advertisement


Coronavirus - the new strain XVIII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seanm said:
Had no intention of changing the date until the data was clear he should...that’s not really an awful position! It’s actually surprising: I thought he’d crack on.

From what I can gather it really is the case that the data has only recently become clear: things have obviously been very finely poised, but very few experts claimed to be confident about which way the ball was going to roll. Obviously there were some very high profile exceptions, but they’ve been confident that the worst was just about to happen since the start of the roadmap, which is why nobody’s listening to them now.
Click to expand...

Delta has been growing since early April and doubling weekly. It's been clear to me for some time.
 
gavreid said:
That's why they left it until today. That's the counter to the planning argument, far better to have said at step 3 that step 4 was unlikely to happen, not leave it until the week before
Click to expand...

They've been saying for ages they're looking at it, had a clear date when the decision would be announced and said repeatedly (albeit sometime slightly less blatantly) to not bank on the 21st being the date restriction would be lifted. Now I'm not the brightest pixie in the forest but even I know not to book a holiday or wedding based on the 21st; it would be a foolish course to take.
 
Last edited:
It's funny how you guys that have been arguing against me for weeks are now saying they were always going to pull the plug ;)
 
gavreid said:
far better to have said at step 3 that step 4 was unlikely to happen, not leave it until the week before
Click to expand...

No. He didn't know that step 4 was unlikely to happen five weeks ago, so if he had said that, he would have been misleading. Better to do what he did: say that he'll wait until the week before to decide.


gavreid said:
Delta has been growing since early April and doubling weekly. It's been clear to me for some time.
Click to expand...

It's prevalence was not clear; neither was the number of vaccinations doable.

gavreid said:
It's funny how you guys that have been arguing against me for weeks are now saying they were always going to pull the plug ;)
Click to expand...

Who's saying that?
 
gavreid said:
It's funny how you guys that have been arguing against me for weeks are now saying they were always going to pull the plug ;)
Click to expand...
I thought he wouldn’t! My sense was that the roadmap was pretty sensible but that the government’s commitment to it (I.e. to its conditional nature) was a matter of pure expedience: that as soon as Boris’ political agenda diverged from it sufficiently he’d do his own thing. Actually I still do think that! This isn’t a sign of Boris’ commitment to the science, it’s a sign that there’s no significant political pressure on him to plough on with opening up.
 
mandryka said:
No. He didn't know that step 4 was unlikely to happen five weeks ago, so if he had said that, he would have been misleading. Better to do what he did: say that he'll wait until the week before to decide.




It's prevalence was not clear; neither was the number of vaccinations doable.



Who's saying that?
Click to expand...

The Government censored the PHE report on the spread of Indian Variant (as was) on election day - see my post on 6th May, it was crystal clear.
 
Probably the right choice to err on the side of caution, although I do feel for those whose livelihoods are affected.
 
gavreid said:
It's funny how you guys that have been arguing against me for weeks are now saying they were always going to pull the plug
Click to expand...

I think I've missed something - they said they'd lift everything on 21/6 provided everything lined up. It hasn't, so they won't. So we have a go at them for doing what they said they'd do?

And some on here have a go at the media for twisting stuff. Amazing.

IMV it was only ever a 'what if' date.
 
Andrew C! said:
I think I've missed something - they said they'd lift everything on 21/6 provided everything lined up. It hasn't, so they won't. So we have a go at them for doing what they said they'd do?

And some on here have a go at the media for twisting stuff. Amazing.

IMV it was only ever a 'what if' date.
Click to expand...

Funny old world - they're dragged kicking and screaming yet again, and you say they were always going to follow the science. At no time throughout the pandemic have they done so until it's been too late.
 
gavreid said:
and you say they were always going to follow the science.
Click to expand...

I've never said anything of this kind until now, Gav. If I have, please quote me accordingly.

I do agree they have been very reticent, reluctant, or what ever other word we could use to describe things.

But if they delay for 4 weeks, its not because they said that they would indefinitely open up on 21/6. That date was never a 'done deal'. It was never certain.
 
gavreid said:
Funny old world - they're dragged kicking and screaming yet again, and you say they were always going to follow the science. At no time throughout the pandemic have they done so until it's been too late.
Click to expand...
But they don’t appear to have been dragged kicking and screaming: most scientists have been saying that it looks bad, but the picture isn’t clear and we’ll know more by the 14th - make a decision then. And that’s what’s happened.

Unless you think it’s the hand waving by certain high profile media scientists that’s responsible for this decision? I think that’s unlikely as those people have really discredited themselves. But I’ve no doubt *they* believe it, which I guess will confirm them in their belief that the way to influence policy is to bludgeon the public with worst case scenarios, easy solutions and false confidence.

And that’s not great. It means they’ll redouble their misinformation campaign on our “open borders”, for one thing.
 
@gavreid They will do. That’s what they do. I have said my previous experiences with politicians and media outlets leads me to be highly careful around either category. Even the beloved Guardian.
 
Andrew C! said:
@gavreid They will do. That’s what they do. I have said my previous experiences with politicians and media outlets leads me to be highly careful around either category. Even the beloved Guardian.
Click to expand...

On the 2 June you'd have to have been wearing pretty dark sunnies indoors to see nothing in the data - only 2 days later Indie Sage released their emergency statement. I thought it was incredibly irresponsible of him because it's encouraged a lot of people to let their guards down in the meantime. There seems to have been a number of confirmed cases around the G7 for example and Delta is now growing rapidly in all of the metropolitan centres.
 
gavreid said:
On the 2 June you'd have to have been wearing pretty dark sunnies indoors to see nothing in the data - only 2 days later Indie Sage released their emergency statement. I thought it was incredibly irresponsible of him because it's encouraged a lot of people to let their guards down in the meantime. There seems to have been a number of confirmed cases around the G7 for example and Delta is now growing rapidly in all of the metropolitan centres.
Click to expand...
Indie Sage are not reticent about releasing Emergency Statements though. And they are just not representative of mainstream scientific opinion. It’s one thing to see something in the data - everyone could see that what was happening was not good. But that’s not enough to base policy on, especially when, insofar as that policy had to do with what would happen at a future date, it wasn’t necessary to jump the gun.
 
Seanm said:
Indie Sage are not reticent about releasing Emergency Statements though. And they are just not representative of mainstream scientific opinion. It’s one thing to see something in the data - everyone could see that what was happening was not good. But that’s not enough to base policy on, especially when, insofar as that policy had to do with what would happen at a future date, it wasn’t necessary to jump the gun.
Click to expand...

Cases hit 5000 and then nearly 6500 on the 3rd and 4th of June and you're still defending your position...
 
gavreid said:
Cases hit 5000 and then nearly 6500 on the 3rd and 4th of June and you're still defending your position...
Click to expand...
My position is that we should delay opening on June 21st. What should it be, on the grounds you mention: that we should delay opening on June 21st with a much greater sense of commitment? I think you’ve manufactured a controversy here where there is none.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top