrue that rising case numbers are explained by increased testing. Testing numbers have actually fallen back recently, and the discerning statto knows that the key figure to determine whether rising numbers is explained by rising testing is the percentage positive rate. If this is falling while case numbers rise, it is because of greater dilution of positive cases by wider testing. This is not currently the case here or in the US.

The whole article is dropping with condescension, from references to Merkel droning to Starbucks latte drinkers to, natch, lots of anti-European sentiment. The Telegraph has done some good journalism on Covid. Her rant is not such a piece.

It reads like Tinfoil Bill who runs his own Facebook conspiracy group has written in - one part misdirection with one part anger.

 

[PhilTheFragger]

 

[Kellfire]

View attachment 32219

It’s understandable why vegetarians might be annoyed at meat eaters given how many vegetarians do it for ethical reasons. What’s more confusing is why meat eaters get angry at vegetarians!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Last night BBC reports about 1500 new cases of infection and 2 deaths for previous 24hrs. And there was me thinking that the BBC had stopped reporting number of deaths now that they are generally in single figures - well that’s what I read on here.?

What’s changed? Nothing i am guessing. More likely that the BBC hadn’t actually stopped reporting numbers of deaths. Not something the anti-Beebers will mention so I thought I would...

 

[PhilTheFragger]

It’s understandable why vegetarians might be annoyed at meat eaters given how many vegetarians do it for ethical reasons. What’s more confusing is why meat eaters get angry at vegetarians!

I don’t think it’s veggies par se

More like the vegan evangelical militia who will have a go at the carnivores

 

[Kellfire]

I don’t think it’s veggies par se

More like the vegan evangelical militia who will have a go at the carnivores

One of my best friends is an ethical vegan and thankfully he never gives me any jip for eating meat whatsoever. And he really misses proper cheese, too.

 

[SocketRocket]

It’s understandable why vegetarians might be annoyed at meat eaters given how many vegetarians do it for ethical reasons. What’s more confusing is why meat eaters get angry at vegetarians!

Flatulence