D = fn + (p x 0) then AD = - fn - (p x 0)

[LadyOfTheImprovisedBath]

New Thread. - Hello.

Aww @Dowser check this out! Friend of mine is in it which is why I was sent it. Great, positive, video.

vimeo.com/433737823?fbclid=IwAR3rd_LhA0waMy-W5vxN271LWArfeeah29grO0y3-lYsdp6wosW4DmoFUjM

Anyone seen this? It concerns the Leicester lockdown, but is very interesting to me, given the situation in Melbourne, and the hysteria here over 'positive swabs.' lockdownsceptics.org/why-leicester-doesnt-need-a-local-lockdown/?fbclid=IwAR0xqvtc2JZqbvgWOwmmud1tGFYf2AoSdS6ef8NaF1X60kId-qY1AL3uiJ4

Interesting the language being used here. Government just now reporting 191 new 'patients', rather than using the more accurate term 'positive swabs', or even 'cases'. Spinning like mad...

I remember being told (but couldn't find evidence when I googled, so it might be an urban myth) that the common cold had a devastating effect on the Eskimos when they first met Europeans.

Another day has begun - going to keep this one positive! Still in bed, due at my laptop in 33min for a Teams meeting that will last a couple of hours. Such fun.

skeptile I haven’t got time to post now as getting the DC to school but writing this to remind myself to come back to you on the Leicester stuff... I’ve been doing a lot of reading about it as I live in Leicestershire and it’s certainly interesting! Will post more later.

@skeptile. That is an interesting read. Am going to disappear down a rabbit hole now and have a good look at the rest of that site!

@IAintentDead except they weren't - they were what we were expected to wear all day every day YY- green school knickers. I was sporting hipster pink pants the day that the games teacher perved up my tennis skirt.. Games knickers were bigger and thicker and had a pocket for one's hanky. Aertex blouses were tucked into them for athletics. Super attractive.

Anyway. We're off to IKEA in Reading today- ds1 is buying new furniture for his new flat. I think I'm possibly more excited than him

@skeptile thanks for sharing. I’m a lockdown sceptic too, I vary between anger and despair, but thankfully never resignation.

My fairly young dog is wet, she’s been sitting out in the rain.

Err?!👆

That was a response to the deleted post. Didn’t expect MNHQ to be quite that on the ball.

Sorry @barkandcheese, wasn't pointing at you but blimey MNHQ picked that one up pretty quick. Wonder if they were an AD though?!

Once again someone wanted to chat about their wet young cat.

@BarkandCheese

My fairly young dog is wet, she’s been sitting out in the rain.

😹

I'm not a lockdown sceptic.

I'm a lockdown rejectionist.

I believe that locking down society is morally wrong and socially dangerous.

This article was the most persuasive thing I read near the start of lockdown. It's a paper written by the man who eradicated smallpox, so he had quite some reputation in public health.

Someone posted it on a long ago AD thread. Maybe Lilac? I miss her.

How a free society deals with pandemics

I think this is an ethical issue, not a mathematical one.

The idea that you can "follow the science" to suspending human rights indefinitely chills me to my fucking bones.

A lot of seriously fucked up unethical shit has been justified by science.

@skeptile that was a great link thank you!

I'm a lockdown rejectionist.I believe that locking down society is morally wrong and socially dangerous

Me too. And I'd add – also totally unnecessary medically.

If I can go a bit meta for a moment - we've been heading in this direction for years. The Trojan horse is "evidence based policy" which of course no one wants to argue against - who wants their policy not to be based on evidence?

But the evidence on which the policy is based tends to come from a small group of experts who have a very blinkered approach. So because we don't want people to die of vivid, the evidence says we should lock them in their homes. Never mind about freedom or well being of cancer treatments because we didn't put that in the evidence base. But you, you smelly proles, mustn't argue about it, for our policy is evidence based.

Lockdown is just the latest and largest impact of "evidence based policy" but it's not unique.

Obviously it is covid of which we don't want people to die. Vivid deaths would be something quite different.

A lot of seriously fucked up unethical shit has been justified by science.

You don't even have to look too far into the past to see damage caused by the blind following of "science"
The lobotomy performed on JFK's sister.....
The incarceration of inconvenient women in Bedlam.....

Bill Bryson's The Body has a fascinating chapter on this. I'll see if I can dig it out

@110APiccadilly

If I can go a bit meta for a moment - we've been heading in this direction for years. The Trojan horse is "evidence based policy" which of course no one wants to argue against - who wants their policy not to be based on evidence?

But the evidence on which the policy is based tends to come from a small group of experts who have a very blinkered approach. So because we don't want people to die of vivid, the evidence says we should lock them in their homes. Never mind about freedom or well being of cancer treatments because we didn't put that in the evidence base. But you, you smelly proles, mustn't argue about it, for our policy is evidence based.

Lockdown is just the latest and largest impact of "evidence based policy" but it's not unique.

Link please! 😉

@110APiccadilly

If I can go a bit meta for a moment - we've been heading in this direction for years. The Trojan horse is "evidence based policy" which of course no one wants to argue against - who wants their policy not to be based on evidence?

But the evidence on which the policy is based tends to come from a small group of experts who have a very blinkered approach. So because we don't want people to die of vivid, the evidence says we should lock them in their homes. Never mind about freedom or well being of cancer treatments because we didn't put that in the evidence base. But you, you smelly proles, mustn't argue about it, for our policy is evidence based.

Lockdown is just the latest and largest impact of "evidence based policy" but it's not unique.

Wow, yes.

I genuinely would love to read more about this.

And the data culture in the schools and I'm perfectly sure other areas of the public sector, even our beloved NHS

Another of the reasons for walking away from teaching was losing my integrity. Policy said that progress had to be linear, so linear it had to be. It is not. Sometimes a human child does well on assessment A because they really love that topic, might get a duff result on assessment B, may be they had a bad day, a cold, had been ill, judt less interested, then do better on assessment C. A wavy graph of progress would not do so we had to massage the data around so that performance looked like a straight line. Disingenuous and hugely time consuming which frankly stole time that my two young children deserved more.