| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
With the benefit of hindsight, the decision to go ahead with the Cheltenham festival looks like lunacy, but, even at the time, I'm sure I wasn't the only one who was questioning it. The Government could have stepped in and ordered it to be abandoned, but I suppose that was back in the "herd mentality" days.Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
Have you ever had a job? Yes of course projects are monitored, assessed and reported on throughout.
You will be on another account by then.
Monitored, assessed, reported on sure. Determining course of action based on woefully incomplete information? Works for you, I guess.
Ooooh, I'm a multi, eh? Some would think only those with a multi would make that incorrect assumption. Not me, though.
At what point did the government gain their complete information? Or have they been making decisions based on incomplete information throughout?
Of course they've been working off incomplete information, that should be fairly obvious.
WHO proclamations in January were inaccurate. Each day gives more information about the nature of the virus and other factors.
There will have to be a public inquiry into this afterwards.
We may not find definitive answers until then
A lot of the people against lockdown seem to parrot the idea that this is no worse than flu. Firstly it is worse than flu, even flu in a bad year would struggle to kill this many. Factor in on top that we are at the back end of flu season, so many of the very weakest would have succumbed to flu over the last 5 months. Coronavirus is literally killing thousands of people that have survived the flu season.
Although to be blunt and heartless, the death rate alone from coronavirus probably is just about low enough that governments would try to push through it. But looking at the deaths alone isnt taking into account the 10/15 people in critical care for weeks/months for every death recorded. The pressure on hospitals is also leading to virtually all other operations being cancelled, this will also lead to potentially hundreds/thousands more deaths. The 'experts' dont really have a scooby about this virus, that much is obvious. So our only option is a lockdown(along with increasing testing), it's the only way we have of trying to slow the spread and take the pressure off the healthcare system. For people to argue against it is crazy. Without a lockdown the numbers would continue to increase for weeks and weeks. Aswell as the thousands of coronavirus victims what would happen to all the poor people whose cancer or other life saving ops were cancelled. A belief in rolling back the lockdown is verging on a eugenics arguement in my opinion. Its arguing that all who are ill should be left out for sacrifice, so that the strongest can have a good economy. Its a sick belief, and thankfully one that only a minority seem to hold
My friend, I realize you are just pontificating but it isn't helpful. You're promoting misinformation. A lot of experts do have a "scooby". Unfortunately, a lot of political types are interfering.
I think actually the truth is probably half way between mine and your statements. There will be a lot of scientists out there with very strong theories on this virus, but there's not a huge amount that's certain yet. Studies around transmission especially are evolving quite quickly. As for the stats guys doing the modelling, you can find vast differences between their respective models. Personally I think It needs strong public health figures and politicians to err on the side of caution while these theories are given time to be tested. Unfortunately we had Patrick Vallance and Boris Johnson, 2 quite weak individuals who seemed to be very reluctant to take this seriously
[QUOTE=chrisp_1927;5061059]I think actually the truth is probably half way between mine and your statements. There will be a lot of scientists out there with very strong theories on this virus, but there's not a huge amount that's certain yet. Studies around transmission especially are evolving quite quickly. As for the stats guys doing the modelling, you can find vast differences between their respective models. Personally I think It needs strong public health figures and politicians to err on the side of caution while these theories are given time to be tested. Unfortunately we had Patrick Vallance and Boris Johnson, 2 quite weak individuals who seemed to be very reluctant to take this seriously[/QUOTE
"Caution" as in a longer, more restrictive lockdown or more allowance for personal freedom?
But equally eminent experts are saying different things.
Which ones do you believe?
The gloomier ones with no axe to grind.
Provide examples.
Yes good point, which different things have the experts said.
Government elected on "Get Brexit done" and "Anyone but Corbyn" while running away from scrutiny and seeking to misinform rather than provide detail just now identified by media: The Times is calling it "chaos", the Mail calling it "Shocking", the Telegraph calling it "Questions without answers".Mr Gove’s answer on ventilators very vague. He talked about the START of thousands more this weekend. So maybe hundreds. And produced or delivered/installed? I don’t underestimate the difficulties. I just think we deserve some clarity.
I was right to be suspicious. Turns out the exact number of new ventilators we can expect this weekend is 30. That’s right 30. Not 3,000 or even 300. But 30. Mr Gove’s exact words Tuesday were “the first of thousands of new ventilator devices will roll off the production line”.
It was a circumlocution — rarely has ‘of’ carried so much weight — which masked fact it was not 1000s. But 30. Of course more will come in the weeks ahead. But with only 8,000 ventilators in the NHS and now 10,000 hospitalised with the virus, we are clearly running out of time.
Andrew Neil: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/1245510705438220293
It wasn't clear your follow-up comment was directed to me. Examples of what?
I know (from personal experience) there is an awful lot of politics going on in the background around this.
I also know the data that is thrown up worldwide is highly dubious in terms of its validity and usefulness. Some is more useful, some is less so. It's very difficult to pick out the data that is trustworthy from that which is not. A lot of emphasis is being given to some Icelandic data (
https://www.zmescience.com/medicine/...covid-19-0523/).
Totally agree. What really annoyed me was the way that the public health guys were talking about it being an open air event and that Corona doesn't particularly like the outdoors. Were they that daft that they didn't take into account the beer tents, the packed public transport and the full to the rafters pubs that most definitely are transmission dangers. They seemed to think it was equivalent to the Chelsea flower show with everyone wandering around in pairs and no one really getting close to each other 😂
[QUOTE=az city;5061062]Personally I think we need caution in terms of keeping people safe. So a longer lockdown to be sure.
Although I think that the caution Johnson and Vallance had was a caution of action. they were scared to respond. Although to be fair, they did do the right thing quite quickly after
😂😂😂😂😂
They were fitting the science to the policy. At that time the policy was that sporting events carried on and so the scientists were wheeled out to explain why that was fine.
At the time the media were happy enough with it.
True. Hopefully, in the future, politics becomes a bit more like Dragons Den and a bit less like Golden Balls but that's going to require the media forgetting which side they're on.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote