Abandon Ridiculous Two-Metre Rule
I’ve written a piece in today’s Telegraph entitled: “For the sake of our economy, we need to scrap the absurd two-metre rule.” I point out that this and other over-cautious social-distancing rules will mean our economy is permanently stuck in second gear.
For most shops, the only way to keep customers six feet apart will be to introduce cumbersome one-way systems and force them to queue up outside. All very well when the only retail outlets we’re talking about are supermarkets and newsagents, but how will people observe that rule on the pavement when there are queues outside every shop?
For pubs and restaurants, due to reopen on July 4th, the two-metre rule will mean that many of them can’t resume trading and those that can will be forced to operate at less than 50% capacity.
I also point out that there’s no scientific basis for the rule.
What’s so absurd about this measure, which will decimate the hospitality trade, is that there’s no obvious scientific basis for it and many countries are much more relaxed. In South Korea, for instance, the acceptable distance in 1.4 metres, and in China, Hong Kong, Singapore and France, people are only expected to stay one metre apart.
Indeed, the World Health Organisation says a distance of one metre is more than sufficient. In Sweden, which has had fewer deaths per million than the UK in spite of not locking down formally, there is no hard-and-fast rule. People are just expected to use their common sense.
Boris Johnson is reported to be reconsidering the two-metre rule. Worth reading in full, Prime Minister.
SAGE Member Does U-Turn on Lockdown
No, it’s not what you think. Yesterday, a member of SAGE gave a press conference in which he warned that the Government was easting lockdown too fast. This is how it was reported on the BBC News website:
A scientist on the UK Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) has suggested he does not agree with easing the lockdown at this stage.
In a briefing to health journalists Prof John Edmunds, from the London School of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine, said that 8,000 new infections a day in England, as calculated by the Office for National Statistics, was “a very high incidence” level.
“Many of us would prefer to see incidence down to lower levels before we relax measures,” he said.
He said that with an “untested” test and trace system “we are taking some risk here” and “even if we keep it flat, that’s still quite a level”.
“Lifting the lockdown is a political decision. Lifting it now, means we’re keeping incidence at this level,” he added.
The Labour MP Richard Burgon was so over-excited by this news, he linked to the BBC report and tweeted the following: “So the Government is no longer following the science. It’s a political decision and we can’t trust this Government to make the right decisions with public safety.”
But hang on a second. Is this the same Professor John Edmunds who told Channel 4 News on March 13th that “the only way to stop this epidemic is indeed to achieve herd immunity”?
I guess he’s changed his mind.
Nobel Laureate Skewers Member of Imperial College Modelling Team
A few days ago I linked to a fantastic webinar, organised out of Brazil, in which a group of scientists discussed the reliability of predications generated by epidemiological computer models and whether those predictions should be used as the basis for government responses to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Among the participants were Michael Levitt, Professor of Structural Biology at Stanford and the winner of the 2013 Nobel Prize for Chemistry, and Samir Bhatt, a Senior Lecturer in the Faculty of Medicine at Imperial’s School of Public Health.
One of my concerns as I’ve watched the British Government’s disastrous mishandling of this crisis unfold is that the people behind the Imperial College modelling that informed so much of the Government’s response will never be properly held to account. This webinar, in which Michael Levitt cross-examines Samir Bhatt, may be the closest we ever get.
If you have the time, I urge you to watch the whole thing. But if you don’t, watch it from the two-hour point onwards, in which Levitt begins to lose patience with the dissembling Bhatt. A reader has very kindly made a transcript of this part of the exchange. My favourite part is when Levitt – beginning to get angry – lays the blame for the coming global recession at the door of the Imperial College modelling team, whom he thinks wildly over-estimated the deadliness of the disease. “That is an error that has cost the world many, many trillions of dollars, but it isn’t a joke. I mean an error like that is not a small error,” he says.
Michael Levitt: I’m concerned by, there’s been a massive communications gap here and you know one question that I did raise which Rui didn’t pick up, is I’ve noticed that for example, that epidemiologists and I’m not talking about you guys, don’t think anything wrong about being a factor of 10 too high but are dead scared to be a factor of 10% too low.
I mean the number of deaths caused by lockdown is way higher than anything that will be caused by Covid, unless you assume exponential growth, forever. So, therefore this is a price that the world is paying for this asymmetry. In other words, I don’t know how we handle it, you know.
Sweden is not locked down. You guys are going to have a very hard time when Sweden plateaus at 6,000 deaths, which is 0.06, 0.6 per 100,000, and you can say well they social distance, they’re Scandinavians, they’re cold, there’s high population density. But, you know, the fact remains that the plateau rate of population reached by England, New York City, Lombardy, France is basically around one month of natural death. Ferguson said a year of natural death. That is horrible. That is an error that has cost the world many, many trillions of dollars, but it isn’t a joke. I mean an error like that is not a small error.
Now you could say, oh it’s our intervention, we intervened, Sweden intervened by itself, Italy was a very intervened country. Anyone who believes that Iran intervened is crazy.
Certain countries, there’s no doubt that the one place where there’s beautiful intervention is a part of China I call non-Hubei China…
In Hubei, the Chinese were out of control, but out of Hubei the epidemic is the most beautiful Gompertz function. It was so beautiful that everyone said they must have hacked my computer, except that New Zealand has the same distribution and other countries do as well. So I am trying to understand this.
There’s no doubt that once lockdown has been forced, everyone’s going to believe it was a good thing because otherwise why did we need to do it? But there’s no evidence for it.
Samir Bhatti: It’s not about believing if it’s a good thing. What mechanism do you conjecture for the plateauing of death in the UK that’s not lockdown?
ML: It reached one in a thousand. It’s nothing to do with lockdown. The UK policy led to early saturation. The whole country was infected before lockdown was done. The same thing was true of New York.
SB: No serological data supports this hypothesis.
ML: This is going to saturate at 20% serology. We know that already. You know this assumption that 80% based on R0 is basically nonsense. You guys don’t know what you’re doing to yourselves. You guys are going to end up being responsible for a hundred billion dollar crisis to the world and this is not funny.
And you start to use clean terminology. Don’t estimate herd immunity from an R0 value, which is completely meaningless. If the R0 value is 1.3 then I get saturation at 25%. The Diamond Princess, this wonderful experiment, saturated at 25% and you can say, “Oh, it was such good lockdown. We had shared air conditioning, it was an aged population.”
It doesn’t work. In other words, there needs to be sanity checks. Sanity checks come from looking at the data.
SB: OK so we’re going to talk about the data then. So you’re hypothesis is that infection fatality rate is much lower, everyone has been infected, that’s what caused the curve to bend. A massive serological study occurred just now in Spain, suggesting that with the 28,000 deaths, 5% of the population has been infected based on serology.
ML: And I think we’ve seen that the serological studies have serious shortcomings. We’re now seeing signs there may be T cell receptors.
Daily Mail Guide to Having a Socially Distanced BBQ
This illustration is in today’s Daily Mail, based on advice from Professor Patricia Riddell, a Professor of Psychology at the University of Reading.
Prof Riddell recommended asking guests to bring their own cutlery, plates and condiments to reduce the risk of virus transmission through touching the same surfaces, and having only one person using the tongs.
She also endorsed serving food on plates from a distance rather than everyone approaching the grill, setting out seats in advance for people to sit two metres apart, and sitting alongside each other rather than face to face.
Can’t say it looks like a barrel of laughs. Bagsy not sit next to the guy with the guitar.
Brazilian Scientists Challenge Concept of “the Science”, Defend Hydroxychloroquine
A group of more than 25 Brazilian scientists have written an open letter, questioning the idea that indiscriminately locking down whole populations, as well as other responses to the pandemic, is supported by “the science”. In particular, it challenges the idea that “the science” has concluded hydroxychloroquine shouldn’t be used to treat patients with COVID-19.
The letter has been coordinated by Marcos Nogueira Eberlin. He’s a member of the Brazilian Academy of Sciences and holds a PhD in chemistry from the University of Campinas. Founder of the Thomson Mass Spectrometry Laboratory and winner of the prestigious Thomson Medal (2016), Eberlin is recognized worldwide as one of the most productive mass spectrometrists ever, having published close to 1,000 scientific articles. He discovered the Eberlin Reaction during his work on gas phase ion chemistry, and he and his research group introduced EASI (Easy Ambient Sonic-spray Ionization), an ionization technique used in mass spectrometry. In other words, a highly-respected, mainstream scientist.
It’s not the usual dry, scholarly dirge, but an angry, impassioned screed. (The caps haven’t been added by me.) I’m going to quote the opening few paragraphs in full because they’re so good.
During this pandemic, the term “science” has been used “ad nauseam”, that is, has been repeated to exhaustion: “Science, science, science”, “I’m pro-science”, “For from the science, through the science and to the science I guide my decisions and acts” and “I am, therefore, fully right to do so”. It is clear that the intention here is to lead all of us to the idea of decisions based on something unquestionable and infallible, as scientific as law, as the law of gravity.
Groups of “science experts” or famous YouTube scientists, many of them still “beginners” in science, some of them with a minimal or no experience in fighting pandemics, are selected by the establishment and the media to give “scientific aura” for the lockdown and the condemnation of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as an ineffective drug; worse, as a deadly poison.
That disastrous apocalyptic simulations from the “Imperial College” – this pompous name that brings us to the idea of a center of excellence of infallible, omnipotent and unquestionable knowledge, an “College of the Empire” – are being used to place everyone at home, and then, to compare data as being the absolute reference of the truth. “We did something and as a result, we reduced those many deaths. Therefore: ‘blessed be the science!’”.
But what kind of “science” is that to which they are appealing? And who, in the name of this “science”, would be allowed to speak? Science (I know that there are controversies, as scientists even debate on its meaning) is “the dispassionate search for the truth about the Universe and life”. But ironically, we seek truths that we don’t even know what those truths would be like, or where they would be found. For this reason, sometimes, ironically, even when scientists find a truth that is indeed true, yet they doubt that they have found it. We literally zigzag in the dark, searching for solutions to our problems. Therefore, we sometimes say that: “eating eggs is bad, it increases cholesterol”; and sometimes: “eggs are good, eat at ease”.
Richard Feynman put it this way: “Science is the culture of doubt”. And I would add, “science is the culture of debate, of divergence of opinions”.
Rarely, there are situations in which we reach consensus in science, even a momentary consensus. Some defend the “Big Bang” and the theory of evolution, others, including myself, are skeptical of them. Some defend with data and papers the central role of men in global warming, others defend, with the same data and papers, that human activity is irrelevant. Scientists are human beings, therefore, skeptics and enquirers who can and should speak for themselves, like all scientists have the right to do, but NEVER A SCIENTIST OR A GROUP OF THEM CAN DECLARE TO BE AUTHORIZED TO SPEAK IN THE NAME OF SCIENCE!
Nobody, absolutely nobody is allowed to speak for science or declare that he is “been guided” by science! In times of pandemic, this impossibility is even greater, as we face an unknown enemy. Data is still being collected and researches are being performed and published by scientists divided by their worldviews, and by their political and party preferences.
Whoever said he acted in the name of science, dishonestly usurped science prestige. For what type of “science” is this, unanimous and consensual, that no one has ever heard of? Could someone give me its address so I can confirm its consent? Its phone, email and WhatsApp?
For defenders of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), the next section is manna from heaven, ripping apart the studies that purport to show it’s ineffective or, worse, dangerous.
The Manaus’ study with chloroquine (CQ) performed here in Brazil and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) [1], is emblematic to this discussion of “science”. Scientists there used, the manuscript reveals, lethal doses in debilitated patients, many in severe conditions and with comorbidities. The profiles of the groups do not seem to have been “randomized”, since a clear “preference” in the HIGH DOSE group for risk factors is noted. Chloroquine, which is more toxic than HCQ, was used, and it seems that they even made “childish mistakes” in simple stoichiometric calculations, doubling the dosage with the error. I’m incapable of judging intentions, but justice will do it. The former Brazilian Health Minister Luiz Henrique Mandetta quoted this study, supported it, and based on it, categorically stated: “I do not approve HCQ because I am based on ‘science, science, science’!”.
Definitely worth reading in full.
Incidentally, the recent HCQ study in the Lancet that led to the worldwide suspension of clinical trials of the drug and hospitals around the world yanking it from their treatment protocols has been criticised in another open letter signed by a group of scientists, this one addressed to Richard Horton, the Editor of the Lancet. It’s not quite as angry as the Brazilian letter, but almost. Also worth reading in full.
Trump Terminates the WHO
Donald Trump has said he’s “terminating” America’s relationship with the World Health Organisation (WHO), having already said the international body will get no more US funding.
The US president cited the body’s ties to Beijing as he made the announcement yesterday, saying: “China has total control over the World Health Organisation.”
Does this mean we’ll now be able to challenge some of the WHO’s wilder claims about the virus on YouTube? Interestingly, the WHO has just done another U-turn – is this number 657? – recommending against the wearing of masks.
As I’ve said before, if you’re the YouTube employee in charge of removing any content that contradicts the WHO’s recommendations about how to stay safe, keeping up with the organisation’s constant flip flops must be a nightmare.
Church Leaders Threaten Government With Judicial Review if Churches Aren’t Allowed to Reopen
A coalition of church leaders has written to the Government, threatening a Judicial Review if the ban on churches opening isn’t lifted. The pre-action letter supported by Christian Concern and the Christian Legal Centre argues that blanket ‘lockdown’ restrictions imposed on all churches are both unlawful and unnecessary, and asks the Government to prioritise the re-opening of churches as part of its exit-strategy.
The letter, which you can read here, says the blanket ban is disproportionate, given that lots of churches closed voluntarily and those that remained opened introduced social distancing measures. It also makes the argument that the ban contravenes the separation of church and state:
While the short-term practical difference between state regulation and church self-regulation may be limited in present circumstances, the principle of Church autonomy is extremely important in the broader constitutional context, and must be protected for the benefit of present and future generations.
Among the list of 24 claimants requesting an urgent meeting with the Government to discuss lifting the ban are Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, President, Oxford Centre for Training, Research, Advocacy and Dialogue (OXTRAD); Pastor Matthew Ashimolowo, Senior Pastor, Kingsway International Christian Centre (KICC); and Revd. Dr David Hathaway, President of the Eurovision Mission to Europe.
Pastor Ade Omooba MBE, Christian Concern’s co-founder and one of the claimants in the letter, says:
It cannot be right that at present it is lawful to go to a bike shop, B&Q, visit a chiropractor or dry cleaner, and not be allowed to receive Holy Communion or engage in silent prayer in a church.
Similar legal challenges have been successful in other countries. Last week, France’s Supreme Court ruled that the French Government’s absolute ban on religious gatherings as part of its lockdown restrictions is unlawful, and ordered the Government to relax restrictions on religious worship.
The Government should lift the ban immediately or face the consequences.
Government Publishes Chart That Inadvertently Discredits its Own Policy
The Cabinet Office Briefing Room issued a chart yesterday (see above) showing that the Government’s first “test” – “We must be confident that we are able to provide sufficient critical care and specialist treatment right across the UK,” in the words of the Prime Minister – has been met. This was part of the rationale for allowing up to six people from different households to meet up from June 1st.
But look closely at the chart and you’ll see that in the small print on the left-hand side is says occupancy of mechanical ventilator beds in the NHS peaked on April 10th at 41%. In other words, the risk of the NHS’s critical care capacity being overwhelmed – something flagged up in Neil Ferguson’s March 16th paper and one of the key reasons for locking down the country on March 23rd – was exaggerated. We didn’t need to remain in our homes to “Protect the NHS” after all.
Another embarrassing implication of that number – only 41% of the NHS’s ventilators used – is that it makes a mockery of the Government’s wartime-style drive to manufacture more ventilators. Just as well, since the entire effort – dubbed the “ventilator challenge” – was a fiasco from start to finish. Not that it would have mattered if there had been a shortage and the “challenge” was a success, since ventilators are almost completely useless when it comes to treating patients with COVID-19.
Six Reasons the Cure is Worse Than the Disease
In the latest anti-lockdown jeremiad by Professor Ramesh Thakur, the former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations lists six reasons why the official response to the pandemic will end up causing more harm that it has prevented:
- Lockdowns will have a negative impact on mental health and lead to more suicides.
- With elective surgeries and routine screenings suspended, many diseases that would be treatable if caught in time will end up killing hundreds of thousands.
- People have been so terrorised by the propaganda unleashed by governments around the world that people requiring crucial care have refused to go to hospital, whether through fear of catching the virus, or because being good citizens they don’t want to trouble a badly over-burdened health system.
- The lockdowns reduced the amount of time people spent in the fresh air and sunshine, with some people being cooped up in high-risk environments like congested living complexes.
- Elderly hospital patients infected with COVID-19 were discharged into care and nursing homes to deadly effect, accounting for more than half of all Covid deaths.
- The deadliest impact of the lockdowns will be on the world’s poorest billion people over the next decade along multiple sub-pathways.
Worth reading in full.
Rioters in Minneapolis Comply With Mayor’s Order to Wear Face Masks in Shopping Malls
I got an email from a reader in Minneapolis yesterday, the American city that was set ablaze by rioters on Tuesday night following the death in police custody of George Floyd, a 46 year-old African-American, and has been burning ever since.
We’ve been a bit busy here in Minneapolis dealing with the city being burned down around us. It was oddly relaxing to think about Chinese viruses. All of the businesses I service – my customers – are either in ashes, boarded up or looted.
Here is the joke: Why did Minneapolis police stand by and watch the looters and arsonists destroy hundreds of businesses? Because the looters were complying with the Mayor’s order to wear a mask inside retail establishments.
Interestingly, that order took effect Tuesday at 5p.m. When did the rioting start? Tuesday evening….
Round-Up
And on to the round-up of all the stories I’ve noticed, or which have been been brought to my attention, in the last 24 hours:
- ‘YouTube Cancels Another Video for Coronavirus Wrongthink‘ – James Delingpole Ridicules YouTube for censoring my video making the case against lockdowns
- ‘The Delingpod: James Delingpole Interviews Professor Dolores Cahill‘ – A double-helping from James today. In this one he interviews the dissident Irish virologist
- ‘Scots pensioner went for five days without food because she was scared to leave her flat during lockdown‘ – We’ll be hearing a lot more stories like this unfortunately
- ‘The lockdown’s founding myth‘ – Excellent reporting job by Christopher Snowdon in the Critic, thoroughly debunking the narrative that has the Government initially ignoring scientific advice about locking down the country and only reluctantly agreeing to do it once it had paid attention to “the science”
- ‘Two thirds of people contacted through tracing did not fully cooperate, pilot scheme finds‘ – Report in the BMJ about a pilot ‘test-and-trace’ scheme in Sheffield in which two-thirds of the people contacted refused to cooperate. Why then roll it out nationally?
- ‘Monkeys ‘escape with COVID-19 samples’ after attacking lab assistant‘ – No, not the plot line from the next Planet of the Apes sequel. This actually happened yesterday in India. Are these monkeys available to take over from Boris and pals?
- ‘Why most Covid-19 deaths won’t be from the virus‘ – Excellent piece for BBC Future by Zaria Gorvett summarising the case against lockdowns. Welcome to the club, Zaria
- ‘Scientists are intrigued by lack of lockdown looting‘ – The Times reports that the Government’s scientific advisors have expressed surprise over the lack of rioting during the crisis. Let’s hope nothing happens to confirm their fears
Theme Tune Suggestions From Readers
Some more suggestions for theme songs from readers: “Worry” by Blodwyn Pig, “When Will I See You Again?” by the Three Degrees (can’t believe we haven’t had that yet) and “Locked Up In Jail” by John Lee Hooker.
Small Businesses That Have Reopened
A couple of weeks ago, Lockdown Sceptics launched a searchable directory of open businesses across the UK. The idea is to celebrate those retail and hospitality businesses that have reopened, as well as help people find out what has opened in their area. But we need your help to build it, so we’ve created a form you can fill out to tell us about those businesses that have opened near you. Please visit the page and let us know about those brave folk who are doing their bit to get our country back on its feet.
Shameless Begging Bit
Thanks as always to those of you who made a donation in the last 24 hours to pay for the upkeep of this site. It still takes me about nine hours a day, what with doing these updates, moderating your comments and commissioning original material. If you feel like donating, however paltry the amount, please click here. And if you want to flag up any stories or links I should include in tomorrow’s update, email me here.
And Finally…
A reader made a slight adjustment to this Lord of the Rings meme. Works pretty well…
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Has anyone read the SAGE minutes yet? Does the Bloomberg story hold water / is it reflected in the minutes?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-28/top-aide-to-u-k-s-johnson-pushed-scientists-to-back-lockdown
Haven’t read them but the story certainly reflects what has always seemed likely. The ‘scientists’ are just there as cover!
Of note is that 4 participants in SAGE meetings did not consent to be named when the minutes were released..
Announced by Boris March 23rd, led everyone to believe it started that evening, was not enacted into law until 26th march.
There’s nothing on March 23rd other than closing of schools, but I now can’t remember when we fully locked down?
March 23rd. Measures came into force on… 26th I think
I’m past caring and so should you.
Throw them all in the gulag.
I’m not entirely sure what the downvotes are for – Just being thorough.
FWIW I’ve read *some* of the minutes and SAGE are discussing nosocomial transmission and deaths caused by the “social measures” at a very early stage.
https://www.paulchaplin.life/blog-original/lockdown-boris-violated-sage-advice
An excoriating critique and timeline of the SAGE minutes (and the lacuna in same) leading up to the lockdown. Quote:
Interesting stuff as ever, again not really much covered in mainstream media alas.
One question to commenters out there if I may – the number of 8,000 new infections per day is being quoted as the current rate by Edmunds and others. Does anyone know how this breaks down – hospital/care home/community – and what the implications of this are for further easing of lockdown? And where they are coming from actually?
Thanks.
Worldometer says less than 2500 new infections
If you look at the graph on official website, it is actually around 500 cases a day! https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/#category=regions&map=rate
And this with loads more testing than at the beginning.a
Not surprised though that cases are being inflated. The deaths graphs is starting to make the inflation in the number of deaths obvious.
This is the ONS estimate for new community-only (non-hospital/care home) daily infections based on (small) recent samples.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52837593
So I would take it with a pinch or two of salt.
Cheers, this is very helpful; appreciate you taking the time to reply.
It’s in England, not the UK.
A cupful!
Although even if it’s reasonably accurate it’s hardly something to worry about.
It’s a legitimate estimate from the ONS as Marcus said, extrapolated from a sample of about 18,000 people.
I see no reason to doubt it.
The implications for the lockdown are that the virus is still spreading slowly in spite of it, as you would expect.
For TTT to work they reckon you need to get it into the 100s. This may even be true. But the only ways to achieve that are to wait several months with the current restrictions or to try to tighten them up (and hope that “works”). Neither is a realistic option. Oh and you also need a TTT system that isn’t a complete and utter shambles and that people will respect.
Relaxing restrictions may mean it goes up a bit. If it does that’s not a bad thing. The only viable strategy is the same as it always was: herd immunity and protect the vulnerable. I think the government may have finally accepted this.
Many thanks for this, much appreciated. Certainly helps to put that rather out of context original figure into perspective.
So I said no reason to doubt it but what they actually found was about 45 positive tests out of 18193 giving them their 0.24%.
Unless their test had a specificity of better than 99.76% many of them could be false positives.
When the thing you’re looking for has such a low prevalence the specificity of the test becomes very important.
Generally the PCR test is thought to have good specificity (its sensitivity sucks but that’s not a problem when prevalence is low) but it can sometimes pick up dead fragments of virus which are false positives in this context.
The claimed range for their 95CI is about 4800 to 12000, but the specificity of the test is likely to have been calibrated on never-infected samples, not on ones that may have bits of smashed up viral RNA floating around in them.
I read a report of a US paper that reckoned to be truly effective over a long period TTT would need to test 22-35 million a day – all frontline workers daily and everyone else at least twice a week. https://www.vox.com/2020/4/13/21215133/coronavirus-testing-covid-19-tests-screening That sounds a bit OTT and I imagine they were aiming for close to zero deaths. If you jusy want to control the spread and flatten the curve you’d need fewer. But I still imagine we’re a long way from being able to deliver that. It would cost a fortune, too. The article I link to has an interesting sentence in it “test test test until the whole damn pandemic is over”. I wonder what they meant or even if they really know what they meant. Until it is not a pandemic any more? Aren’t we close to that point? Until it is completely eliminated – that will never happen. Until there is an effective vaccine and/or treatment? That could take a while. I suppose we could stay locked down for the many months it would take to put in place effective TTT, but we’d then be stuck with TTT possibly forever. So your conclusion seems obvious to me… Read more »
The Mail picked up in the sage minutes that the community spread (as opposed to hospitals and care homes) was only 0.5 BEFORE lockdown.
Says it all I think.
(Tbh i think even that is bullshit, because I think the fabled R value is modelled bullshit)
It remains a disgrace that the ‘R’ figure is given as an absolute in any case, with no attempt to mark differentiation between community, hospital and care home figures, or even between regions. One of the ways in which a sense of doom is allowed to pervade the daily briefings and feed the media narrative on this.
Comrade Drakeford in Wales is fixated on his Rs, though he doesn’t know them from his elbow.
It’s been pretty much the same pattern in other countries. The R value was near or below 1.0 when lockdowns were impemented.
..which makes social distancing a complete nonsense!
Do you/they have a link for that?
It was in the actual paper today (yes my Dad buys The Fail, and I read it for Hitch but apparently he’s not in there on a saturday gggrgrr), so maybe it’s on the website. They didn’t quote which part of the sage minutes it was from, but they did specifically say R0 was discussed at 0.5 in March before lockdown
When they were telling us it was way closer to 1, I might add.
They were, and are, just boldly lying in those daily briefings
Hi Giles. I was wondering that aswell. I’m from Scotland and every week they give a breakdown of deaths and % of where they all occurred. Roughly 50% of deaths happen in care homes so surely its only logical to think 50% of new cases are in care homes too. I would also like to know how many have caught it in hospital.
The 8,000 figure comes from the ONS. Not known for its stellar leadership team nor is it staffed by the brightest and best. Goodness only knows how they get the figure of 8,000. Blind leading the blind comes to mind.
The 8,000 is roughly 54,000 divided by seven. 54,000 is ONS’s estimated number of new infections per week between 11 May and 24 May 2020. See here https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/28may2020
Thanks for the explanation re where ONS number comes from. The internal goings on at ONS, however, cause me concern whenever an estimate is their basis.
It’s fine to ask, but none of these numbers justify lockdown.
One of the most fascinating things to observe during this period of mass insanity is the general acceptance by people of the curtailment of their normal liberties as though we were in a period of total war. I suppose during total war secrecy is of the essence .
The data on hospital admissions , bed occupancy , covid patients etc should be generally available especially now when there is so much good news, with the vast majority of hospitals in this country observably half empty . However the policy of the government is to keep these figures under wraps and officials are told in the strongest terms not to share data. How odd. It is as though the government wish to continue the policy of fear.
I think it’s obvious that’s what they want.
True. But I fsil to see how anybidy can read the guidance if sicially distanced barbecues without screaming with kauhter. And the Daily Mail,s little route map … ih my..😂😂😅🤣😄😃😀
All you have to do I drive past any NHS facility with car parking facilities. Ordinarily you struggle to find anywhere to leave your car, not at the current time. Car Parks are quiet.
More and more people ain’t buying it anymore. The fear mongering masked loons don’t bother me, dwindling and getting more and more ridiculous by the day. It’s the apathetic that are pissing me off the most, too accepting and ‘confortable’ with it all, thinking it will all ‘blow over’. I’m ok, am furloughed, quite a nice holiday types… As our futures and freedoms are at huge risk
was at a beach front last night hundreds of people if not thousands all wandering around, no social distancing, drinking beer, playing songs, eating ice cream. The real people are sick of being told what to do and will no longer go along with the lunatics. F**k you if you want the lockdown to continue in any way. Nothing less than the full restoration of society now or the people will just do it anyway. This bollocks has to go.
I see the cops in Northern Ireland got a kicking last night when they tried to break up a group if 200 young people. Much more of this to come, if the government doesn’t bring a swift end to this farce.
Trying to find this…where did you see it posted? Thanks
Same in Manchester’s ‘student land’ last night. Bars open serving take away alcohol to lots of people standing on the pavement. Does this mean all the bed-wetters are cowering indoors frickened to death?
Most of them are sitting at home enjoying themselves drinking supermarket booze and watching pornography courtesy of the free money from the taxpayer.
the pubs where i was were open too. By the end of the night folk were sitting in the pub and standing at the bar. it was glorious
What region are you in?
Beaches busy here in SE Cornwall.
I’m very glad you dug up that mid-March John Edmunds interview – I still remember him saying vehemently that the only alternative to herd immunity was to eradicate every case of covid “in the world … IN THE WORLD!!” (his emphasis). He had certainly changed his tune by the time the online Cambridge Union debate (with P Hitchens et al) came around in late April – by which time he was arguing in support of lockdown.
More from Ko Ko, do add to it: When the world regains its senses and the reckoning begins, I’ve got a little list, I’ve got a little list Of thugs and wimps and bullies who must answer for their sins, And they’ll none of ’em be missed, they’ll none of ‘em be missed. There’s the fornicating expert who despises his own rules, The SAGES who despise us all and take us all for fools; The servile politicians, solid wood from ear to ear, The BBC, dispensing the pornography of fear, And the morons and bed-wetters who on cowardice insist: They never would be missed, they never would be missed. There’s the shutter-off of playgrounds, paths and parks and even trees, The joyless pessimist, I’ve got him on my list; The neighbour who reports each normal person that she sees, She never would be missed, she never would be missed. There’s the vicious teaching unions who, in cowardice and spite, Inflict appalling tortures on each hapless little mite; There’s the spineless crawling bishops whom we’d do well to ignore, The twit who puts a mask on when he creeps out through his door, And the silly clapping seals who just don’t… Read more »
This is brilliant! Thank you.
Brilliant!!! Now if we could get someone to record this.
Genius!
Sad that topsy-turveydom is an accurate depiction of our world. G&S would be seen as realists were they around today.
“From every kind of man
Obedience I expect;”
Brilliant! I’ll commit this to memory!
I remember watching the channel 4 interview with Edmunds and the hysterical silicon valley loon and being reassured at the time by the calm, reasonable and realistic words of the epidemiologist who seemed to have a grasp of the obvious realities of the situation. He appears to have sold out.
I recall feeling the same up to 16 March when suddenly it shifted from relative calm sense to crazy panic. I still haven’t recovered from the sense of betrayal and that this has all been a baseless imposition on me.
Same, was feeling more than happy with our approach in the first half of March and couldn’t imagine the British ever accepting a lockdown, of course we’d just keep calm and carry on. Then around 16 March I sat at a table in a cafe working for an hour with two twenty something blokes at the next table talking utter tripe about the deadly killer virus and outraged that we weren’t following the lead of Italy and Spain and began to feel a creeping unease that I didn’t live in the country I thought I did.
Yes. This is the thing that’s most affected me too. At first I felt a lot of anger at the sheer stupidity, but it dissipated pretty quickly and left behind crushing disappointment. So…. I stayed here in this country (after having many opportunities to move away etc. Many friends abroad etc. Speak three languages etc.) because I love it. I voted to free it from the tyranny of a certain suprapolitical union for the same reason.
These are people I thought I loved.
It upsets me actually. It really does.
At least the Scandinavians seem to get it now. At least the Germans and the Spanish got angry. At least the Italians are starting to get mental. At least the Aussies were fairly laid back and now are ignoring their gvt’s crap. At least the Belarussians and the Tanzanians
gave no fucks.
What happened to the British?
Still bed cowering.
In your Telegraph piece today you conclude a calculation that the Covid IFR may be about 0.26 per cent compared with the IFR for seasonal flu between 0.1 and 0.2 per cent. Did this take into account the novel way of certifying death with/of Corona virus as explained by Dr John Lee in the Spectator? Perhaps the IFR is approximately the same as flu?
blob:https://dailysceptic.org/78b6e93e-288d-4817-8f0c-0b068d3f487d
Look at the state of this lotblob:https://dailysceptic.org/18fde204-b897-40b2-a54b-aed6b9dc63b9
Sorry, can these be deleted. Was trying to post a photo but it won’t work.
Levitt did well but they’re totally convinced it woz lockdown (or social distancing) wot did it so we need to up our game and really show in simple terms why that can’t be true. Examples, data, dates which prove it beyond doubt. Without that we’ll get nowhere with the fanatics who have a huge amount invested in it working.
The pre-lockdown voluntary precautions that people were taking probably did reduce R0. Seroprevalence _is_ low and this is probably due to a combination of factors, including some unknowns about innate and cross-immune responses, but also due to reduced R0.
The killer fact against lockdown is the just the number of actual deaths in the UK of the under 60s without pre-existing conditions, which is less than 300. Even including preconditions, it’s about 2000. Out of several million infections by any estimate. These were deaths “with” Covid but there’s no need even to quibble about that.
Whichever way you cut it it’s a negligible risk and there is therefore no justification for anyone of working age not to go back to work, school, the pub, the opera, the grand prix and the shops.
This does not rely on IFR estimates, fitting Gompertz curves or on how many people may have CD4+ T cells lying around matching funny bits of coronavirus orfeome. It’s just historical fact.
There is a real debate involving those considerations about whether there was a case for non-pharmacological interventions back in March. But the debate about whether to end the lockdown now is a very short one.
Doesn’t that by itself just justify ending it for people under 60? If social distancing is effective for reducing the spread why is the growth rate dropping before it starts, why is there no consistency in how social distancing affects it, why is there no new wave as social distancing is eased, and why is Belarus not the worst affected country in the world?
Any “social distancing” that reduces R to less than 1 has an almost identical effect. We know the epidemic started early (antibody tests of blood donors in Milan is the biggest smoking gun) and has low IFR (Iceland and multiple serology studies in non-overwhelmed places). Therefore by the time we even started washing our hands it’s likely we already had some immunity. That’s why just simple pre-lockdown measures were enough to cause the epidemic to peak, and why we see the same results everywhere regardless of their measures– provided they exceed the minimum required they will all look the same. Whatever Sweden were doing, and the UK before the “full” lockdown, was more than enough. It may also be that even without any measures the epidemics would have peaked when they did anyway, but to be fair we don’t know that, and the serology numbers are a bit on the low side. So if we go right back to shouting in other’s faces in pubs when we have colds we might get a few more cases. But it’s not a big deal if we do. If this theory is right then that’s also why there are no second waves– nobody… Read more »
I think that mostly sounds right. The question is what is the minimum needed to bring it down? Even Belarus has done some. Is it just keeping a bit of distance especially indoors and hand washing?
There is still a mystery though why the effect of starting social distancing is so inconsistent. If you look at the interval between a city starting social distancing (based on public transport use dropping off) and its deaths peaking or slowing down there is very little consistency – weeks apart in many cases. Why is that if it’s a minimum that’s enough? Conversely if you look at the interval between when deaths start to surge and when they peak it’s largely the same everywhere regardless of the measures taken or when. I think it all needs looking at in much more detail with all assumptions suspended.
The minimum is just staying at home when you’re symptomatic. You’re infectious for about 4 or 5 days. If you stay at home for just 2 or 3 (never mind 2 weeks) you cut R0 in half. That is enough to reduce herd immunity threshold from a hypothetical 60% to 20%.
I agree that it’s impossible to see the “signal” of lockdowns in the data, which does imply that they were all too late to make any difference (the “minimum” was already lower than normal life).
With other viruses, like the ‘common’ cold, people are often not very good at staying at home – a lot of people would go to work despite cold symptoms. Now we are doing more than that ‘minimum’..
They may only be reporting deaths of people who actually died from the virus itself, rather than ‘with’ the virus?
Wodka and saunas. Please keep up. 🙂
And those people under 60 are exactly the demographic that carried on working in busy environments, supermarkets, deliveries, hospitals etc. So why isn’t there a correlation between those people and higher deaths. Supermarket workers should have been dropping like flies, yet they are under represented in the numbers.
Well, whilst I generally agree with much of what you say, It is clear that it’s not just “pre-lockdown voluntary precautions” as they clearly can’t be responsible for the rate of growth diminishing even in late February (when the disease was barely heard of, and the govt were still insisting that there was no community transmission), and continuing to do so consistently throughout the epidemic despite a number of different things being trialed. The graph below shows that this is the case in a number of different countries too.
I’m not competent to suggest why this is, or what (clearly natural) thing has done it, but it clearly is the case nonetheless.
This is a great article talking about confirmation bias and actually looking at the data.
https://hectordrummond.com/2020/05/27/thaddeus-michaels-fixating-on-bad-evidence/
I can’t argue with that graph, except to say that small changes in R will be hard to see on a gradient of a log plot. I guess the missing piece of the puzzle is likely to be that R0 is rather low to start with, probably because of the asymptomatic cases, which although infectious in theory, are likely to be much less infectious. When I first started looking at these graphs around the end of March I was assuming HIT of about 50% and IFR of 0.1% or so which is how Iceland was turning out. They seemed consistent with those numbers. In other words, I was estimating prevalence from the IFR and the number of deaths. But it turns out prevalence is much lower and apparent “IFR” much higher because of the nosocomial infection problem– infection rates probably around 80% in hospitals and care homes, but more like 10% outside them. We know there was a huge nosocomial problem (more than half the deaths on most Western European countries are officially owned up to being in care homes), and we know from the low IFR, early onset, wide geographical distribution, the fact that prevalence is about the same… Read more »
I think a lot of people are realising that the risk to themselves is minimal – what is keeping them scared to move about freely is the fear that they may catch the virus, be asymptomatic but inadvertently pass it to someone more vulnerable. This risk is often mentioned by the MSM..
But the same applies to any infectious disease including the common cold, which can kill very frail people. So if you employ the rational that people don’t move freely because they are scared of passing it on then the world stops forever.
I suspect it’s rather exaggerated. Although you can infect someone when asymptomatic it will be much harder. Even children (who are usually very good at spreading viruses) struggle to infect anyone with SARS2.
The high number of asymptomatic cases is probably a large part of why R0 is quite low.
What matters is the average. The press get all hysterical about how you might catch it from a surface that was touched 72h ago by someone asymptomatic etc but it’s unlikely, so it doesn’t matter. Any guidance designed to reduce transmission just needs to concentrate on what’s most probable and easiest to manage. So basically just stay at home when you’re ill.
The R number is of no consequence if most of the population are not at risk.
They have been talking through their Rs from the beginning.
We should have protected the vulnerable instead of murdering those in care homes.
Agree 100%. It’s still interesting to see what R0 is and how it all pans out, but the strategy is the same either way.
Guy, do you have an authoritative source for that ‘300 fatalities among people under 60 with no pre-existing conditions’ figure?
So much available data is/are rubbish. The killer argument, I think, is a different one, used by Sweden, that the data simply was not available to justify a lockdown.
That has recently been echoed by Norway:
‘The institute reported at the start of this month that the reproduction number had already fallen to as low as 1.1 even before the lockdown was announced on March 12.’
“The scientific backing was not good enough,” Stoltenberg said of the decision to close down schools and kindergartens, a policy her agency had not recommend even at the time it was instituted in March.’
https://www.thelocal.no/20200522/norway-could-have-controlled-infection-without-lockdown-health-chief
If the evidence was not there in the first place, and it most certainly was not, only a batty model, then, ultimately, given a just passably competent inquiry (unfortunately never a given!) then there should be no place to hide.
This is an interesting article re Denmark – so much is political: https://www.thelocal.dk/20200529/leaked-emails-show-how-denmarks-pm-steam-rollered-her-own-health-agency
With luck the tide might finally be turning around to favour our opinion, The Guardian has finally started publishing some stuff that is at least slightly anti-lockdown. Even a bastion of lockdown-foreverist-zealots has had to bow to reason in one article. Now we need to push home the point, get our old normal back, and get a hard ban enforced against governments ever being able to use such intrusive powers as lockdowns ever again.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/may/29/britain-shame-coronavirus-deaths-economic-collapse
There’s also an article in the telegraph, perhaps a satire one I can’t quite tell, but it suggests that Cumming’s breaking of illegitimate lockdown restrictions was a masterstroke of genius, and even if it is supposed to be atrie it’s arguments add up very well. Especially given how the Durham and Barnard castle reasonable excursions happened early during the assault on civil liberties, but the news only came out at the time when the Gov wanted to start getting our country off our arses.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/05/30/people-think-dominic-cummings-made-terrible-blunder-actually/
As far as I can see it, the entire SAGE panel need to be sacked. These unelected so-called “experts” have no clue what they’re doing and continue to take such a ridiculously over-cautious approach, they would prefer us to stay at home forever, wrapped in cotton wool bubbles.
To all the current SAGE members, every one of you can F**K right off. How are these lunatics holding our country to ransom? We’d get far more sense (and much faster) from a bunch of monkeys attempting to write the complete works of Shakespeare.
Health & Safety on steroids – Ian Botham’s comment sums it up ‘H&S gets in places where even water can’t’.
I even think they’ll try and take control from government, a SAGE coup. They all need telling to fuck off, but no doubt government will cave and we’ll be back to square zero next week.
The entire SAGE panel needs to be investigated up to the hilt, for links to Big Pharma. Forensic accountants should go through the bank accounts and financial dealings of EVERY member.
Have any of these so-called “experts” signed personal deals for big money from Gates & Co. in return for extending the lockdown until the trillion-dollar vaccine is rolled out?
If such is found to be the case, then such criminal “scientists” should stand trial for High Treason. Life imprisonment for the guilty.
Try THAT for a friggin’ lockdown.
Nah. They should be made to reenact Sisyphus for the rest of their life like some freak show and we the public could pelt them with whatever we want.
They deserve to be humiliated for the rest of their lives for the damage they have inflicted on us.
A bunch of monkeys pressing red or blue buttons would do better. At least they’d be about 50% right.
It’s good to get these updates everyday but nothing changes. If anything, the government seems to be doubling down. What do we have to do to end this nonsense?
Riot.
Believe me I’m getting close.
Things may change when the furlough scheme is tapered off and people lose their jobs..
When they end it, they know they will have to have a public inquiry……….
Let’s hope it’s an independent inquiry, with a wide scope. Let’s hope it ends some careers.
the opposite will happen – OBE’s aplenty
No chance – it’ll probably be Lady Whitewash!
And they’ll have to finally deal with the Brexit fiasco.
Oh it’s changing alright. I see it every day, far too slowly for my liking but essentially lots people just need to ignore the government and carry on as normal as much as possible. I know I have.
They know themselves that their guidelines are bollocks.
Took a bike ride to the larger Tesco today, deliberately locked it up in the queuing section. You should have seen the parting of the waves when I came back out, lept over the red tape on the middle of what was now a large queue to go get it. One idiot almost fell over trying to ‘distance’, it was equally joyous but profoundly sad at the same
* time
Professor Noakes was asked by the House of Commons Select Committee of Science and Technology to explain the scientific basis for the two metre social distancing rule. Her answer: the precautionary principle.
So apparently “it might be harmful” now constitutes science – and these are the people the government is relying on for scientific advice. This is beyond satire.
By that logic they really need to ban smoking, drinking and swimming in large bodies of water. And driving. And flying. And walking outside. And climbing ladders. And eating food raw. And eating food that might not be cooked enough. And contact sports. And extreme sports. And…. Sports.
AND F*KING EVERYTHING
Yeah. Ban living. Save lives.
Do these people have children who will be subject to the absurd new social distancing measures that will be imposed when schools re-open???
In 2019 from the week ending 15th March to the week ending 17th May (10 weeks) ONS statistics show an average of 1401 per week (200/day) died of respiratory diseases (ICD-10 J00-J99) ICD-10 v 2013 (IRIS). In the same period 2018, the figures were 1635 per week (233/day). Similarly for the following 10 weeks in 2019, 24th May until 26th July, an average of 1131 per week (161/day) died of the same causes. Again in 2018 for the same period the figures were 1116 per week (159/day). By comparison in the last 7 days an average of 252 people per day have died from Covid 19 and the death rate is falling each week. These figures indicate that deaths from flu and pneumonia do not vanish into thin air but continue week in week out, year in year out. Likewise with Covid 19 we can probably expect to see a similar situation for the foreseeable future. The Government should now stop issuing the daily bulletins and giving daily updates, which only cause more anxiety and are in the main meaningless. The death rates for Covid 19 are down to figures that are no longer outweighing other causes of death and therefore should… Read more »
Yes, we just need the ONS to confirm we’re back in normal range, which will hopefully be on Tuesday or the following week.
“The Government should now stop issuing the daily bulletins and giving daily updates”
Totally agree. Not sure they should ever have been daily, and they should certainly have been presented with context – the excess over a normal week, or last year, so people could understand the relative importance.
But their function was to promote fear and compliance and feign transparency. Context and relative importance doesn’t come into it.
Not many have any confidence in the covid 19 infection data in Britain: ‘Some labs will however still need to keep using the PHE SARS-CoV-2RdRp assay in the interim and in keeping with the requirement for ongoing review of performance and validation of new/improved assays, some discordant results have been identified. Summary of the initial results: 1. There is considerable diversity of molecular platforms, reagents, kits and assay performance conditions in PHE and NHS laboratories providing SARS-CoV-2 molecular detection 2. There is evidence of quality assurance difficulties for key reagents due to global supply chain issues 3. Shortages of swabs and transport medium have led to local variations in sampling practice which may impact on assay performance through the introduction of inhibitors into biochemical reactions 4. There is no evidence of viral genetic drift as a basis for altered sensitivity of assay 5. Enzyme performance from external suppliers has degraded compared with original validation performance.’ https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zoki1xUKuY15JmPujZXd-mMjXn0K_2GM/view That is, admittedly, a PHE document from 11 April, but given the overall performance of the state bureaucracy so far, on a scale of 1-10, where 10 is very confident, how confident can we be that all testing problems have been resolved by now.… Read more »
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/0/will-life-look-like-year-today/
This is terrible, I can’t believe things like this are actively being written and put online.
Hopefully it will make some sheeple think for a change.
I have had no interest in anything the government has said about the virus since they changed the way deaths were being recorded.
The one thing I believe this government might do is take us out of the EU without a deal. And I’m not 100% sure of that.
We won’t be leaving the EU. They’ll come up with some covid related reason why it has to be put back, and back.
Maybe. But in that case why fight so hard to keep Cummings?
Anyway, we’ll see.
Because Johnson works for Cummings, not the other way around. This SAGE lot are the ones in charge and calling the shots.
The EU will collapse soon anyway.
Ah…. Now I think that is a strong possibility now. But then again with the turmoil in the EU with respect to the huge bailouts especially for the southern economies, I would think that the UK’s hand in trade negotiations is probably a lot stronger now
Had my first flat white in two months with the hubby and it was great, again lots of people milling about and no-one cared about social distancing. Not many masked zombies out and about.
Also had to go to Sainsbury’s to get some milk, bloke before me asked a staff member if there was any one way system. Staff member looks at him as if he was crazy then said “nah….just come in and go wherever” or somewhere along those lines.
Great stuff.
Tesco are one way with staff stood with little lollipops telling people off… they look at me very strange when I just wander where I feel! Morrisons have no one way system & is much nicer. Both still are imposing queuing outside tho, idiotic!
There is also a small Tesco in my area but the queues just put me off. Ditto Asda.
Morrisons, M&S and Sainsbury’s are more bearable.
Not in my Tesco. Must depend on individual stores.
Last week IKEA here in Sweden introduced the ‘social distancing marshals’ that you may have seen reported on the news. Crazy, because until then the only changes IKEA had made were that the restaurant was shut and that the opening hours were slightly reduced (opening time an hour later and closing time an hour earlier). Pleasantly today there was no sign of any marshals, so hopefully they have abandoned that idea now!
Either negative feedback must have led Ikea to abandon that idea. Let’s hope you never see them again.
They have one of those feedback machines where you press the appropriate ‘smiley’/unhappy face button, but you can also leave a comment, which I did last time. I suspect I may not have been the only one!
It does look like you’re not the only done. Well done!
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/18/us/coronavirus-time-risk/index.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB
Wear a mask. Wash your hands with soap. Stay at least 6 feet from others. If you do gather with others, go outside rather than inside.
Still, there’s one more aspect to infection that has received less attention. Growing evidence suggests that Covid-19 infection, like with other illnesses, is related to prolonged time exposed to the virus. The longer you stay in an environment that may contain the virus, the higher the risk of getting sick.
Erin Bromage, a comparative immunologist and professor of biology at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, summed it up with a short and sweet equation: “Successful Infection = Exposure to Virus x Time.”
don’t wear a mask, don’t wash your hands and get up close and personal.
All these things we’re meant to do are the state trying to break us down and turn us into drones. Sod that for a game of soldiers
No thanks, and now the WHO say you don’t need to wear masks. Not sure how the American media will handle that. It’s been so politicised there, no mask = murderer. Now what?
Almost Checkmate for the republicans Vs the lockdowner democrats is potentially what that is. But with this whole mess, who fucking knows
Working in travel industry and just thinking out loud but if a holiday was booked and was possible and you got notification from track and trace and were forced to then isolate for 2 weeks and were unable to travel, who pays? Insurers won’t touch it, holiday will be going ahead so tour op not responsible. Will the Govt. pay?
Whole scheme is also open to abuse as has been mentioned before. Neighbourly feuds, jealous ex’es or people who just want some time off.
School kids will have a lot of fun with it. Teacher you don’t like? Self-isolate him for a couple of weeks!
Good question for the daily press conference!
No balance whatsoever in BBC reporting this COVID pandemic.
Complete negative reporting, no reference to how deaths attributed to COVID are falling. You wonder whether they’re actually secretly willing the death rate to increase!
Weekly deaths attributed to those testing positive for COVID:
Week Ending:
03/05 3456
10/05 2879 (-577)
17/05 2209 (-670)
24/05 1701 (-508)
And all they talk about is the elusive R rate. I think Mystic Meg could make a better stab at it.
Now…. I think everyone knows me well enough on here to know how cynical I am. But this is not me being cynical, this is me being realistic and what I consider to be sensible, based on experience working with journalists.
If the meedja – especially the TV – pundits could guarantee their own personal safety and that of their immediate friends and family, they would quite happily have a huge death rate. Seriously. If you asked them and they were comfortable enough to answer with complete honesty (so…. ok a hypothetical situation ;p )- “Would you rather there be 1000 Covid deaths, or 10,000 Covid deaths?” – they would say *100%* – 10,000.
10,000 deaths rather than 1,000 is money, baby. They LOVE this shit.
And if a child dies, they crack the champagne out.
It’s like Drop the Dead Donkey (if you remember that) where Stephen Tompkinson’s character would always have a childs doll in his reports.
Ha, ha.There’s always a child’s doll or a shoe lying amongst a pile of rubble in those disaster reports.
I remember! And the reporter chucking a grenade into the crowd to ensure everybody looked terrified.
At the time, I laughed.
You are exactly correct.
I find myself unable to watch mainstream TV news at present because I am sickened by the talking heads’ barely concealed sense of glee.
They LOVE this and never want it to end.
I honestly think we’ve reached peak stupidity and that even the crazy scientists, drunk on hubris like Frankenstein, and the politicians who believe their own hype know the danger has passed now and are just taking the piss. I never, ever thought I’d ever seen in my lifetime (and I’m only 21 so I have a lot of it left to go) the state telling private citizens how to have a barbecue. It is nothing short of breathtaking insanity. It is so obvious that the government are engaging in political theatricality now to make it look like they’re in control of the situation and haven’t effed up enormously. It’s just a matter of waiting it out now. And the longer they keep the lockdown, the longer they procrastinate from the inevitable public enquiry… I also wonder whether this lockdown would have been eased more quickly if the weather had been absolutely rubbish these past two months, or if this had happened during the winter – who would want to meet outside or host garden parties in the pissing rain and freezing cold? The sunny weather has also dampened any urgency to get back to work or reality and I think… Read more »
Take comfort from the fact that are clearly a very sensible, sane person, and will go far in life. It may be difficult being sane in a mad world, but it’s preferable to being mad.
Regarding how this has played out, if we didn’t have the magic money tree, so people just lost their income immediately, and we were in the middle of winter, and we didn’t have millions who can work from home, and we didn’t have Amazon and Netflix and Zoom, and online shopping, I can’t see how it would have lasted anything like as long as it has done.
‘Regarding how this has played out, if we didn’t have the magic money tree, so people just lost their income immediately, and we were in the middle of winter, and we didn’t have millions who can work from home, and we didn’t have Amazon and Netflix and Zoom, and online shopping, I can’t see how it would have lasted anything like as long as it has done.’
You’re basically describing 50 years ago with the Hong Kong flu, when there was no concept of home working, no internet, no state hand-holding, no lockdown and people just got on with it…!
Yes, I was at school during the Hong Kong flu epidemic, but I do vaguely remember it. We lost two children and one teacher. My mother was ill with it but got over it, yet neither my father nor I – in the same house – caught it or showed any symptoms. But everyone just got on with it. There weren’t the 24/7 news channels or internet then of course, the newspapers were still fairly newsy in that they just did straight reporting of facts, and nobody really blew it up out of all proportion. Most of the population still remembered WW2 and in many ways the HK flu was nothing when compared with that. We just expected people to plough on regardless. And everyone did.
I agree that the if the lockdown had occurred in the past even as recently as twenty years ago, there would be less tolerance of lockdown without the current technology which makes lockdown easier eg skype for communicating. Pre internet the only alternative to shops was mail order which was nowhere near as convenient as the internet.
You couldn’t get food by mail order!
I agree that lockdown might have been slightly more tolerable in winter because being stuck at home is not so bad when it is cold and dark. Being stuck at home is worse during hot sunny weather. The economic impact of a lockdown might have been slightly less in winter as many tourist dependent businesses do the bulk of their trade in the summer and not much in winter. If tourist dependent businesses had to close in winter but could reopen by the summer, the tourist trade would not have been so badly hit. A major problem with a summer lockdown is tourist dependent businesses are missing out on the critical summer trade.
Poppy, if at any point in the future I overcome my total disgust at the political system … you would be the stateswoman I’d vote for!
Thank you, I am flattered by your comment because I have always wanted to go into politics at some point…!
Please do it!
Other factors which make summer lockdowns worse than winter is that events such as music festivals, sports, agriculture and air shows etc are usually held in the summer months and if a lockdown happens in summer these events are cancelled. A winter lockdown with restrictions fully lifted by summer would avoid this. The cancellation of events can mean businesses missing out on trade. For instance, an airshow is held in a town near me which attracts many visitors in the summer who spend money in local businesses. If the airshow is cancelled this year businesses will have lost this trade. People are more likely to go on holiday either in the uk or abroad during summer rather than winter which means restrictions such as hotels not being able to operate and flights grounded means a summer lockdown means more people having to cancel holidays than would happen in a winter lockdown.
On the flip side, a winter lockdown would’ve meant people queuing outside shops in freezing wind and rain. I’m not sure the tolerance and patience would have lasted as long, especially watching NHS staff appear from nowhere, flash their pass and waltz straight in, while you’ve been stood there three quarters of an hour, soaked and shivering. Those finally waking up may have woke up and researched sooner.
I agree queuing in cold and wet weather would be a major drawback in a winter lockdown but I am sure there are people who are not keen on standing in the sun for long periods. I wonder how long people will tolerate supermarket queues. If you are in a hurry queuing takes up your time. Another problem with queuing is that you may have forgotten something and need to go back to your car but if this happens, you have to the back of the queue again.
A winter lockdown would be damaging for restaurants as they would miss out on the staff Christmas dinner trade which can be lucrative for restaurants. On the other hand restaurants and pubs miss out on the tourist trade if they can’t open in the summer.
It is all falling down. Take courage.
Hang on don’t forget the discounts offered to NHS staff, Morrisons is doing 10% What was the Tannoy announcement “our wonderful NHS staff”
Others who are in the .ine of fire and working for a pittance, lets say home delivery drivers who are meeting the public face to face every day, they can go and do one.
No offence to any hard working NHS staff who may be on here.
True, and I wonder how social distancing from loved ones would have gone down at Christmas – imagine spending the 25th alone with no family or friends, one of the most important things about the holiday season.
But a treacherous little voice mutters ‘Christmas without the mother-in-law… Even the worst situations have their compensations…’
I find it sad that we are discussing this as if lockdown is a normal and acceptable thing. Lockdown should never have been considered an option – this is not an open air prison !
Well said sir, they have slipped it into the narrative as usual.
The collateral damage is collosal.
The vast majority of the population just don’t seem to know what is in front of them.
I fear what is happening in America right now might spill over here. We saw what its looks like in 2011 when high streets, mainly in London, were looted. Handy thing to happen to divert us from the virus and to further militarise the police.
I do not think violence is the answer, but I suspect the authorities may be quite keen, sheeple will soon forget the nondemic when the windows of John Lewis are smashed and they cannot reopen,
What a travesty.
Please do fall into the trap.
I really like your posts Polly and you’re much more articulate than many university students I’ve taught, but back in 2008 you would have been about 9 and probably not aware of the global financial meltdown, although I’m sure you might have felt the aftershocks. Nobody, but nobody was held to account in 2008, so despite the fact that their IQs match their shoe size (nice phrase) I do not see any reckoning even though, as I posted somewhere else, a 1% increase in unemployment means 40,000 more deaths (quoted in The Big Short.)
You’re clearly not naive at all. You are right to be highly suspicious of the government’s blase attitude to the ruined economy, trashed businesses and its obvious reluctance to end the lockdown pantomine.
I too have wondered how they would have pulled it off back in February, with howling gales and floods. I don’t think people would have queued so compliantly in that weather.
Well said! As well as the picture Toby printed above regarding barbecues, did you see the BBC guidance on barbecues? A (somewhat sexist) quote: “If you think you’ve had coronavirus and/or you’re low risk, meaning you’re young, you’re slim, you’re female – those are the main variables – your behaviour at a picnic is probably going to be much more relaxed with regards to things like sharing the potato salad and using other people’s cutlery….If you are a man who’s older and overweight and don’t think you’ve had the virus, I would say bring your own cutlery and bring your own coleslaw.” The whole article is totally mad – if you want to read it, it is here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-52848793
I recommend everone to read that, it’s a hoot. I’ve parodies that were less funny. How can he keep a straight face? I don’t think I’d like to be a guest at one of his parties, and I wonder what kind of friends he has. I read it to my Mrs and daughter while we were on our local common watching the youngsters congregate and get a bit drunk. 1. Who to invite The first thing to do is think about who you’re inviting and what pressures that invitation will put on them – we are very differently vulnerable to this virus. If you’re inviting overweight men who are older, they face a very different risk to young families with young children. If you’re inviting people who’ve had the virus that’s very different again. Think about the invitation and think about who you’re putting at risk. If you’re thinking of inviting a 70-year-old overweight man, I would consider having quite a detailed conversation about the risks they were prepared to accept. If you’re shielding you obviously cannot attend these gatherings. 2. How to arrive If you are hosting an event and people can get into the garden directly, brilliant. If… Read more »
As Scott Fitzgerald put it (genuinely this time), ain’t we got fun?
Do you remember Pippa Middleton’s book on party planning, which was (by all accounts) hilariously bad and spawned much satire? Maybe this is an opportune time for her to write a sequel…
“You are having a picnic or gathering at a time of a deadly serious disease circulating widely in the population.” This is the sort of bollocks that makes me want to punch whoever thought this up.
It would be absolutely hilarious if the sheeple weren’t going to take it seriously.
I wonder if Xand van Tulleken believes his own nonsense, or if he’s about to pocket his author’s fee and retire.
Peak idiocy
Is there even a name put next to that nonsense? I shudder to visit the bbc these days, bad for my immune system..
“EH FATTIE YOU SUPPOSED TO BRING UR OWN COLESLAW!
LOL
It’s by doctor and TV presenter Xand van Tulleken, apparently
Maybe he was trolling them?
He will have been well-paid for this fear-mongering bilge. The last paragraph is particularly disgraceful. Wouldn’t it be great if people saw how risible it is and took absolutely no notice. Sadly. . . . .
You mean people really are going to host BBQs that obey these rules? Jeez, if you’re that paranoid you’ll still be hiding under the bed.
Well said Polly and I echo the sentiments of the others in this blog. You are thoughtful, intelligent and perceptive so please keep it up.
You are one of the people who give me hope that all is not lost with the young.
Poppy, hang in there you are not alone.
The meaning of the Emperor’s New Clothes is clear from the story. It is used in contexts where people are widely acclaimed and admired but where others question whether what they have created is of any value. Modern-day examples might be the highly priced work of conceptual artists or the more avant-guard products of fashion designers. Or Cv-19.
The phrase bears some similarity to another modern-day expression – the elephant in the room. An essential factor with both phrases is the willingness of people to engage into an unspoken contract to willfully disbelieve what they know to be true.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/the-emperors-new-clothes.html
We need to make a note of their names …
And put them on our little list …
…and then find a modern day jackal
Theme tune suggestion – Delilah by Tom Jones (for when someone driven batshit crazy by the lockdown takes matters into their own hands)
You could take this story as a positive sign that people are beginning to see sense, or as negative in that reinforces the idea that what we are dealing with is so extreme and unprecedented that we need to modify large parts of normal life, forever.
Coronavirus: Tory MPs call for change in 2m social distancing rule
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-52861993
If we still need a facesaving distance rule, it must be 1m max or hospitality and much of the arts are dead in the water.
1m is better than two but I think we are not out of the woods until all talk of distancing is forgotten, otherwise this could drag on and we’ll be back to square one the next time we have a new virus.
It’s not a “rule”, it’s a guideline – another bit of brainwashing going on and on.
It was Robert Dingwall who said in paraphrase “it’s all crap”, widely reported for 1 day then buried:
https://www.rt.com/uk/486881-uk-guidelines-rule-thumb/
Indeed not a rule or law, but something that will be enforced or attempted to be enforced in schools, universities, public transport, eating, drinking and dancing establishments, sports and leisure facilities, function venues, museums, galleries, entertainment and cultural venues, offices, shops.
The commissars will ensure anywhere not complying will get their license to operate revoked, fines issued.
Just got an email from a leisure operator with whom I have membership – looking to re-open, but with masses of restrictions around numbers, pre-booking, length of sessions, no changing rooms, the need to distance. Aside from completely private non commercial places, and outdoors in the park, every aspect of life will be rendered commercially unviable and bloody unpleasant.
Everytime a subscription, club, company, magazine contact me about this and says “because coronavirus” I answer and basically ask “why?” and state facts.
I then decide if staying a member or frequent their business is worth it.
90% of the time the answer has been no so subscriptions cancelled etc.
Not one has answered me though, not one.
And there’s the problem! We can defy the guideline as much as we like, but the places we want to visit won’t be able to get away with employing the common sense that the government keeps telling us to use!
Vernon Coleman pointed out that a cough or sneeze can expel bodily fluids many times that distance … so the 2m stuff is utter nonsense, and we should just go back to the basic good manners of covering your mouth when you cough, and sneezing into a tissue.
So I went to the supermarket today. There is a one way system. I walked down an aisle to the end and realised I needed to get something from the other end that I’d missed.
What to do, follow the one way system by walking down another aisle to go full circle or reverse backwards up the same aisle? Either way is just as likely to not kill somebody.
The new abnormal.
Queued outside Waitrose yesterday, people were about 20m apart. I was the odd one out, hovering about 2m from the person and in front of me. In the store? Complete free for all. Utterly laughable. I was told to wait on leaving until someone coming in had entered safely as we use the same door – we were at least 4m apart. I politely told the queue manager (must be a whole new job in shops) to do one and walked out, horrifying the Waitrose zealots and in the process.
Our local Morrisons has got a ‘Social distancing Key Worker’ in a specially printed hi viz vest. Apparently, she’s happy to help. . .
Oh but . . . but . .. . but you can KILL people by walking past them in large doorways, didn’t you know?! One split second, and . . . poof! They are gone. Very naughty of you. Go to the back of the queue 😂
My daughter, who is 9 was horrified by my behaviour. Although it was hilarious to see her reaction to me telling these gits to do one, my daughter, god help her, thought I was a monster. What a world of shit we now live in.
Keep explaining to her why and show how she is being lied to and lead, you have to break the conditioning the next generation are receiving from school, education and social media.
Long uphill struggle but worth it when they break free – been through it twice with my kids.
I simply pay no attention to any arrows, just don’t give a shit. Because distancing is pointless. Just do the same, no one stops you
Yes, I will queue…but
Once you are in, with less people about I am finding it a pleasant experience, get what I need to get about 3 times quicker because the compliant get out of my way.
And I normally hate going into supermarkets.
I hold a shopping list before my eyes and walk into people. I also sing as I go.
Is this to stop the horse getting the Wuhan bat flu?
Forcing the horse to subscribe to the NHS religion is disgusting.
I have a horse and she will NEVER be dressed up as an NHS performing seal, any more than I would insult myself and her by wearing a muzzle.
I have two, and they are keeping me sane every single day, they as flight animals, startle first and ask questions later, but I watch them assess risk and go back to a normal state of relaxation and herd / social behaviour as soon as the ‘threat’ has passed, and think if the world listened more to these peaceable, gentle, cooperative animals, we wouldn’t be in half the mess we are!
Is the horse wearing a patch over one eye because it has a lazy eye?
I think it’s a blinker, never seen it look like that before, but horses have 160 degree vision, they can see almost all the way behind, and almost all the way in front. I’m not sure what direction he’ll run, but it might be to help calm nerves due to a distraction on that side. His other eye doesn’t look very relaxed either! (I love horses, I’m not a fan of horse racing, I shall contain my rant for the sake of good relations 🙂 )
Now, who else we know of is wearing blinkers?
I see a Professor of Psychology is giving advice on virology now. Has Covid19 got cognitive dissonance? Is that why half the country seems to be barking mad?
Says a lot doesn’t it. Who better to know the empty gesture behaviours (rituals) that will assuage the fabricated fear? It’s OCD writ large.
This gets more ridiculous by the minute. I don’t want to watch horse racing, premier league football or any sport for that matter-I just want to be able to see and hug my grandchildren and my 96 year old mother in law!!
Yes indeed, what a load of nonsense
Please, just go and hug your grand children and your mother in law! I hear you, I read somewhere that all this social stuff is to try and un-scare the population so they’ll go back to work!
Unfortunately, I can’t yet as my d-i-l is scared to death about breaking the rules and as I posted before, my m-i-l’s care agency said they would withdraw her care package if we continued to visit her. Ironically, the day before full lockdown, they ‘phoned us to ask us to prepare her something for tea as they were short staffed!!
They would stop caring for her and let her die if you paid her a visit?
What shits. Are you sure she was ever safe with them?
Then what is keeping you?
My mum is 88 and very physically and mentally frail.
I am her sole carer.
I go to work, shop and have been at the past three meetings on Glasgow Green where there have been lost of hugs.
I wash my hands and use a hankie if necessary.
People die all the time and it may be too late by the time you decide to use your own free will.
Go and hug them, only thing stopping you is you and them of course if they cower away from you.
Be a rebel, but as it is not “law” the only thing you are rebelling against is authority figures trying to browbeat you into submission.
Consider this. What would you think if your MIL died of something else during all this?
Would you be glad that at least you followed the rules and weren’t to blame for her death? What would she think about that?
What would she think if you called her right now and said I don’t want you to die from this virus but feel free to die of something/anything else?
What would your children and grandchildren do if you called them up right now and said you were dying of something other than COVID-19? Would they rush round to your aid and therefor risk killing you with the virus or would they be too scared to help for precisely the same reason?
One thing about all of this is that nobody is even allowed to ask these questions because it’s been decided that we are incapable of making responsible decisions for ourselves.