Coronavirus - political views - supporting or otherwise...

[Ethan]

This change in policy has been coming for ages now. Plenty of time to stock up and Amazon and almost every store in the land is coming down with face masks of one sort or another.

There is a legitimate question about why it has taken so long. I suspect it is that Johnson is reflexively unwilling to do stuff he thinks will be unpopular, happy enough to let others like the police carry the can. He did exactly that with his weak advice not to go to the pub, then letting the police forces reach differing decisions about what the regulations meant. But since shopping has not taken off again like he wanted, this is literally a veil to encourage people to go out. It is the right policy, but for the wrong reasons and much too late.

 

[DanFST]

It is the right policy, but for the wrong reasons and much too late.

I completely disagree.

The NHS hasn't been overloaded since things started up again/at any point. That's the governments goal.

 

[Ethan]

I completely disagree.

The NHS hasn't been overloaded since things started up again/at any point. That's the governments goal.

Do enlarge.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

The delay is very simple. Any time that something is mandated there must always be a period of notice otherwise people will argue they have not had time to prepare.

Prepare for what?

By now we should all be fully aware that measures that require the wearing of a face mask were always likely - and I have no doubt that some will say that the government has done just that. Therefore we should all have face masks to hand to enable us to respond to an immediate mandating of wearing a face mask in shops.

If we do not all have face masks then the governments messaging to the public on masks has been inadequate.

And why pander to those who choose to refuse to comply or complain they weren't prepared? On matters as important this is it not the case that our tolerance of such refusniks and complainants should be low.

 

[DanFST]

Do enlarge.

It was more the "wrong reasons and much too late" - anything that gets people out as you say is a good thing for the government.

Maybe it's because I'm a pragmatist. You cannot eliminate the virus with no cure and no solid science behind it, we are still learning things every day. (It now appears to attack all organs, the increased rate of strokes and organ failure is due to covid - terrifying stuff)

As such, the only thing you can do is make sure everyone gets access to treatment. There has been a horrible situation with care homes, but the NHS hasn't been overloaded.

 

[Ethan]

It was more the "wrong reasons and much too late" - anything that gets people out as you say is a good thing for the government.

Maybe it's because I'm a pragmatist. You cannot eliminate the virus with no cure and no solid science behind it, we are still learning things every day. (It now appears to attack all organs, the increased rate of strokes and organ failure is due to covid - terrifying stuff)

As such, the only thing you can do is make sure everyone gets access to treatment. There has been a horrible situation with care homes, but the NHS hasn't been overloaded.

Well, we could have suppressed the virus if the Govt had not decided to do a stupid, dangerous, snd we now know, ineffective herd immunity strategy. That would have included closing inward travel and locking down much sooner. This idea of protecting the NHS is all fine and dandy so long as you accept that it is virtually impossible to calibrate public policy to allow a modest number of cases.

The realisation that the Govt had been slow to act at the critical times should have driven a subsequently stronger policy, including masks. Hence this action now is late. And it is not to save lives or reduce deaths. It is to encourage shopping. So you will pass people in Tesco wearing masks who, because of the short duration of exposure pose next to no risk, but you can go to the pub or Nando’s for an hour of more without a mask. It is a contradictory policy.

And the reason Johnson prevaricated on masks was clear today from that apoplectic Tory tosser MP in the Commons moaning about it being a monstrous imposition, and the Twitter reports of Tory members tearing up their membership cards.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

And the reason Johnson prevaricated on masks was clear today from that apoplectic Tory tosser MP in the Commons moaning about it being a monstrous imposition, and the Twitter reports of Tory members tearing up their membership cards.

And just listen to Gove, Johnson and Hancock and over the weekend, yesterday and today talking about wearing of masks. Their thoughts wander all over the shop and they waffle and skirt around saying anything absolutely specific.

Even after trying hard to distill something solid from what each said (and that is not that easy) - you then find that your distillations are not consistent.

On Friday Johnson told us that a "stricter" approach to wearing masks was necessary. What did Gove say on Sunday "It's always better to trust people's common sense...wearing a mask is basic good manners". And so clearly today that common sense and good manners can't be trusted? And that's simply over a period of a few days when nothing in respect of the need to be wearing masks has changed. They are an utter shambles.

 

[SocketRocket]

Well, we could have suppressed the virus if the Govt had not decided to do a stupid, dangerous, snd we now know, ineffective herd immunity strategy. That would have included closing inward travel and locking down much sooner. This idea of protecting the NHS is all fine and dandy so long as you accept that it is virtually impossible to calibrate public policy to allow a modest number of cases.

The realisation that the Govt had been slow to act at the critical times should have driven a subsequently stronger policy, including masks. Hence this action now is late. And it is not to save lives or reduce deaths. It is to encourage shopping. So you will pass people in Tesco wearing masks who, because of the short duration of exposure pose next to no risk, but you can go to the pub or Nando’s for an hour of more without a mask. It is a contradictory policy.

And the reason Johnson prevaricated on masks was clear today from that apoplectic Tory tosser MP in the Commons moaning about it being a monstrous imposition, and the Twitter reports of Tory members tearing up their membership cards.

Herd Immunity was proposed by the UK Chief Scientific Officer and rejected by the Government due to the expected high rate of deaths and overwhelming of the NHS. Also, it's not easy to drink a pint or eat a Nandos with a mask on, is it .
https://www.vox.com/world/2020/3/15/21180414/coronavirus-uk-herd-immunity-vallance-johnson

 

[ColchesterFC]

On Friday Johnson told us that a "stricter" approach to wearing masks was necessary. What did Gove say on Sunday "It's always better to trust people's common sense...wearing a mask is basic good manners". And so clearly today that common sense and good manners can't be trusted? And that's simply over a period of a few days when nothing in respect of the need to be wearing masks has changed. They are an utter shambles.

Have you forgotten about the VE Day celebrations and photos of packed beaches? And you think that trusting these people would be a good idea?

 

[Ethan]

Herd Immunity was proposed by the UK Chief Scientific Officer and rejected by the Government due to the expected high rate of deaths and overwhelming of the NHS. Also, it's not easy to drink a pint or eat a Nandos with a mask on, is it .
https://www.vox.com/world/2020/3/15/21180414/coronavirus-uk-herd-immunity-vallance-johnson

It isn't that simple. That story was just around the time when the Imperial modelling (again a terrible decision to use modelling rather than conventional public health) had shown that the human cost of herd immunity was high. This, when added to the debate that it was far from proven it could even work, caused the sudden realisation that the way the UK was proceeding, different to every other civilised country ahead of us in exposure terms, was a terrible idea. Valiance's error was to admit this policy in public when the Govt politicians were canny enough to keep it quiet. Anyway, it is still up to Govt to make the decisions. But the consequence of that realisation was that lockdown and other steps were needed right away. And the Govt hesitated.

I've met Vallance, and wasn't all that impressed with some of his decisions in another context, so I don't doubt he may have made some more bad decisions. But I don't think he is the originator of herd immunity.

In another part of this story, up until March 12th, the UK was doing contact tracing. Not through an expensive company owned by a party donor, but through Public Health England. Then the Govt decided to stop doing it because the demand was too great. So right at the time they needed it the most, they stopped doing it. It would have been pretty easy to scale up PHE capability then. And a decision was taken, not by Vallance, not to close down the airports. This was a critical mistake. Cheltenham, that Liverpool match in the Champions League and other events with lots of overseas visitors were allowed to go ahead during this period. Again, not Vallance's decision.

The current trope of protecting the NHS needs some exploration. That could mean allowing the disease to run amok up to the point where NHS capacity of displacement of other treatments, becomes an issue. That is quite a window of morbidity and mortality. Is the public willing to see further culling of oldies, with a few unfortunate NHS frontline workers and youngies with bad luck too? Because once you let the genie out of the bottle, as we may be doing, it is very hard to put it back in again.

One of the lessons of the Spanish flu was that if you don't nail down lockdown hard and make it work, you don't escape the virus. The US is learning that in a big way, but we are going to experience it too. We are currently in the waiting period before the bill for the early easing becomes due. Germany won't have anything like the same numbers.

There is a lot of debate on Covid on Doctors Net, a closed social media platform for UK doctors. Few there agree that lockdown was fast enough, that easing it was wise or that there isn't going to be a rebound.

 

[Old Skier]

I wonder what the posts from some on here would be if the government had said “face masks from tomorrow “.

 

[Mudball]

So we were told DomComs (read Govt) plan was herd immunity.. so if everyone gets it, we can get immunity and move on. This may be fake news, but Italians now say that Covid has long term impacts long after being cured. So much for the herd immunity construct. Ofcourse, we can all hide behind the fact that this is new information and therefore not applicable..

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/coro...19-could-be-worse-than-first-thought-12027348

 

[Jamesbrown]

I'll remember to wear a tea cosy the next time I'm on a motorbike.

There is a reason different helmets, ear defenders and masks have different levels of protection.

Maybe the next time someone is going into an isolation room in Porton Down they should wear a pinny and a pretty scarf.

Seriously, ask yourself why there's different whatever depending on the risk.

It’s not about the right level of protection, that’s not the government requirement. The government requests “face coverings” which could be anything.

The right level of protection is to stay at home and forage in the woods, or an air fed mask if you so choose to buy one. Not non - fitted loose air escaping fabrics providing a placebo safety net.

 

[road2ruin]

I'll remember to wear a tea cosy the next time I'm on a motorbike.

There is a reason different helmets, ear defenders and masks have different levels of protection.

Maybe the next time someone is going into an isolation room in Porton Down they should wear a pinny and a pretty scarf.

Seriously, ask yourself why there's different whatever depending on the risk.

To be fair the language used differs from politician to politician. Face masks vs Face coverings. The latter suggests that those who have been using snoods, scarves etc can continue to do so, it doesn’t need to be a face mask.

 

[Mudball]

To be fair the language used differs from politician to politician. Face masks vs Face coverings. The latter suggests that those who have been using snoods, scarves etc can continue to do so, it doesn’t need to be a face mask.

Isnt it ironic that the guy who called people 'letterboxes' is asking all of us to become one.. Just Saying

 

[Deleted member 18588]

So we were told DomComs (read Govt) plan was herd immunity.. so if everyone gets it, we can get immunity and move on. This may be fake news, but Italians now say that Covid has long term impacts long after being cured. So much for the herd immunity construct. Ofcourse, we can all hide behind the fact that this is new information and therefore not applicable..

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/coro...19-could-be-worse-than-first-thought-12027348

Only one thing wrong (that makes a change) with your statement.

Herd immunity was not Cummings plan but was, initially, advocated by Sir Patrick Vallance, Chief Scientific Officer.

 

[drdel]

Prepare for what?

By now we should all be fully aware that measures that require the wearing of a face mask were always likely - and I have no doubt that some will say that the government has done just that. Therefore we should all have face masks to hand to enable us to respond to an immediate mandating of wearing a face mask in shops.

If we do not all have face masks then the governments messaging to the public on masks has been inadequate.

And why pander to those who choose to refuse to comply or complain they weren't prepared? On matters as important this is it not the case that our tolerance of such refusniks and complainants should be low.

Really! This is just so much noise for noise sake.

When a Government mandates anything there is always a period of grace between the mandate being issued and the 'enforcement' date.

If the Government had insisted on immediate implementation I'd be willing to bet that your would have been hitting the keyboard claiming it guilty of an unreasonable draconian action by not giving notice.

 

[Ethan]

Only one thing wrong (that makes a change) with your statement.

Herd immunity was not Cummings plan but was, initially, advocated by Sir Patrick Vallance, Chief Scientific Officer.

He is the Chief Scientific Adviser, actually, but as I said before, I suspect he was indiscreet in letting that slip and now people think he owns the idea when it was really a broader idea arising from data modelling. We all know who is the big data guy in Number 10.

Still Govt's choice to accept advice, and they clearly rejected a number of pieces of advice from their scientists.

Herd immunity depends on transmission causing an antibody response in enough people that further transmission dies out. It does not stop cases arising, though. Herd immunity is a very risky and unproven strategy, a very untypical public health strategy for an unknown virus, and I doubt that Chris Whitty was a fan. I find it hard to believe that Vallance, who is neither a public health doctor, epidemiologist nor virologist, could successfully advance the herd immunity strategy.

As noted above, Covid has several phases. There is an old fashioned respiratory phase, which can be bad, but there is also an inflammatory phase in some people, which causes organ damage in some or all of the heart, kidneys, liver, brain and circulation. This is what dexamethasone treats. It is a nasty disease and there is mounting evidence of "recovered" people having lasting organ damage.

 

[Mudball]

Only one thing wrong (that makes a change) with your statement.

Herd immunity was not Cummings plan but was, initially, advocated by Sir Patrick Vallance, Chief Scientific Officer.

It could be or may not be... cant believe anyone
https://bylinetimes.com/2020/07/03/...nce-advisory-group-on-dominic-cummings-watch/

 

[Deleted member 21784]

The delay is simple. Go online and since this change of policy, public demand has already swept up huge numbers of masks and so delivery times are now being delayed until next week if not longer. What happens then, for example if you are shopping for vulnerable parents still shielding. You won't be allowed in any shop (and possibly fined). Give the majority time to get themselves sorted (and even ordering the day before yesterday would mean most are only being delivered yesterday or the next few days depending on whether express deliver or standard postage was paid). At that time it's right to enforce strictly and no mask = no entry. I thought masks were already mandatory at train stations and people wouldn't be allowed access to the complex or on trains but sit on any train I've been on and people are flouting this especially the 16-30 age grouo

I ordered 3 reusable masks off eBay Friday just because I wanted one that was bit better with glasses

Arrived today

£6 well spent, bet their triple price now