Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Herd immunity. The big political risk the government is runnin

SystemSystem Posts: 11,847
edited March 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Herd immunity. The big political risk the government is running

Call for comms overhaul comes after the astonishing Hancock u-turn on herd immunity, contradicting Vallance and No10 aidesMinisters admit that even they are now confused by that messaging…https://t.co/Vab9TTdn5v

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,568
    First
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,445
    Third
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,118
    I’m still intrigued as to how many people have died of flu since we have had the Corona crisis, and how many who died of Coronavirus would have died from flu with no reporting
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,458
    I don't think the Gov't can be going for herd immunity - at least not in this virus season, the NHS is going to be overwhelmed before you hit that point by a country mile.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,011
    I think the government recognise that people in this country will not adapt to lockdown well right now. There is still a feeling of grim invincibility pervading the national psyche. The panic buying is driven, I think, less from fear of the virus itself and more from fear that people are going to be confined from a long period of time. People are still out and about, although perhaps numbers are down a little.

    I think they are right that if they start this too early they will not succeed in keeping people indoors for the duration and this could lead to a second spike in cases. It seems rational to me. But then I’m not an expert in these matters.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 116,230
    edited March 2020
    FPT
    alex_ said:

    Regardless of whether the document has been reported accurately or not, it is hugely irresponsible to publish it without Government comment.
    This what happens when you leak to friendly journalists, the ones who have been deliberately ignored want a scoop to show they are relevant.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,445

    More disgraceful shit from the media. The Guardian "scoop" tries it sound like Witty and co have been lying.

    They have taken one word "expected" on a slide and blown it up...what did I say they would do if they saw any of the intern documentation.

    Witty and co have previously talked about the 80%, and initially about 500,000 deaths (although they have since said their modelling suggests more like 100,000) and the Guardian also trying to claim that the government haven't said this will be about until next year. When again, the whole f##king strategy is based on the premise that this will come in waves.

    Why the f##k don't you think we aren't just simply going to stay in our homes for 3 weeks and it be all done.

    F##k me, these twats about in WWII, they spend their entire time banging on about just how badly the UK would suffer trying to fight the Nazis, rather than f##king help the country come together and try out best to win.

    Even their worst case scenario is four times better than the calculations proffered by the doom mongers in here, though.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 50,151
    If David had written this article, would we be talking about Herdson Immunity?
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,568
    In a way, the virus has come at a bad time. If it were September, the easy decision - shutting everything down would be the right thing to do. Instead, the powers that be need to decide how much we need to use the summer that is approaching.
  • Options
    numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,011

    More disgraceful shit from the media. The Guardian "scoop" tries it sound like Witty and co have been lying.

    They have taken one word "expected" on a slide and blown it up...what did I say they would do if they saw any of the intern documentation.

    Witty and co have previously talked about the 80%, and initially about 500,000 deaths (although they have since said their modelling suggests more like 100,000) and the Guardian also trying to claim that the government haven't said this will be about until next year. When again, the whole f##king strategy is based on the premise that this will come in waves.

    Why the f##k don't you think we aren't just simply going to stay in our homes for 3 weeks and it be all done.

    F##k me, these twats about in WWII, they spend their entire time banging on about just how badly the UK would suffer trying to fight the Nazis, rather than f##king help the country come together and try out best to win.

    I despair at how irresponsible the media have been throughout this whole debacle.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    The Guardian article is the media at its very worst. Fortunately, it being in the Guardian, very few will read it...

    I think the thread header is interesting, but is obviously also coloured by bias. I think at least 30% will oppose any Government on anything, because they are the core opposition that thinks its wicked.
  • Options
    kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 4,425
    The trouble with herd immunity is the branding.

    It's the word. "Herd". What image does it conjure up in your mind? Perhaps one of sheep. Sheep are idiots. Or cattle. Cattle get slaughtered.

    Herds are culled and most people do not want to be part of a cull. The very idea strikes fear into the hearts of the unwashed, loo-roll hoarding masses, who are suddenly made acutely aware of their own individual unimportance.

    The question is what you re-brand the concept as. It's effectively a lottery where 97% of the population win, but sadly "national lottery" is already taken.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    edited March 2020

    The Guardian article is the media at its very worst. Fortunately, it being in the Guardian, very few will read it...

    I think the thread header is interesting, but is obviously also coloured by bias. I think at least 30% will oppose any Government on anything, because they are the core opposition that thinks its wicked.

    Of course the BBC will ignore shit from the Guardina....oh no wait, course they won't. This will be the headline on BBC and Sky all tomorrow, just as they pushed the fake new tick chart and the student letter.

    I absolutely despair at what is going on. If the egg heads had spent the past 2 weeks saying our modelling says 1% of people will get this and it will be 3 weeks and that's it, sure, clearly then the government have lied to us. In fact, they have done the f##king opposite and because they have been honest, they have been bashed from pillar to post and now bashed again.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 46,223
    tlg86 said:

    In a way, the virus has come at a bad time. If it were September, the easy decision - shutting everything down would be the right thing to do. Instead, the powers that be need to decide how much we need to use the summer that is approaching.

    From what I see of Australia and Brazil, and other places in Latin America, I cannot see a British summer saving us.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    kyf_100 said:

    The trouble with herd immunity is the branding.

    It's the word. "Herd". What image does it conjure up in your mind? Perhaps one of sheep. Sheep are idiots. Or cattle. Cattle get slaughtered.

    Herds are culled and most people do not want to be part of a cull. The very idea strikes fear into the hearts of the unwashed, loo-roll hoarding masses, who are suddenly made acutely aware of their own individual unimportance.

    The question is what you re-brand the concept as. It's effectively a lottery where 97% of the population win, but sadly "national lottery" is already taken.

    community defence
  • Options
    AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited March 2020
    Estimations for Paris mayoralty

    Anne Hidalgo (PS) 30,2%
    Rachida Dati (LR) 22
    Agnès Buzyn (LRM) 17,6%.

    In Grenobles: Green incumbent (backed rest of the left) 40%. Right is at 20.5%

    In Stasbourg: Green candidate 26%. LR 20%

    Lyon: Green 29% LR 16.7% LREM 14.9

    Bordeaux: Green 35-36% LR 33-34%

    Le Mans: Socialist incumbent 40% Left dissident 13%

    Limoges: LR 46% Left 21%

    Tolouse: LR 35% Greens 28% PS 18%
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    kyf_100 said:

    The trouble with herd immunity is the branding.

    It's the word. "Herd". What image does it conjure up in your mind? Perhaps one of sheep. Sheep are idiots. Or cattle. Cattle get slaughtered.

    Herds are culled and most people do not want to be part of a cull. The very idea strikes fear into the hearts of the unwashed, loo-roll hoarding masses, who are suddenly made acutely aware of their own individual unimportance.

    The question is what you re-brand the concept as. It's effectively a lottery where 97% of the population win, but sadly "national lottery" is already taken.

    “Virus Club Express”.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,329
    edited March 2020
    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547

    The Guardian article is the media at its very worst. Fortunately, it being in the Guardian, very few will read it...

    I think the thread header is interesting, but is obviously also coloured by bias. I think at least 30% will oppose any Government on anything, because they are the core opposition that thinks its wicked.

    Of course the BBC will ignore shit from the Guardina....oh no wait, course they won't. This will be the headline on BBC and Sky all tomorrow, just as they pushed the fake new tick chart and the student letter.

    I absolutely despair at what is going on. If the egg heads had spent the past 2 weeks saying our modelling says 1% of people will get this and it will be 3 weeks and that's it, sure, clearly then the government have lied to us. In fact, they have done the f##king opposite and because they have been honest, they have been bashed from pillar to post and now bashed again.
    Couldn’t agree more. There’s actually a “Tory genocide” hashtag. I despair. It’s a game to these people.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,432
    edited March 2020

    FPT

    alex_ said:

    Regardless of whether the document has been reported accurately or not, it is hugely irresponsible to publish it without Government comment.
    This what happens when you leak to friendly journalists, the ones who have been deliberately ignored want a scoop to show they are relevant.
    I do not think this 'shock' article will contain a single surprise to anyone who has followed the story so far dispassionately; and along with Mr Meeks excellent and thoughtful article it is a bit short of more optimal answers.

    I notice that despite a bit of routine government bashing, the opposition has not developed a crisp and clear counter argument with any traction. Looking to the great chancelleries of Europe doesn't seem to be filling people with great ideas at the moment. It is still possible that the government's experts are as right as it can be at the moment.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    tlg86 said:

    In a way, the virus has come at a bad time. If it were September, the easy decision - shutting everything down would be the right thing to do. Instead, the powers that be need to decide how much we need to use the summer that is approaching.

    Don't. We are due our first nearly-dry week since October, and it is light till nearly 7. Going into winter with this stuff happening would be (will be) unbearable.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    edited March 2020

    People on Twitter, the Web or activist journalists think this is a game. Make the government look bad and you win.

    No. Discredit the chief medical officer and chief scientist and you kill evidence based policy. That way lies chaos and death. It’s not a game. It’s pathetic and dangerous and should be called out.

    If you hate Boris because of Brexit and are prepared to go for him because of that, have the decency to say it. This is too important to dick around.

    They really do, they think this is just a normal run of the mill political event, so usual rules of the game apply. Clip videos out of context, make misleading graphics, give undue airtime to people who know f##k all about this stuff, claim Boris the Butcher wants to kill everybody.

    Anything to win the twitter / media game and score points against the government.

    I don't like Boris, I don't trust him on most things, but it is clear in this case he is just the passenger. Everything that is being done is driven the the likes of Witty, and there is zero suggestion he is just some Tory stooge.

    What the government have actually done is been incredibly grown up and honest with the public. Lots of people will die, this is really bad and it isn't a flash in the pan. They could easily have given the full BS and said don't worry, 3-4 weeks lads and it will all be over with and look in China only 3000 people died total less than a bad flu season.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,458
    It's a toss up as to which media organisation is the most pathetic.

    Peston 'reveals' a Gov't plan with tremendous glee.
    Daily Mail doorsteps two sick Covid19 patients.
    Guardian publishes Public Health Doc with the old "EXCLUSIVE" tag.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,538
    So sad to see Alastair taking the opportunity to continue his deranged Japanese Jungle Soldier agenda. Very poor show
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 13,207
    Evening all :)

    Having heard the news this afternoon my brother is suspected of having the virus, it's brought the whole thing closer to home as did the 60-strong queue outside Superdrug in East Ham who were allowed one bottle of hand sanitiser each.

    I worry about the proposed enforced quarantine for those over 70. I understand the statistics but the realities are rather different. Age UK tell me 2 million people over 75 already live alone so my worry is out of sight will become out of mind.

    The issue must be with those who have pre-existing medical conditions especially of a respiratory or pulmonary nature. Encouraging those individuals in particular to self-isolate would seem the more appropriate guidance rather than a blanket quarantine which will trap many perfectly healthy individuals who might be in a position to help within their communities.

    I understand the theory of "herd immunity" - it's not without risk - and until now I've broadly understood and been supportive of the Government response but I now begin to sense control slipping away especially in the light of the ever more concerning reports from elsewhere.

    My concerns remain as they have always done - first, those with pre-existing conditions who might not understand or appreciate the severity of the virus for them and second, the rush to self-isolate might cause certain key services to struggle on the basis of what turns out to be a normal cold or chill.
  • Options
    MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    edited March 2020
    I repost from FPT, actually somewhat relevant to AM's excellent header since I'm wondering about the comms strategy, but here more about the "what am I supposed to be doing" versus the big picture "what's the government trying to achieve" aspect.
    Barnesian said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    A person who I had coffee with last Thursday has been confirmed as having the virus. The latest advice seems to be that I don’t self isolate unless I develop symptoms. I don’t have any at the moment.

    I think the reality is that many of us are going to come into contact with carriers frequently. We either completely cut ourselves off or carry on until there are symptoms.

    It’s a bit troubling though.

    According to the BBC you are covered by the previously issued advice:

    Anyone who has travelled to an affected area, or who has been in close contact with an infected person, had already been asked to self-isolate for 14 days.
    We had coffee not sex. I have a tricky court case tomorrow morning. I am genuinely unsure what to do. Trying to pass it on would be very difficult at this point.
    @DavidL The advice about self isolating for 14 days was withdrawn on the 13 March.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-specified-countries-and-areas/covid-19-specified-countries-and-areas-with-implications-for-returning-travellers-or-visitors-arriving-in-the-uk

    It was superceded by this advice:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance
    So, now we are in the stage where people are seeking to action government advice in their own lives, how clear is it?

    Judging from the above, contradictions between old and new advice on when to self-isolate risk causing confusion. I think a lot of people do not know what the most recent advice is. Constant changes to the advice are going to leave people confused, especially once we get different advice by age-band or risk-group. (Presumably this confusion is a disincentive for the government to keep changing its advice. I suspect it was a factor in why, for example, they only announced that 70+ shouldn't go on cruises well after this was obvious advice, because that way they could bring it in simultaneously with a whole slate of other new recommendations that effectively replaced the previous set, rather than having things change piecemeal in a way that's impossible to keep up with. If this is so then a down side is that the rational, self-interested individual should treat government advice with caution, since the "current" advice - e.g. during that period HMG deemed cruises for the 70+ not to be something they needed to avoid - may still be sub-optimal.)

    There's also confusion about future potential advice and whether it applies yet. I don't think the media have reported very well about the stuff in the bill next week - I've met people who seem to believe some of those measures are coming into effect on Monday, rather than next week the relevant powers are being discussed in Parliament. Similarly, some people seem to think "avoid large gatherings" is already in force.

    I've also found some simple stuff in the regular messaging has been misconstrued. Trying to get my 70+ mother ready for her "cocoon" period, turns out she thought it didn't matter there was no hand sanitiser in the local supermarket because she had got Aloe Vera hand moisturiser, which she assumed would kill all her germs!!

    Anyone know how HMG are actually testing how well their messaging is getting through?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 29,049
    When Merkel talked about 70% of Germans possibly getting the virus she was basically saying the same thing, albeit in a different way.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,432

    The Guardian article is the media at its very worst. Fortunately, it being in the Guardian, very few will read it...

    I think the thread header is interesting, but is obviously also coloured by bias. I think at least 30% will oppose any Government on anything, because they are the core opposition that thinks its wicked.

    Of course the BBC will ignore shit from the Guardina....oh no wait, course they won't. This will be the headline on BBC and Sky all tomorrow, just as they pushed the fake new tick chart and the student letter.

    I absolutely despair at what is going on. If the egg heads had spent the past 2 weeks saying our modelling says 1% of people will get this and it will be 3 weeks and that's it, sure, clearly then the government have lied to us. In fact, they have done the f##king opposite and because they have been honest, they have been bashed from pillar to post and now bashed again.
    Couldn’t agree more. There’s actually a “Tory genocide” hashtag. I despair. It’s a game to these people.
    Indeed, this Tory plan to kill off most of its loyal voters and alienate those who are lucky enough to be allowed to live as it puts a plan in place remarkably like that of the SNP, who of course plan to keep all the same people alive because unlike Tories they don't eat people, is not the world's most convincing theory.

  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,336
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    kyf_100 said:

    The trouble with herd immunity is the branding.

    It's the word. "Herd". What image does it conjure up in your mind? Perhaps one of sheep. Sheep are idiots. Or cattle. Cattle get slaughtered.

    Herds are culled and most people do not want to be part of a cull. The very idea strikes fear into the hearts of the unwashed, loo-roll hoarding masses, who are suddenly made acutely aware of their own individual unimportance.

    The question is what you re-brand the concept as. It's effectively a lottery where 97% of the population win, but sadly "national lottery" is already taken.

    Collective immunity.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    The only f##king experts I want to hear from in relation to the government strategy is the likes of the WHO.

    Prof Farage and Morgan can shut the f##k up, as can the jumped lab tech and MSc maths students. And the media shouldn't be spreading misinformation and always looking for talking heads to provide "balance" for / against what are some impossible decisions, when they haven't seen the data.

    All this is just making the governments job even harder and killing more people.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,627

    More disgraceful shit from the media. The Guardian "scoop" tries it sound like Witty and co have been lying.

    They have taken one word "expected" on a slide and blown it up...what did I say they would do if they saw any of the intern documentation.

    Witty and co have previously talked about the 80%, and initially about 500,000 deaths (although they have since said their modelling suggests more like 100,000) and the Guardian also trying to claim that the government haven't said this will be about until next year. When again, the whole f##king strategy is based on the premise that this will come in waves.

    Why the f##k don't you think we aren't just simply going to stay in our homes for 3 weeks and it be all done.

    F##k me, these twats about in WWII, they spend their entire time banging on about just how badly the UK would suffer trying to fight the Nazis, rather than f##king help the country come together and try out best to win.

    The BBC and The Guardian have perfectly demonstrated the danger of the government publishing their model and data. The press will simply take the worst case and run with it.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    Internet noise aside, the two most worrying conversations I had today were with seventy year old who don’t see themselves as at risk. They are fit and healthy, but because of this they are missing the point they they are septuagenarians. We all need to help land the point.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,924
    geoffw said:

    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.

    Re the Med countries: this isn't about them trying to look decisive, they really don't have any choice. Once you have more than 3,000 cases in the Province of Bergamo (pop 1.1m), and your intensive care units are overloaded, then you have to shut everything down.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,445

    People on Twitter, the Web or activist journalists think this is a game. Make the government look bad and you win.

    No. Discredit the chief medical officer and chief scientist and you kill evidence based policy. That way lies chaos and death. It’s not a game. It’s pathetic and dangerous and should be called out.

    If you hate Boris because of Brexit and are prepared to go for him because of that, have the decency to say it. This is too important to dick around.

    Agreed.

    Although TBF up until a few weeks ago, our PM thought that politics was a game, too.
  • Options
    AndrewAndrew Posts: 2,900

    Internet noise aside, the two most worrying conversations I had today were with seventy year old who don’t see themselves as at risk. They are fit and healthy, but because of this they are missing the point they they are septuagenarians. We all need to help land the point.

    Had almost word for word the same conversation with my parents today, who are a similar age bracket.


  • Options
    MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Anyone who trusts an expert British scientist advising the Gov't is a berk. Didn't BSE teach you anything?

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,331

    Anyone who trusts an expert British scientist advising the Gov't is a berk. Didn't BSE teach you anything?

    Then why are the Germans and the French doing basically the same thing?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    I hope all these tw@ts in the media are really pleased with themselves when they go to bed thinking well I did a great job stitching up the government today...

    Certain sections love to go on about how disgraceful the likes of the NOTW were over phone hacking and how they are purer than purer. Phone hacking was disgraceful, but this is war and 10,000s, possibly 100,000s will die. Finding out Steve Coogan is a drug taking possie shagger really hasn't harmed his career.

    Every hour the government have to waste rebutting your stupid shit and also causing confusion and panic within the public, the more people will die.
  • Options
    MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.
  • Options
    IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Anyone who trusts an expert British scientist advising the Gov't is a berk. Didn't BSE teach you anything?

    Boring, stupid troll.

    Tell us again how yersinia pestis is a virus.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 46,223
    I dont think the figures in the Guardian article are over egged, they are the figures without action taken to reduce transmission urgently. We could act urgently, or continue to watch the wave coming.

    The mortality of 1% will be exceeded when ICU capacity is saturated. At that point needless deaths occur both in COVID19 patients, but there will be a big effect on mortality on other conditions too. This summer will be no time to have a heart attack or major road traffic accident, or even appendicitis.

    We have amongst the lowest ICU and hospital bed capacity in Europe, as well as levels of obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease in excess.

    We are not going to get off lightly in secondary care, we need strong and stringent public health measures. Nothing else will work.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,331

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    No, it isn't. And constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,421
    Usual story on here - everyone making the mistake that the public will be following detailed arguments about a highly technical subject.

    Of course they won't. 90%+ won't have the faintest idea of precisely what the Government's strategy is other than to "deal with it as best they can".

    Of course that doesn't excuse the irresponsible journalism but as someone on here suggested yesterday - journalism is basically now entertainment.

    Getting the details right won't make you successful commercially.

    Certainly if there's anything with numbers in it then forget it as far as most of the population is concerned - it was reported yesterday that 75% of adults don't have basic numeracy skills which would be expected at GCSE.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,538

    Anyone who trusts an expert British scientist advising the Gov't is a berk. Didn't BSE teach you anything?

    Yep it taught me that twats like you will try and make everything the Government do out to be wrong even when it turns out you are talking bollocks.

    Where are the hundreds of thousands of vCJD victims?
  • Options
    GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,036
    Peston is a public menace.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,538

    I repost from FPT, actually somewhat relevant to AM's excellent header since I'm wondering about the comms strategy, but here more about the "what am I supposed to be doing" versus the big picture "what's the government trying to achieve" aspect.

    Barnesian said:

    DavidL said:

    IanB2 said:

    DavidL said:

    A person who I had coffee with last Thursday has been confirmed as having the virus. The latest advice seems to be that I don’t self isolate unless I develop symptoms. I don’t have any at the moment.

    I think the reality is that many of us are going to come into contact with carriers frequently. We either completely cut ourselves off or carry on until there are symptoms.

    It’s a bit troubling though.

    According to the BBC you are covered by the previously issued advice:

    Anyone who has travelled to an affected area, or who has been in close contact with an infected person, had already been asked to self-isolate for 14 days.
    We had coffee not sex. I have a tricky court case tomorrow morning. I am genuinely unsure what to do. Trying to pass it on would be very difficult at this point.
    @DavidL The advice about self isolating for 14 days was withdrawn on the 13 March.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-specified-countries-and-areas/covid-19-specified-countries-and-areas-with-implications-for-returning-travellers-or-visitors-arriving-in-the-uk

    It was superceded by this advice:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance
    So, now we are in the stage where people are seeking to action government advice in their own lives, how clear is it?

    Judging from the above, contradictions between old and new advice on when to self-isolate risk causing confusion. I think a lot of people do not know what the most recent advice is. Constant changes to the advice are going to leave people confused, especially once we get different advice by age-band or risk-group. (Presumably this confusion is a disincentive for the government to keep changing its advice. I suspect it was a factor in why, for example, they only announced that 70+ shouldn't go on cruises well after this was obvious advice, because that way they could bring it in simultaneously with a whole slate of other new recommendations that effectively replaced the previous set, rather than having things change piecemeal in a way that's impossible to keep up with. If this is so then a down side is that the rational, self-interested individual should treat government advice with caution, since the "current" advice - e.g. during that period HMG deemed cruises for the 70+ not to be something they needed to avoid - may still be sub-optimal.)

    There's also confusion about future potential advice and whether it applies yet. I don't think the media have reported very well about the stuff in the bill next week - I've met people who seem to believe some of those measures are coming into effect on Monday, rather than next week the relevant powers are being discussed in Parliament. Similarly, some people seem to think "avoid large gatherings" is already in force.

    I've also found some simple stuff in the regular messaging has been misconstrued. Trying to get my 70+ mother ready for her "cocoon" period, turns out she thought it didn't matter there was no hand sanitiser in the local supermarket because she had got Aloe Vera hand moisturiser, which she assumed would kill all her germs!!

    Anyone know how HMG are actually testing how well their messaging is getting through?
    My reply from previous thread

    I would say right now it is pretty unclear and a worrying failure on the part of the Government.

    They have one job as far as the medical actions are concerned and that is to make sure that the advice from the CMO and the other scientist is conveyed as clearly, as accurately and as simply as possible.

    I would suggest they are failing on this at the moment.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,552

    Anyone who trusts an expert British scientist advising the Gov't is a berk. Didn't BSE teach you anything?

    Ultimate truth only resides in a tweet of a Brixton polling station.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,458
    I'm of the view that the Gov't is handling the issue sub optimally AND the media reporting is poor to the point of being dangerous.
  • Options
    MysticroseMysticrose Posts: 4,688
    Trust no-one. Especially experts in the Government's pocket. There is always an agenda. The herd immunity is a euphemism for the Government's preferred option, which is to get this over with as quickly as possible.

    https://spectator.us/fda-cdc-hhs-health-response-covid-19-coronavirus/

  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,231
    My planned surgery in August, which would probably require an ICU bed ‘just in case’ is slowly turning into a distant dream...
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,716
    edited March 2020
    glw said:

    More disgraceful shit from the media. The Guardian "scoop" tries it sound like Witty and co have been lying.

    They have taken one word "expected" on a slide and blown it up...what did I say they would do if they saw any of the intern documentation.

    Witty and co have previously talked about the 80%, and initially about 500,000 deaths (although they have since said their modelling suggests more like 100,000) and the Guardian also trying to claim that the government haven't said this will be about until next year. When again, the whole f##king strategy is based on the premise that this will come in waves.

    Why the f##k don't you think we aren't just simply going to stay in our homes for 3 weeks and it be all done.

    F##k me, these twats about in WWII, they spend their entire time banging on about just how badly the UK would suffer trying to fight the Nazis, rather than f##king help the country come together and try out best to win.

    The BBC and The Guardian have perfectly demonstrated the danger of the government publishing their model and data. The press will simply take the worst case and run with it.
    The tone is is in much of the media, rather than just shared between the BBC and the Guardian. BBC News bulletins often follow the Telegraph and Mail's agenda from day to day nowadays more than the Guardian, as Peston gave a good account of after working there.

    A now ironically resonant use of the word 'herd', in his interview from a few years ago.

    "BBC News is “completely obsessed” by the agenda set by newspapers and follows the lead of the Daily Mail and Daily Telegraph too much, according to senior journalist Robert Peston.

    The BBC’s economics editor, in a question-and-answer session after delivering the British Journalism Review Charles Wheeler lecture on Thursday evening, said he found this “most frustrating” and attributed it to a safety-first approach by programme editors. Peston, responding to questions about how he and the BBC decided which stories mattered to audiences, said: “It’s a challenge, the issue of the herd and pandering [to it]. Technology makes it much, much easier … to know what stories matter to people.”
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    edited March 2020
    I notice the new EU president give her views on how the EU countries shouldn't be shutting their borders and how it is essential that free movement and trade continues....and then German shut theirs.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,432
    The answer to Robert Peston's perfectly reasonable question is firstly that there is no evidence that the alternative approach works in the long run and secondly that it is impossible to implement. Apart from that it looks fine.

    The government, while sotto voce, has actually disclosed information from which a six year old without a calculator can deduce that it regards 100s of thousands of deaths (even 500,000+) as possible from its policies. I have not noticed any of the critics disclosing what they think are the deaths numbers in the worst case scenario of the alternatives. Remarkably the government, right or wrong (who knows) has acted with a relatively high degree of integrity and courage. Which, as Humphrey Appleby and Mr Meeks might comment, is very brave of them. I think they deserve support.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 46,223
    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.

    Re the Med countries: this isn't about them trying to look decisive, they really don't have any choice. Once you have more than 3,000 cases in the Province of Bergamo (pop 1.1m), and your intensive care units are overloaded, then you have to shut everything down.
    Leics has 55 ICU beds for a population of 1.05 million, slightly above national figures because of regional specialities. That is about a third of the capacity of Bergamo. We will reach that saturation point more quickly, even converting operating theatres and recovery into overflow ICU using anaesthetic machines and staff.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,331

    Trust no-one. Especially experts in the Government's pocket. There is always an agenda. The herd immunity is a euphemism for the Government's preferred option, which is to get this over with as quickly as possible.

    https://spectator.us/fda-cdc-hhs-health-response-covid-19-coronavirus/

    If the plan was to get things over with as quickly as possible, why are they doing things to slow the progress of the disease?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 50,151
    Andrew said:

    Internet noise aside, the two most worrying conversations I had today were with seventy year old who don’t see themselves as at risk. They are fit and healthy, but because of this they are missing the point they they are septuagenarians. We all need to help land the point.

    Had almost word for word the same conversation with my parents today, who are a similar age bracket.


    Mum is only just past 70, but she says she is happy to self-isolate. Except, I'm around too! Neither of us went anywhere today, though we went to Sainsbury's and the local corner shop yesterday. She stayed in the car whilst I did the Sainsbury's shopping.

  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,329
    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.

    Re the Med countries: this isn't about them trying to look decisive, they really don't have any choice. Once you have more than 3,000 cases in the Province of Bergamo (pop 1.1m), and your intensive care units are overloaded, then you have to shut everything down.
    True, but there is a push to get us to follow them - trying to put a lid on it by quarantining whole cities/countries with travel restrictions, closing schools restaurants etc. That is a bad idea.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,552

    The only f##king experts I want to hear from in relation to the government strategy is the likes of the WHO.

    Prof Farage and Morgan can shut the f##k up, as can the jumped lab tech and MSc maths students. And the media shouldn't be spreading misinformation and always looking for talking heads to provide "balance" for / against what are some impossible decisions, when they haven't seen the data.

    All this is just making the governments job even harder and killing more people.

    They're happy to kill more people so that they can then blame the government.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,331
    The UK should not be trying to create herd immunity, that will take care of itself. Policy should be directed at slowing the outbreak to a (more) manageable rate.

    That's what they are doing. You have to wonder what these people were listening to when the CMO described why timing was critical for the introduction of additional restrictions.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,458
    Kids are almost certainly asymptomatic carriers.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 29,049

    Anyone who trusts an expert British scientist advising the Gov't is a berk. Didn't BSE teach you anything?

    Are you British?
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 50,151
    Spain's population is about 60% of the UK's.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 13,207
    RobD said:

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    No, it isn't. And constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
    And constantly leaping to its defence every time someone has the temerity to criticise it doesn't make the Government right.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 116,230
    edited March 2020
    I kinda know the government is doing the right thing when Farage is moaning like a whore and Carole Cadwalladr is having to delete crazy tweets on the government's approach.

    I wouldn't be surprised to learn that those two are actually the parents of Piers Morgan.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,808
    RobD said:

    Trust no-one. Especially experts in the Government's pocket. There is always an agenda. The herd immunity is a euphemism for the Government's preferred option, which is to get this over with as quickly as possible.

    https://spectator.us/fda-cdc-hhs-health-response-covid-19-coronavirus/

    If the plan was to get things over with as quickly as possible, why are they doing things to slow the progress of the disease?
    Because other countries will have second, third, fourth waves. We are trying to get this done with in one wave - which is the quickest possible way to get it over with.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,924
    Let me interject with some good news for a moment.

    All the evidence from Hubei is that when you clamp down on social interaction (whether through voluntary distancing or more extensive "shut downs"), new infections plummet. This takes a week or so to show up in the headline numbers, but it's almost certainly the case that new infections are falling in the UK, Italy, France, Germany and Spain. And I have little doubt that the US will follow a week or so behind.

    Now, this still means there's a week of new cases rising happening in Europe. But the 3x multiplier of people infected is almost certainly below 1x right now thanks to the various measures that have been taken.

    Removing restrictions is going to be a gradual thing, so we can make sure that hotspots are identified, and people traced and treated. It will take some time to get back to normal. But it all probability the peak of infections has already been passed. We just won't see it for a couple of weeks yet.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,331
    Where's the evidence that school closures would help? In Spain it might have made things worse because families moved around. They later had to go on to close parks and other recreational facilities.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,552
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Having heard the news this afternoon my brother is suspected of having the virus, it's brought the whole thing closer to home as did the 60-strong queue outside Superdrug in East Ham who were allowed one bottle of hand sanitiser each.

    I worry about the proposed enforced quarantine for those over 70. I understand the statistics but the realities are rather different. Age UK tell me 2 million people over 75 already live alone so my worry is out of sight will become out of mind.

    The issue must be with those who have pre-existing medical conditions especially of a respiratory or pulmonary nature. Encouraging those individuals in particular to self-isolate would seem the more appropriate guidance rather than a blanket quarantine which will trap many perfectly healthy individuals who might be in a position to help within their communities.

    I understand the theory of "herd immunity" - it's not without risk - and until now I've broadly understood and been supportive of the Government response but I now begin to sense control slipping away especially in the light of the ever more concerning reports from elsewhere.

    My concerns remain as they have always done - first, those with pre-existing conditions who might not understand or appreciate the severity of the virus for them and second, the rush to self-isolate might cause certain key services to struggle on the basis of what turns out to be a normal cold or chill.

    You saw some hand sanitizer for sale !!!
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 29,049
    edited March 2020

    Internet noise aside, the two most worrying conversations I had today were with seventy year old who don’t see themselves as at risk. They are fit and healthy, but because of this they are missing the point they they are septuagenarians. We all need to help land the point.

    But in a way they're right. The age thing is just arbitrary. In a perfect world we would assess people more according to their health than just their age. The reason for the age limit is because there isn't time to assess people. There are lots of 60 years olds in poor health who are probably more at risk than 70 year olds in perfect health.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,331

    RobD said:

    Trust no-one. Especially experts in the Government's pocket. There is always an agenda. The herd immunity is a euphemism for the Government's preferred option, which is to get this over with as quickly as possible.

    https://spectator.us/fda-cdc-hhs-health-response-covid-19-coronavirus/

    If the plan was to get things over with as quickly as possible, why are they doing things to slow the progress of the disease?
    Because other countries will have second, third, fourth waves. We are trying to get this done with in one wave - which is the quickest possible way to get it over with.
    I thought the quickest way would be to literally do nothing.
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    Is that a technical term for one of your famous weather predictions?

    Tell us again how many snowstorms we were going to have last December?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 45,798
    edited March 2020

    Andrew said:

    Internet noise aside, the two most worrying conversations I had today were with seventy year old who don’t see themselves as at risk. They are fit and healthy, but because of this they are missing the point they they are septuagenarians. We all need to help land the point.

    Had almost word for word the same conversation with my parents today, who are a similar age bracket.


    Mum is only just past 70, but she says she is happy to self-isolate. Except, I'm around too! Neither of us went anywhere today, though we went to Sainsbury's and the local corner shop yesterday. She stayed in the car whilst I did the Sainsbury's shopping.

    I think that the evidence is that it's age + pre existing conditions that are the big problem. Quite alot of over 70s have long running issue. Quite alot dont't

    And now for something lighter -

    https://www.therichmondgolfclub.com/wartime-rules/

    "A player whose stroke is affected by the simultaneous explosion of a bomb may play another ball from the same place. Penalty one stroke."

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    edited March 2020
    stodge said:

    RobD said:

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    No, it isn't. And constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
    And constantly leaping to its defence every time someone has the temerity to criticise it doesn't make the Government right.
    There are some genuine criticisms from the experts in this. The WHO do not like the idea the UK have decided to abandon the idea of mass testing. This is legitimate to ask the government why this change in strategy.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 46,223

    RobD said:

    Trust no-one. Especially experts in the Government's pocket. There is always an agenda. The herd immunity is a euphemism for the Government's preferred option, which is to get this over with as quickly as possible.

    https://spectator.us/fda-cdc-hhs-health-response-covid-19-coronavirus/

    If the plan was to get things over with as quickly as possible, why are they doing things to slow the progress of the disease?
    Because other countries will have second, third, fourth waves. We are trying to get this done with in one wave - which is the quickest possible way to get it over with.
    Yes, but there is time to prepare and equip for future waves, time to refine treatment and most importantly, no certainty that a second wave will manifest.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 25,551
    I thought it was just me who was confused by the new advice today. It is not just Hancock but also the cancellation of sports events rather than running them behind closed doors, without crowds but with television audiences. We saw on the last thread some degree of confusion as to what 70-year-olds are supposed to be doing, and we at pb are probably paying more attention than most, even if some of us did need to look up the word confutation in the header.

    During the second world war, the government commissioned Mass Observation research on the home front. Maybe the government is or should be doing the same now to monitor how its messages and actions are being received. Ironically it is those who did not panic and who behaved responsibly who now find themselves without toilet paper or Coca-Cola.

  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 29,049
    edited March 2020
    The economist (and paper reviewer) Ruth Lea was on Five Live just now and says she will refuse to self-isolate completely, and would prefer to end up in Holloway jail if they make it compulsory.

    https://twitter.com/RuthLeaEcon
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    edited March 2020
    Andy_JS said:

    The economist (and paper reviewer) Ruth Lea was on Five Live just now and says she will refuse to self-isolate completely, and would prefer to end up in Holloway jail if they make it compulsory.

    https://twitter.com/RuthLeaEcon

    What is wrong with this people. If people wants to be total twats and get themselves killed that is their choice, but in this case they are endangering the whole population.

    And while we have these idiots, we also have the other lot that are close everything down now, all the schools straight away...even if that means all the medical staff can't go to work.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,552
    geoffw said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.

    Re the Med countries: this isn't about them trying to look decisive, they really don't have any choice. Once you have more than 3,000 cases in the Province of Bergamo (pop 1.1m), and your intensive care units are overloaded, then you have to shut everything down.
    True, but there is a push to get us to follow them - trying to put a lid on it by quarantining whole cities/countries with travel restrictions, closing schools restaurants etc. That is a bad idea.
    I wonder how many of the people demanding lockdowns have themselves self-isolated or even bother to wash their hands properly.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 45,798
    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.

    Re the Med countries: this isn't about them trying to look decisive, they really don't have any choice. Once you have more than 3,000 cases in the Province of Bergamo (pop 1.1m), and your intensive care units are overloaded, then you have to shut everything down.
    No-one got sacked for choosing IBM - a very good strategy in the mainframe world. Which they still pretty much own.

    It failed as a strategy when times changed and desktops came along.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,065
    Does anyone have a decent resource (I’ve been relying on Wikipedia) as to the Chinese response OUTSIDE the Wuhan and Hubei epicentre? Very crudely, if we regard Italy as Europe’s Hubei, then the experience of the rest of the country must be instructive to the rest of us.

    (If Brexiteers prefer we can be Japan or Taiwan in this analogy).
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454

    geoffw said:

    rcs1000 said:

    geoffw said:

    Herd mentality: it used to be said by purchasing managers in the 80s that "no-one got sacked for choosing IBM" (re desktops) even though they were much poorer value for money than the alternatives. Your argument is like that.

    But yes, Boris and the boffins must persuade Joe Public about the policy. Fortunately he has time on his hands, electorally speaking. The Mediterranean policy of trying to eradicate by shut-down may be intended to look like decisive action now because the electoral ballot box is more imminent for them, but it could well be seen as inadequate in the medium term when successive waves of the epidemic wash over them.

    Re the Med countries: this isn't about them trying to look decisive, they really don't have any choice. Once you have more than 3,000 cases in the Province of Bergamo (pop 1.1m), and your intensive care units are overloaded, then you have to shut everything down.
    True, but there is a push to get us to follow them - trying to put a lid on it by quarantining whole cities/countries with travel restrictions, closing schools restaurants etc. That is a bad idea.
    I wonder how many of the people demanding lockdowns have themselves self-isolated or even bother to wash their hands properly.
    They will more than likely claim there are in the special exemption category....
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,432
    edited March 2020
    The difference between the views is a philosophical one: this guy says 'don't take risk X now for a greater good purpose, avoid the risk X now instead whatever the consequences.' That's ethics not medicine. Both views are fair, and it ain't resolvable empirically.

    He also fails to point out that anyone who can long term self isolate can do so right now if they wish and need no government order to do so. Which slightly destroys his point.

  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,552
    rcs1000 said:

    Let me interject with some good news for a moment.

    All the evidence from Hubei is that when you clamp down on social interaction (whether through voluntary distancing or more extensive "shut downs"), new infections plummet. This takes a week or so to show up in the headline numbers, but it's almost certainly the case that new infections are falling in the UK, Italy, France, Germany and Spain. And I have little doubt that the US will follow a week or so behind.

    Now, this still means there's a week of new cases rising happening in Europe. But the 3x multiplier of people infected is almost certainly below 1x right now thanks to the various measures that have been taken.

    Removing restrictions is going to be a gradual thing, so we can make sure that hotspots are identified, and people traced and treated. It will take some time to get back to normal. But it all probability the peak of infections has already been passed. We just won't see it for a couple of weeks yet.

    That would be very good if true but why do you think that new infections and already falling in the UK ?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,458

    stodge said:

    RobD said:

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    No, it isn't. And constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
    And constantly leaping to its defence every time someone has the temerity to criticise it doesn't make the Government right.
    There are some genuine criticisms from the experts in this. The WHO do not like the idea the UK have decided to abandon the idea of mass testing. This is legitimate to ask the government why this change in strategy.
    My friend (Who we're doing the horses for at the moment) has

    Dry cough, fever, recent contact with someone from Italy.

    Not tested. Surely that's wrong ? I mean 99% it's a positive result but without the test there's no definite info for for instance the local school where their youngest kid went to to make decisions with the most knowledge.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,552
    Andy_JS said:

    The economist (and paper reviewer) Ruth Lea was on Five Live just now and says she will refuse to self-isolate completely, and would prefer to end up in Holloway jail if they make it compulsory.

    https://twitter.com/RuthLeaEcon

    I tried to explain to my parents why they need to self-isolate but they think I'm "taking things too seriously".
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 25,551
    kyf_100 said:

    The trouble with herd immunity is the branding.

    It's the word. "Herd". What image does it conjure up in your mind? Perhaps one of sheep. Sheep are idiots. Or cattle. Cattle get slaughtered.

    Herds are culled and most people do not want to be part of a cull. The very idea strikes fear into the hearts of the unwashed, loo-roll hoarding masses, who are suddenly made acutely aware of their own individual unimportance.

    The question is what you re-brand the concept as. It's effectively a lottery where 97% of the population win, but sadly "national lottery" is already taken.

    Perhaps but there is something else more subtle than that. The problem with herd immunity is people, including journalists and the public, do not already know what it means, and the unfortunate but inevitable byproduct of the energy and length that must be devoted to explaining it mean that it is taken to be the most important part of the message.
  • Options
    MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 1,533
    edited March 2020
    Nothing like trying it a second time, The Donald must be happy gets to refinance all his gold towers on the cheap.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 50,151

    rcs1000 said:

    Let me interject with some good news for a moment.

    All the evidence from Hubei is that when you clamp down on social interaction (whether through voluntary distancing or more extensive "shut downs"), new infections plummet. This takes a week or so to show up in the headline numbers, but it's almost certainly the case that new infections are falling in the UK, Italy, France, Germany and Spain. And I have little doubt that the US will follow a week or so behind.

    Now, this still means there's a week of new cases rising happening in Europe. But the 3x multiplier of people infected is almost certainly below 1x right now thanks to the various measures that have been taken.

    Removing restrictions is going to be a gradual thing, so we can make sure that hotspots are identified, and people traced and treated. It will take some time to get back to normal. But it all probability the peak of infections has already been passed. We just won't see it for a couple of weeks yet.

    That would be very good if true but why do you think that new infections and already falling in the UK ?
    Possibly - On Saturday, the total cases went up by over 300, today the number went up by 240 or so.
  • Options
    WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,716
    edited March 2020
    A good and thorough header from AlastairMeeks, which explains the understandable background to what might be the excessive current public scepticism , and the anger with that from those both more favourable to the government and wanting the nation to pull together quicker.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 78,454
    Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    RobD said:

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    No, it isn't. And constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
    And constantly leaping to its defence every time someone has the temerity to criticise it doesn't make the Government right.
    There are some genuine criticisms from the experts in this. The WHO do not like the idea the UK have decided to abandon the idea of mass testing. This is legitimate to ask the government why this change in strategy.
    My friend (Who we're doing the horses for at the moment) has

    Dry cough, fever, recent contact with someone from Italy.

    Not tested. Surely that's wrong ? I mean 99% it's a positive result but without the test there's no definite info for for instance the local school where their youngest kid went to to make decisions with the most knowledge.
    Personally, as somebody who has no real insight into this, just looking at South Korea, with their two strand testing approach, it seems we could / should follow it. The WHO thinks we should.

    People have said it is capacity and tying up front line medical staff to perform and process tests. I don't know if it is possible to use the army to take the samples of the "less" accurate version.

    All of the above I think is a valid point to raise with the government, rather than spinning one word in a leaked slide into making it appear they have been dishonest in some way.
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 50,151
    Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    RobD said:

    It's all unravelling.

    This Gov't is a shitshower.

    No, it isn't. And constantly repeating it doesn't make it true.
    And constantly leaping to its defence every time someone has the temerity to criticise it doesn't make the Government right.
    There are some genuine criticisms from the experts in this. The WHO do not like the idea the UK have decided to abandon the idea of mass testing. This is legitimate to ask the government why this change in strategy.
    My friend (Who we're doing the horses for at the moment) has

    Dry cough, fever, recent contact with someone from Italy.

    Not tested. Surely that's wrong ? I mean 99% it's a positive result but without the test there's no definite info for for instance the local school where their youngest kid went to to make decisions with the most knowledge.
    Hope it's not Covid!

    @stodge same for your brother!
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 48,445

    Andy_JS said:

    The economist (and paper reviewer) Ruth Lea was on Five Live just now and says she will refuse to self-isolate completely, and would prefer to end up in Holloway jail if they make it compulsory.

    https://twitter.com/RuthLeaEcon

    I tried to explain to my parents why they need to self-isolate but they think I'm "taking things too seriously".
    My mother said she was self isolating and then told me about all the people she was self isolating with. Having just got back from shopping.
This discussion has been closed.