So it's nothing to do with the science then

[bonsaidragon]

The government lied when they said it's all about the science.

From the bbc :

Relaxing lockdown is a risk because levels of the coronavirus are still "very high", one of the government's top science advisers says.
Prof John Edmunds said it was a "political decision" to lift lockdown and that "many" scientists would wait.
The warning comes as Sage, the group of scientists advising government, publish details of their confidential meetings.
One meeting on 23 April estimated there would be only 1,000 cases per day by mid-May.
Instead, estimates by the Office for National Statistics suggest there are currently 8,000 cases per day in England alone. Those figures don't include cases in care homes or hospitals.
'Little time for stringent measures'
"Many of us would prefer to see the incidence down to lower levels before we relax measures," Prof Edmunds, from the London School of Tropical Hygiene and Medicine, said.
Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust and a member of Sage, agreed that measures were being lifted too early, writing on Twitter that the newly-introduced NHS test and trace system needed to be "fully working" before measures were eased.
Newly-published Sage documents also warned of the dangers of having high numbers of cases.

What do you suggest ?

As I explained above, honesty, even when that means admitting failure.

The government’s proposed strategy can only work if they have credibility.

That as may be. I’m still not convinced the outcome will be an all out free for all. Perhaps I’m wrong any everyone who’s not on mumsnet is a total idiot.

If all the trust is gone and people won’t be follow the guidance anyway it doesn’t really matter if we ease lockdown does it?

The whole debate about “following the science” is just a distraction, because it depends what you’re optimising for. If “science” is optimising for zero Covid deaths, of course lockdown should be extended for months or years until there are no more cases or a perfect vaccine is found. But if “science” is optimising for overall impacts on humans, there will be a point where the economic impacts over a 5-10 year timeline may actually kill more people (through poverty, cuts to healthcare and education etc) than the virus.

Science isn’t a singular thing - it is made up of millions of scientists worldwide with different opinions and beliefs and research approaches. So for every group of scientists saying lockdown should be harsher or extended you can probably find one that says that actually the risk per capita is quite small and the other trade offs should be considered more heavily.

And politics isn’t about following what one group of scientists say. In theory at least, it’s about taking expert advice from scientists AND policy makers and making really really difficult decisions about the trade offs. Because there isn’t just one right answer.

PS I say this as someone who studied history and philosophy of science at undergrad.

The scientists did not come up with the rules.

That would be a fair comment if the government didn’t keep saying that their rules are dictated by ‘the science’.

Here is more evidence of the Government ignoring 'the science' when making decisions.

ttps://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/face-masks-coverings-recommended-scientists-government-a4455096.html

Scientists recommended face masks to Government weeks before public guidance changed

On April 21, members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) concluded that the public should be advised to wear coverings where social distancing isn't possible.

However, ministers in England did not issue the advice until May 11.
The revelation came after minutes of 34 Sage meetings were released on Friday.

The panel of experts, including chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance and chief medical officer for England Professor Chris Whitty, said of masks back in April: “Sage advises that, on balance, there is enough evidence to support recommendation of community use of cloth face masks, for short periods in enclosed spaces, where social distancing is not possible."

Despite Scotland and Northern Ireland issuing the advice to wear coverings, ministers in England did not give the guidance until publishing the “plan to rebuild” nearly three weeks later.

Personally I think the mismanagement has been the way we've come out of lockdown.

There has been lots of mixed messaging.

Beaches weren't warned people could suddenly be outside as much as they want and that's caused issues because they couldn't prepare safely and get lifeguards etc and correct PPE.

We had a very good and slow roadmap. This was based on number dropping enough to get to level 3.
We have now opened more than we were going to at this stage whilst still at 4.

I get the economy needs to start. But what is the cost to the economy of reopening too soon and requiring another lockdown very soon. It's where we are heading.

I was going to write a long reply but I think @notalwaysalondoner has already said it.

@notalwaysalondoner I agree. Very few people are looking at the bigger picture, which I find very worrying. It’s almost like the deaths that will be caused by the lockdown here and across the world (delayed treatments, fear of seeking treatment, suicide, poverty) don’t matter to some people.

If all the trust is gone and people won’t be follow the guidance anyway it doesn’t really matter if we ease lockdown does it?

Whether you think lockdown was a waste of time or whether you think restrictions should not be lifted next week, it matters that there is no coherent policy.

I would like to believe that when my father is told he no longer needs to shield, the people giving the advice are competent.

The question is why do we need to get our econommy going much quicker than the other countries to the point that we are doing with with much higher infection rates than other countries . And in some cases it's 4-5 times the numbers.

We've already got countries who have categorically said they are opening for summer holidays but not to brits as our infection rates are too high.

That'll be affecting our economy.

Notalwaysalondoner’s post explains why ‘following the science’ was a way for the government to avoid responsibility - at some point somebody has to make a decision.

It doesn’t justify ignoring key indicators chosen by the government without explanation.

Agree, merrymouse. The Government has been hiding behind the scientists to claim that their actions are based on 'the science'.

Given the UK has the highest death rates in Europe and indeed by some measures the world, it matters who bears the responsibility for the tens of thousands of deaths, as will become apparent in the inevitable enquiries into the mismanagement of the response to the disease.

The Government is currently blaming 'the science'.

So it matters if what they are actually doing is ignoring the science.

Which key indicators have been ignored?

Availability of an effective tracking tracing and testing system to enable control of the virus and establish what the hell is going on.

Prof Stephen Reicher is a social pychologist who with a few others rushed out an ebook 'Together Apart - The Psychology of COVID 19 a few weeks back which included a paragraph about the importance of 'leaders' being seen to adhere to guidelines so he obviously (as you would if you were him) LOVED the DC story and made those tweets about BJ 'trashing advice' etc as it publiscised him and his book. No foul to me as he's not wrong but he has loved it on his Twitter, talking about how many times he was retweeted, being the subject of a question in the DM, commenting on all his new followers and how they might be a bit bored after the drama calms down because he generally just tweets about social psychology etc.

He has also tweeted this study a few times in the last 24 hrs www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/getting-used-to-life-under-lockdown.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjLwOCHudvpAhVFXRUIHUrODNkQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0Jakl_wZhHJ9k4cVQM-IdU

Which in his words is 'the real story of the pandemic is how well people understood the issues and are prepared to observe restrictions for each other' and 'the extraordinary number of people who are still abiding by the rules and even going beyond them'.

He isn't a 'scientific advisor' in terms of science of numbers, R rates, infection etc. He's a social psychologist who suggested some people follow leaders and if those leaders appear to fail to do what they've told others to do, it could have an effect. Which we know to be fair.

But he's also tweeting research about how many have complied. Which is great to see evidenced 🙂

However, my chosen key indicator is ‘are the government happy to tell me any old shit to protect the ego if an employee?’

@imsooverthisdrama

Oh come on does anyone seriously think we can lockdown in our homes for months on end ?. The virus isn't going away we need to manage it . If your worried don't see your family or friends stay home .

What if you’re a bus driver or nurse? What if your dcs are desperate to go back to school but you’re shielding?

but I am not sure the entire country will abandon social distancing because DC broke the lockdown rules.

The difference between success / failure isn't about everyone following guidance; it's about enough people taking it seriously enough for it to have an impact. A drop in just 5 to 10% compliance could result in there being enough of a problem that we do get a second wave. If you look at track and trace if it's effective it will only reduce cases by a maximum of 15%. If the system isn't fully operational it will be having significantly lower affect. Plus you have people under the misguided belief that track and trace is more effective than it is and a weakening in social distancing compliance.

That's why it's important to stress this honestly rather than let people have false expectations and beliefs. And it's important to have public trust in government and the protocols its promoting.

There is a track and trace system in operation now. Whether it’s good enough remains to be seen. None of the social measures that have been taken should result in people having significant numbers of contacts if the rules are followed. If the rules are not being followed then it doesn’t really matter what the rules are. I don’t believe the rules are being disregarded in anything like the numbers assumed by some posters but again it’s entirely possible I am wrong on that.

Time will tell in any event. I’ve seen numerous predictions of spikes left right and centre on here and none of them seem to come to anything. It’s all a bit the boy who cried wolf now. Maybe the wolf really will arrive this time, we shall see.

I don't think Whitty and Vallance were muzzled. On the contrary, I thought they were both very forthright on Thursday particularly Patrick Vallance who said 'this is not a low number' and we are 'in an fragile state'

Clearly, it's a knife-edge. I think the rules were relaxed because people have relaxed them anyway.

I don't think either of those men would answer questions about DC anyway.

DinghyCalledDignity - Professor Reicher is one of the Government's 'scientific advisors'. Not sure why you think he isn't.

He is a member of SPI-B.

He is one of several members of SPI-B to criticise the way the Government has ignored their advice and handle the crisis.

Sunshinegirl82 - no there isn't a track and trace system in place now.

Johnson has now said it might be working by the end of June. If you believe him on that.

The scientific advice - and the Government's own 5 tests - made it quite clear that the lockdown should not be reduced until an efficient test, track and trace system was in place.

IT IS NOT.

There is no scientific basis for reducing lockdown now. This will inevitably lead to a second wave and tens of thousands more unnecessary deaths.

It is reckless in the extreme.

@effingterrified. I didn't say he wasn't an advisor, I said he's a social psychologist (not a scientist with info about infection rates etc) who has a book out who is also tweeting a study about the unexpectedly high levels of compliance.

Do you disagree with that? Is he wrong do you think?

So your view is that we shouldn’t take any further steps until the app is up and running? That is the “track” element? The test and trace elements are now operational.

I’m reasonably indifferent to the app. I’ll download it when it’s available but it’s strength will be in identifying contacts who are strangers. As things stand I would imagine very few people have significant numbers of stranger contacts due to social distancing.

Plus it relies on people to download it, those who know they are planning to break the rules probably just won’t do so, or will leave their phone at home.