Johnson is dithering and a danger to us all.

[the other bob wilson]

So Johnson et al are rightly being criticised in your view on what evidence?

Do you have anything indicating they have gone against the evidence of the CMO, for example?

Well if you're trying to argue that going with the herd mentality approach for a while and then doing a complete about face was all part of some masterplan, then good luck on that. Also, it's clearly counter productive to have people who may already have had and recovered from the virus sat at home because someone where they live may have it. The means to test more people and in greater numbers quicker and more efficiently was paramount surely, but,instead we took the decision only to test those with the worst symptoms - as I say, poor decision making as opposed to flawed political allegiance.

[tell it like it is]

Well if you're trying to argue that going with the herd mentality approach for a while and then doing a complete about face was all part of some masterplan, then good luck on that. Also, it's clearly counter productive to have people who may already have had and recovered from the virus sat at home because someone where they live may have it. The means to test more people and in greater numbers quicker and more efficiently was paramount surely, but,instead we took the decision only to test those with the worst symptoms - as I say, poor decision making as opposed to flawed political allegiance.

So it's more a gut feeling than actual evidence then - not having a go, just curious.

You can only test people so many times - test say yourself now, clear. Next day you get it. Unless those tests are continuously repeated they are meaningless.

As for the herd immunity, the situation has been changing from day to day as more information is known about the virus. If the CMO had given advice and that had been ignored, I'd agree with you but frankly there's no evidence that is the case.

With regards to things changing, Ferguson has gone from the doom scenario of 250k dead to less than 20k dead with most people who may well have died regardless. Lockdown of a few days hasn't caused that revision, it's acceptance of the fact most people have probably had it without symptoms, thus death rate lower than expected.

My wife has a compromised immune system. As she went over the symptoms a week or so ago, it struck her that each symptom matched a virus she had back in December.

[dandywarhol]

So it's more a gut feeling than actual evidence then - not having a go, just curious.

You can only test people so many times - test say yourself now, clear. Next day you get it. Unless those tests are continuously repeated they are meaningless.

As for the herd immunity, the situation has been changing from day to day as more information is known about the virus. If the CMO had given advice and that had been ignored, I'd agree with you but frankly there's no evidence that is the case.

With regards to things changing, Ferguson has gone from the doom scenario of 250k dead to less than 20k dead with most people who may well have died regardless. Lockdown of a few days hasn't caused that revision, it's acceptance of the fact most people have probably had it without symptoms, thus death rate lower than expected.

My wife has a compromised immune system. As she went over the symptoms a week or so ago, it struck her that each symptom matched a virus she had back in December.

Only 20000 dying.**** me that's comforting.Most of them would have died anyway.Well we all have to die its a matter of timing.There's a gravestone in Cwmbran inscribed with "I expected this but not yet"
That's what we all wish for.

[xsnaggle]

Well if you're trying to argue that going with the herd mentality approach for a while and then doing a complete about face was all part of some masterplan, then good luck on that. Also, it's clearly counter productive to have people who may already have had and recovered from the virus sat at home because someone where they live may have it. The means to test more people and in greater numbers quicker and more efficiently was paramount surely, but,instead we took the decision only to test those with the worst symptoms - as I say, poor decision making as opposed to flawed political allegiance.

The test for people who have already had it to determine if they have an imunity and can go back to work, and the test of those who show severe signs of having it are completely different. The emphasis is on tresting those with severe symptoms. The other test is being tested now to see it if works and if it does that will be rolled out next.

[the other bob wilson]

The test for people who have already had it to determine if they have an imunity and can go back to work, and the test of those who show severe signs of having it are completely different. The emphasis is on tresting those with severe symptoms. The other test is being tested now to see it if works and if it does that will be rolled out next.

I know all of that. It just seems so wrong that a month and more since the virus took a hold in Italy, we're still not in a position where we can test at any more than a level which is so restricted - I'm sorry, but it just should not be like that.

[Lord Dargavel]

I know all of that. It just seems so wrong that a month and more since the virus took a hold in Italy, we're still not in a position where we can test at any more than a level which is so restricted - I'm sorry, but it just should not be like that.

It really isn’t that simple. My company is one of several large medical companies who have launched a COVID-19 test in record time ... months !!! And that is thanks to the FDA massively relaxing the usual protocols. We hope to be producing tests in the millions by the end of March. Staff in the US and elsewhere worldwide have been literally working around the clock and it is incredible achievement, especially given the laws surrounding drug/medical testing and production. It’s just not as simple as do lots more tests. Mass testing has to be scalable, affordable and available, and that takes time!

You will have heard Chris Witty talking about the antibody test which tests for the presence of antibodies. This will tell whether you’ve had COVID-19, not whether you have it. The test we are releasing uses PCR to replicate RNA and will take around 4 hours. The testing equipment can only do a certain number of tests per hour and you need enough laboratory staff to run and validate the tests. That is a challenge in itself. My partner is a biomedical scientist and is presently on 14 day isolation. So the labs have challenges. Get more blood testing machines you might say. Again it’s not that simple as they must be delivered, installed and validated (that is my job). Again this takes many weeks per machine.

When you have a validated machine you then require the consumables to run the tests in bulk. Another huge manufacturing task and challenge. So it’s just not as simple to say we’ve had an extra month and should be able to do so much more testing. It just doesn’t work like that for a new virus!

[surge]

I do not have subscription and therefore cannot judge nature of whole article but wonder if rest follows on from what you can see for free: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...s-eu-pandemic/

Matt Hancock's department wanted to retain membership of the Early Warning and Response System (EWRS) as part of the EU-UK future relationship deal – but Number  10 said no, The Daily Telegraph has learnt.
Senior health advisers warned that exiting the EWRS – which has helped coordinate the response to the virus and played a vital role during the bird flu outbreak – would put public health at risk.
However, the British negotiating team, which reports to Boris Johnson, did not want to blur the UK's request for a basic, Canada-style trade deal, it is claimed. Every add-on requested by the UK would risk giving the EU leverage to demand post-Brexit alignment....

Note that it was The Times that was most critical of Cummings and UK government's role in "herd immunity" plan and now Telegraph is writing this.

[the other bob wilson]

It really isn’t that simple. My company is one of several large medical companies who have launched a COVID-19 test in record time ... months !!! And that is thanks to the FDA massively relaxing the usual protocols. We hope to be producing tests in the millions by the end of March. Staff in the US and elsewhere worldwide have been literally working around the clock and it is incredible achievement, especially given the laws surrounding drug/medical testing and production. It’s just not as simple as do lots more tests. Mass testing has to be scalable, affordable and available, and that takes time!

You will have heard Chris Witty talking about the antibody test which tests for the presence of antibodies. This will tell whether you’ve had COVID-19, not whether you have it. The test we are releasing uses PCR to replicate RNA and will take around 4 hours. The testing equipment can only do a certain number of tests per hour and you need enough laboratory staff to run and validate the tests. That is a challenge in itself. My partner is a biomedical scientist and is presently on 14 day isolation. So the labs have challenges. Get more blood testing machines you might say. Again it’s not that simple as they must be delivered, installed and validated (that is my job). Again this takes many weeks per machine.

When you have a validated machine you then require the consumables to run the tests in bulk. Another huge manufacturing task and challenge. So it’s just not as simple to say we’ve had an extra month and should be able to do so much more testing. It just doesn’t work like that for a new virus!

I can't dispute what you are saying, so I won't, but I do look at countries like China, South Korea and Germany off the top of my head who appear to have been far more effective at overcoming all of these problems.

[tell it like it is]

I can't dispute what you are saying, so I won't, but I do look at countries like China, South Korea and Germany off the top of my head who appear to have been far more effective at overcoming all of these problems.

If you believe China have been effective, I've a bridge to sell you.

Anybody believing China's figures given their suppression of info about the virus initially, persecution of whistleblowers and indeed telling WHO in Jan there had been no person to person infections is a tad naive.

China have almost certainly disappeared many.

[the other bob wilson]

If you believe China have been effective, I've a bridge to sell you.

Anybody believing China's figures given their suppression of info about the virus initially, persecution of whistleblowers and indeed telling WHO in Jan there had been no person to person infections is a tad naive.

China have almost certainly disappeared many.

I agree that there will be doubts about the sort of statistical studies seen in another thread today while they are almost entirely reliant on Chinese figures, but what about the other countries I mentioned?