(Covid) To think these recommendations are bonkers?

[NoCharnce]

So the government commission into how to memorialise the Covid pandemic has recommended the government implement “A UK-wide day of reflection should be established and held annually.”

Other recommendations include national memorials (10 sites already identified!), oral histories and museums plus additional funding for local authorities to set up their own memorials.

I can’t be the only one who thinks this is nuts and hope the government ignores the recommendations? I genuinely cannot believe people get paid to produce this crap.

Article just out by Kate Bingham underlining the urgency for pandemic preparedness, puts things in layman’s terms.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-12551251/amp/pandemic-disease-x-covid.html

Don’t be put off by DM, whoever their science editor is is very good and they are quicker at putting out info and in more details than other well known outlets.

@Sparklecats

That’s a good article. Not sure about the Daily Mail Covid coverage in general though. They tend to feature ‘studies’ by the likes of Steve Hanke with strong economic bias.

I’ve not seen an anti-lockdowner yet who doesn’t just ‘gloss over’ the collapsing hospitals/virus with no method of control - or have an alternative solution to that issue. They tend to have an individualistic rant and then only side with any hardship caused by lockdown, whist conveniently ignoring any adverse effects that no lockdown would have caused.
Or think that it was something cooked up purely by our government - and not looking at the global scale of the issue.

DameWhiskers Then you werent looking hard enough

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3967705-Masks-GET-A-GRIP?flipped=1

The "dont be put off by DM" Will remember that!

“Measures taken during the Covid pandemic such as social distancing and wearing face masks “unequivocally” reduced the spread of infections, a report has found.
Experts looked at the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) – not drugs or vaccines – when applied in packages that combine a number of measures that complement one another.
The Royal Society report, called Covid-19: examining the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions, reviewed the evidence gathered during the pandemic for six groups of NPIs and their effectiveness in reducing transmission.”

I would like memorial gardens to remember the family members we lost.

I will never forgive the mask dodgers who passed Covid around through their ignorance. Too many people taken before their time.

“The most effective measure, according to the review, was one of the most controversial — restrictions on movement and social interactions through lockdowns, distancing and rules around the size of gatherings. These were repeatedly found to be associated with a “significant reduction” in transmission of the virus, with the more stringent the measure, the greater the effect.“

“Chris Dye, professor of epidemiology at the University of Oxford, who led the review on masks for the Royal Society, said if they had only looked at randomized controlled trials they would have come to the same conclusion as the Cochrane review. But the researchers behind the paper released Thursday chose to analyze a larger body of studies and found strong evidence that masks work. “

@JenniferBooth speaks for a hell of a lot of people.

No amount of patronising insults, belittling language and yawning emojis changes that.

You're blaming "mask dodgers" for the epidemic???

People who didn't wear those little bits of blue paper over their mouths?

of course you know so much better than the experts and medics. Your ignorance is embarrassing.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/three-things-you-can-protect-30999134?fbclid=IwAR3EcXt1wOmfNSEWr8f9TbpoKdq14BIeVWegVOSCkklJDlrOcYQ-MdFkfyY

@WestwardHo1

The latest and most in depth review by the Royal Society provides strong evidence that mask wearing stopped transmission.

It might mean bit of blue paper to you, it was preventing hospitalisation or death to others.

Some of the Royal Society report conclusions are more tenuous than others, but they were obviously right about how lockdowns worked to get cases down. Because anything that reduces contacts will do that. Especially for the less contagious strains- I accept the picture becomes a bit more complex with something as contagious as Omicron, although most places had stopped locking down by then anyway. But broadly, it holds.

Just as important is what they said about how what we will need to do is decide whether the negatives are worth the positives. Which probably is going to involve some value judgements about what to prioritise, even way into the future when we have a fuller picture of the downsides of both covid and restrictions.

And no - that doesn’t speak at all for ‘a hell of a lot of people” - most people abided by and followed the scientific recommendations.

so latest reports say lockdowns and masks were effective
other ones have said differently

so still no consensus then even amongst experts

@TooOldForThisNonsense

No the consensus is that they are effective, which is why mask wearing is recommended by health services across the globe.

There are a minority of studies that question the effectiveness of mask wearing, but they tend to come from authors with an economic or right wing bias. Or studies that have limitations (Cochrane review).

Might be useful to have some 2023 polling on how people feel now about the policy response to covid.

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/survey-results/daily/2023/03/03/4c7d8/1

https://britain.unherd.com/lockdown/

There are criticisms to be levelled at both Unherd and You Gov. But as with the Daily Mail article posted upthread, which I thought was a useful read despite disliking the paper generally, hopefully we can get some use out of the information anyway. If anyone knows of any other recent polling please post.

@TrashedSofa

I would be extremely sceptical about anything I read in Unherd because it has a right wing, some would say far right bias.

By all means if you have a criticism of the methodology they use in their surveying or the way they phrased the question, I'm very open to hearing about that.

It makes sense stopping contact between people will lower spread

Any action needs to be balanced against societal harms though

The Royal Society report about the impact of NPIs makes that same point. It's just such a complex question.

@TrashedSofa

“The politics of UnHerd’s editorial line, we might identify lockdown scepticism, support for Brexit and opposition to trans rights as the three planks.”

Which tends to make me automatically dismiss them, but that map shows every constituency majority support for lockdown?

It really is

Tbf Whitty and co knew their remit very well (apart from slight issue around omicron statement) and always said that the decisions based on the scientific information provided were political ones.

The science can be pretty much sound but bigger decisions will be needed

I’d support/follow whatever the global consensus scientific opinion would recommend, as that would aim to be free from bias.

The Daily Mail, Unherd etc will apply an element of political bias.

Sorry I'm not clear, are you saying you think this data is useful and valid or not?