Raging at Boris Johnson's irresponsible response to Covid 19

[somanydevices]

BJ said I must level with you, I must level with the British public: many more families are going to lose loved ones before their time

How fucking dare he. This kind of phrase belongs in a rousing speech where the public are asked to come together to do what we can to help prevent those deaths. e.g. not going to large events, doing social distancing.

Not one which says "business as usual".

There was a government adviser on the radio saying they've not banned sporting events because they're in the open and in sunlight.

What about those events undercover? Or after dark? If that's the case why aren't they banned?

They're saying they're acting on scientific advice, but they're adding a layer of interpretation which is about what they think is possible.

They lack faith in their ability to communicate what needs to be done to the population and they think we're all idiots who won't do it, basically. So they've taken the decision that they can't help people dying.

I don't know on what basis BJ and his government is making decisions, but it's not with our best interests at heart.

It's a "don't panic"'message from a government scared and disrespectful of the population, not leadership in a time of crisis.

Fucking raging.

BJ is an untrustworthy snake. But I 100% agree with the CMO. We must let the virus spread whilst managing as much as possible the rate of spread to prevent an overwhelming peak.

This means the NHS will be better able to cope with the serious cases (lack of funding for the past 10 years notwithstanding) and as a population we begin to develop widespread immunity.

This will mean the following waves of covid infect fewer and fewer people and hopefully there will be a vaccine to protect the vulnerable.

BUT unfortunately during this process many people, mostly the vulnerable will die. There is no escaping this fact.

A lockdown only delays the spread. It's only effective if it is implemented until there is a vaccine. I'll be very surprised if the countries in lockdown now don't see a return of rapid spread once the lockdown ends which it must.

Just going to leave this here:

twitter.com/WHO/status/1238495452141629441?s=19

Pretty clear that the WHO advocates measures fighting the expansion of the virus. But hey, what do they know?

And this

@sakura7 but the UK response IS to buy ourselves time. But it is a staged response. Very clearly at the briefing yesterday it was explained that we have around 5000 - 10000 cases in the UK. We are still at the very bottom. We have a long way to go. So they are turning the slow down measures on bit by bit. They also said that the impact of what they have put in place is a better slowdown than closing public gatherings or schools. Which THEY WILL DO. Just not quite yet.

Hence my second point. It's about planning rather than being overwhelmed too early, and about allowing time to find treatment. The 'second wave' can be managed if we have an effective antiviral by then.

Awful lot of ‘ifs’ there - if we know the best way to avoid being overwhelmed, if we have an effective antiviral.

Which is rather my point. There are no certainties. Is the Italian or Belgian model better than the British for avoiding a spike at some point that overwhelms the health system?

We simply do not know, and if pretend we do we look incredibly foolish.

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/who-urges-countries-to-track-and-trace-every-covid-19-case

The government is reducing testing!! The who is advocating widespread testing to track and trace but the UK government are going to other way.

Boris looked really aged in the press conference. I am going Nick someone else's analysis: the tory government have been cutting funding to the NHS for years and in this game of musical chairs of prime ministers he's the one left standing when the music has stopped. He's fucked, the government have fucked up and he's the one everyone's pointing at.

I believe the UK's advice is being taken through the prism of availabile resources. That is they stripped the NHS and it won't be able to cope if they do what should be done. I expect more "difficult" decisions to be made, with some justification (i.e., building up herd immunity) but just pragmatic because our health service has been chronically underfunded for 10 years.

Reducing testing has to be a political decision as well. If you test less, you find less, so people can't complain as much.

Bool

That makes no sense. The way to flatten the curve is to act aggressively. UK will be in a similar position to Italy soon with numbers skyrocketing. The NHS won't be able to cope.

JassyRadlett
One if actually, and it's a reasonable possibility.

Far, far more ifs in the UK approach. We have no idea if it's even possible to build herd immunity to this virus. It's a massive gamble to take with people's lives. If 60% were to get the virus, you're talking 4-8 million people becoming seriously ill and at least 500,000 people dying. The UK is accepting this. Other countries are doing everything they can to prevent it.

The UK approach is bananas. But don't listen to me, have a listen to the WHO briefing from today where their recommendations are in direct conflict with the UK plan.

Sorry, @Sakura7 but you did have a second if in there two, cleverly disguised as a fact.

Not saying there aren’t uncertainties everywhere as you will see from all my posts. Simply taking issue with opinion being presented as fact and those with little expertise, on this thread and elsewhere, posturing to the contrary. Nothing here is certain, including short and long term behavioural responses and short and long term behaviour of the virus.

@Whowantstogotothepark it’s an interesting one and I’ve personally felt disquiet about the testing from the get go; I don’t know how rational that is! But I do wonder if the testing the UK is doing was so limited anyway that it makes bugger all difference in epidemiological terms to reduce it. But then I know painfully little about epidemiology.

*too

I'm not taking anything as fact, but I'm questioning why Britain is interpreting the available evidence in an entirely different manner to the majority of the world, and indeed the WHO. Why does the UK think the consensus among the global expert community is wrong?

Also I'm not sure how 'overwhelmed too early' is an if. The UK plan is to frontload the crisis.

@sakura7 that is not what the chief scientist says and I am inclined to believe him over you I am afraid.

Bool

As I already said, don't listen to me, listen to the experts. The vast majority of whom are opposed to the UK approach.

The UK plan is to frontload the crisis.

What utter bollocks.

As I say, I loathe this government with a passion. But such total misrepresentation in the midst of a crisis is reprehensible.

Let’s look at what Patrick Vallance has actually said:

“What we don’t want is everybody to end up getting it in a short period of time so we swamp and overwhelm NHS services – that’s the flattening of the peak,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease and we reduce the transmission, at the same time we protect those who are most vulnerable to it. Those are the key things we need to do.”

“If you suppress something very, very hard, when you release those measures it bounces back and it bounces back at the wrong time,”

This isn’t ‘front-loading’. It is a delay strategy that is different from other delay strategies, all of which I’ve seen have a similar goal - to broaden and flatten the curve.

I’m as unsure as you are. But I don’t think there’s anything to be gained by making things up.

The UK plan is to frontload the crisis.

What does this mean? A washing machine reference?

I dont know if this reassures people or not. I thought last nights advice was bonkers but already we have children and teachers self isolating for new cough or fever who would have come in before the advice changed. I think schools will just slip into closing by default as its not unusual to have several teachers get a fever or a cough at this time of year. Ive seen so many events cancelled and people taking things into their own hands and cancelling gatherings.

Ok then. Don't question why your government's experts are interpreting the evidence in an entirely different way to everyone else (still nobody will address this point). Ignore the WHO. Other countries are looking on in bafflement (but then it wouldn't be the first time in recent years). Hope it all works out for you.

Very glad to live in Ireland right now.

How long is it since the PM was boasting that he had shaken hands with coronavirus patients at a hospital? The fact that there are now 5,000-10,000 cases and the CMO and CSO have been in post since the beginning, presumably giving advice, might be indicative as to the effectiveness of said advice. The factors to be taken into account when planning for this type of thing aren’t just scientific, they are economic, behavioural and political, as well. Politicians have to make the choices in the end. They are in charge and the buck stops with them.

By the way, people don’t have herd immunity. Herd immunity is a characteristic of the herd: when a certain fraction of the herd is immune, it is much harder for a disease to spread even if one of the non-immune members gets it. It is normally referred to in the context of vaccine. Here, the possibly temporary immunity will come from being infected, and a certain percentage will die. Probably a high percentage here given the low number of ICU beds.

@JassyRadlett it’s an interesting one and I’ve personally felt disquiet about the testing from the get go; I don’t know how rational that is! But I do wonder if the testing the UK is doing was so limited anyway that it makes bugger all difference in epidemiological terms to reduce it. But then I know painfully little about epidemiology.

I believe testing is vitally important. Certainly if herd immunity is the goal. It is essential to know who has it, who recovers, and whether they get re-infected. That is essential in regard to nonfatal cases as well as fatal cases. However, they are only testing hospital cases now.

This government appears to have made a huge gamble based on immunity developing after one exposure. They need data to tackle this effectively. But then data could reveal how badly they got it wrong. Because people couldn't have died from coronavirus if they weren't tested!

I wonder if the government's stance will lead to other countries banning entry of UK citizens (apart from trump of course!). All the easier now we are effectively out of the EU.

@Sakura7 Questioning is fine. Lying isn’t.

This government appears to have made a huge gamble based on immunity developing after one exposure. They need data to tackle this effectively. But then data could reveal how badly they got it wrong. Because people couldn't have died from coronavirus if they weren't tested!

This is what I instinctively feel (caveat: I have no expertise.) But the testing has been totally half-arsed from the get-go hasn’t it? Eg only referring known contacts for testing, many people referred for tests that didn’t happen; I’m somewhat baffled it isn’t a bigger issue while we’re all talking about schools and football instead.

How am I lying?

Seems NHS staff agree with me. Only 5% believe the UK approach is strong enough according to Channel 4.

"Shipmanesque" (!!!) Just read it on-line. As in: to get rid of the (expensive) oldies.

That certainly could be used to describe the government's approach. As boris himself said: "many more families are going to lose loved ones before their time". His words transcribed directly.

There is no delay strategy.

What they say might make sense, but there is no action to back it up.

Reminds me of my ex husband who told me he loved me every day, yet his actions were of an abusive arsehole.

It's the same here. We're being told of a strategy that isn't actually being implemented.

Thankfully we're starting to take matters into our own hands. Because thankfully many of us don't believe the empty words.

This isn’t ‘front-loading’. It is a delay strategy that is different from other delay strategies

But what is the delay strategy? It's a relatively simple question that nobody seems to be able to answer. Other than over 70s not going on cruises, schoolkids not going on school trips, and more encouragement to wash our hands, what measures were announced to delay/flatten the peak? I'm not being sarky, genuinely looking for an answer.

Plus, even if you believe the UK's advisers over the international experts, and that we should wait a few weeks before putting in place school closures etc, why aren't we using this time to ramp up NHS preparations for the coming influx of patients with COVID? I work for the NHS as do most of my friends and family. Other countries have built new hospitals, opened up new wards, created ICUs from existing wards, started to manufacture their own ventilator machines. I can't even get a surgical face mask or some alcohol gel. I've had nothing from my trust or NHS England until today when they emailed us some leaflets to put in the waiting room to remind patients to wash their hands. My friend who works in the ED has been given only one fit mask - that can't be reused. Virtually nothing is happening centrally to help hospitals prepare. This is criminally irresponsible, even if you believe the science of the delay strategy.