Independent SAGE - today's briefing

[vera99]

Just putting this out there - very interesting and most importantly independent.

Slightly off topic, but how and when were original SAGE ‘chosen’? Are some people (chief medical officer) etc automatically on it and if so, how did they get their job?

What I’m actually asking, because I have been wondering for a while, if Labour had won the election in December, would have have received the same scientific advice?

I'm not 100% sure about SAGE but as I understand it Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance are civil servants and so would have also advised Labour if they had been elected.

Sage include senior civil servants (Whitty/ Vallance/ Harries as PP says), plus a range of relevant subject experts. Usually called from universities who do leading research in the area. You can therefore be fairly sure that they aren't all members of any one political party. The government then sends ministers / advisers to listen to the advice and ask questions when they don't understand.
www.gov.uk/government/groups/scientific-advisory-group-for-emergencies-sage.

Their job is to provide advice, the government's job is to take decisions taking all conflicting information into account. Keeping everyone at home for weeks sounds great, but you still need medical staff at work, someone needs to produce food etc etc, then someone needs to pay for it all. Sage have not and will not all agree with each other on every point, and they aren't supposed to, they are supposed to give government their own advice and government decided what to do, taking into account the additional economic and other advice from all the other government departments (senior civil servants again). A labour government would have received the same advice from all parties, they would not have been putting Sir David King back into his post because that post is already filled. They might have taken different actions based on that advice and it's likely they would have made some better decisions / actions, but would not have taken other decisions / actions that worked well. We'll never know. Would "Independent Sage" have still been set up and been critical? Yes, probably, because most of them aren't the top researchers so they still wouldn't have been invited to join Sage.

Thanks @MRex that's an insightful post. That said I don't see them doing harm by questioning and challenging decisions that the government are taking at the present time. It's not as if the woman in the street is questioning government authority and saying that bloke from Indy Sage he's right - sod the virus. Far from it anyone who takes the trouble to study even slightly what they are saying is no doubt better informed than most and doing their bit to fight the virus. They are unpaid volunteers after all and I know from personal experience in a previous life Sir David King is no fool far from it

Whereas in Scotland anyone brought to the podium, medical or financial for example, is an SNP supporter.

Nothing independent about them. A group called ‘we, the citizens’ run them and fund them.

‘We, the Citizens’, also known as ‘All the Citizens’ is an activist group that campaign agains the government. Their website is filled with anti-Tory social media videos, including a protest outside Downing Street, and a conspiracy video about Cambridge Analytica.

The people behind All The Citizens, listed on their website, include failed Brexit whistle blower Shahmir Sanni, his lawyer Tamsin Allen, and conspiracist Carole Cadwalladr. The full list is replete with anti-Brexit activists, anti-capitalist filmmakers, and political campaigners. Not exactly a group you’d associate with independent scientific advice…

Interesting MrsPerry always good to understand who backs a particular group

The name is riding off the back of SAGE and they could be anyone really

Like a pp the elimination claim makes me doubt what they are saying more

@MrsPerrywinkle

Nothing independent about them. A group called ‘we, the citizens’ run them and fund them.

‘We, the Citizens’, also known as ‘All the Citizens’ is an activist group that campaign agains the government. Their website is filled with anti-Tory social media videos, including a protest outside Downing Street, and a conspiracy video about Cambridge Analytica.

The people behind All The Citizens, listed on their website, include failed Brexit whistle blower Shahmir Sanni, his lawyer Tamsin Allen, and conspiracist Carole Cadwalladr. The full list is replete with anti-Brexit activists, anti-capitalist filmmakers, and political campaigners. Not exactly a group you’d associate with independent scientific advice…

I think you're just talking about a group of people who back transparency and open debate generally.

I think you're just talking about a group of people who back transparency and open debate generally.

In which case it's important to be transparent about the fact that they're not 'independent' in the slightest.

They are independent of the government, which is fine - but I wish they'd chosen another name for their group

David King was a previous Chief Scientific Advisor, so Patrick Valance's predecessor
and is certainly not a wannabe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DavidKingg_(chemist)

Any SAGE scientist who disagrees too publicly with public policy would be sidelined as a public spokesman, like Jonathon Van-Tam seems to have been

We need to see different scientific povs in public and this independent group is evidently prioritising public health more than the official line

It would be useful also to have a "Swedish SAGE" too,
which advocates a much more hands-off policy and thinking of the economy, freedom to demonstrate etc

The Swedish government is a Left-Green coalition btw and the Conservative Opposition criticise them for the high death rate
So prioritising public health more wrt COVID is not a left-right issue

@IcedPurple

I think you're just talking about a group of people who back transparency and open debate generally.

In which case it's important to be transparent about the fact that they're not 'independent' in the slightest.

Well they are independent, as in independent of the government

What a surprise, academics think, that's their job. Wouldn't be much good at it if they didn't. Why does it have to be a big conspiracy? If you actually read up about the unprecedented levels of secrecy around SAGE, compared to in previous crises - that is the real issue here.

If SAGE we're open there'd be no space for anyone else to operate in.

Cumming's if he's worth his salt will have a list of 50 or so social media influencers whose media attack teams will rebut any anti-government opinion with slur, smears and half-truths. Mumsnet will be a key target - just saying...

And if he ain't doing that then he is real slouch and needs his eyes testing - preferably when driving a fast car towards Beachy Head.

Well they are independent, as in independent of the government

The point is they're just a group of scientists affiliated with a lobby group. So not really 'independent' - they have an obvious agenda. And not SAGE either. I'm sure they're well-informed, but so are hundreds of others, who don't go around calling themselves 'independent SAGE'.

Scumming's wouldn't even admit he was a member of the actual SAGE so lobby group or not who cares and if you think he has brought anything positive to British life then 'nuff said.

Guido Fawkes was crowing having outed this evil group of commies today.

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/26/attendees-of-sage-coronavirus-meetings-worried-by-presence-of-dominic-cummings

I am in no way a fan of the current government but I'm quite annoyed that David King has chosen to call his group "Independent SAGE". It is leading to unnecessary confusion.

I have no issue with the group criticising the government but I think it's best to be realistic about the fact that they are left leaning (as am I) and therefore they are unlikely to come out and say "we think that was a great idea Boris!"

'Indy' SAGE has never hidden that fact it was on their website from the off. Maybe Sir David along with countless other fair-minded folk have found the Johnston/Cumming's cabal of liars too much to stomach. He is no needless agit-prop thug far from it and he wouldn't I would have thought to want to be associated with something that wouldn't be useful or sound.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_King_(chemist)

I've been a bit unsure how independent this group really are - as they seem to be going for headline grabbing scare tactics (and if they'd been correct previously we'd be well in to our second wave by now)

And this just confirms these fears. If you reduce infections by even 20% a week (which would require significant lockdown) it would still take months to get them into single figures. And then what? It won't have gone away, it'll still be out there in the rest of the world, so if life at that point returns to normal it would come bouncing back. So the only option is to keep it down to manageable levels, which it's already at, and try to minimise the damage to the economy and the rest of healthcare. This isn't a "government" point of view, it's one shared by most non-blinkered scientists.

On a personal note, DS has an badly needed medical appointment on Friday - which has been delayed since March. I am very, very glad that the government is not pursuing an "elimination Covid at so costs" strategy and other healthcare has resumed.

No, that doesn't wash with me I'm afraid. Calling themselves independent SAGE was deliberate and, in my view, misleading.

Surely elimination can’t be a viable strategy for us? The economy has been annihilated after a few months of lockdown... People won’t do it any more. Then there’s the travel industry, the airline industry, the hospitality industry...

We’re not New Zealand and even they can’t stay shut for ever. Even with their small population and isolated position. We’re a densely populated island and a major international hub.

They lose all credibility I think with this argument. We need research and advice now on how best to live with the virus going forward.

Jeremy Hunt was an observer last week maybe he's 'on manoeuvres' .

Vera do you think elimination is sound advice?

I find it provocative in the manner of a group trying to get attention and not possible, which undermines their independent scientific position.

But do you think it could work? And should be aimed for

@MarshaBradyo

Vera do you think elimination is sound advice?

I find it provocative in the manner of a group trying to get attention and not possible, which undermines their independent scientific position.

But do you think it could work? And should be aimed for

Why can't elimination be aimed for? It is what Scotland is aiming for.

Eradication is not possible.

It’s been a long day can you explain the difference Labryrinth?

My understanding - willing to be corrected - is elimination is where you aim that there is no community transmission so any cases would be through either visitors or returners - the situation that NZ is in.

So as soon as there is a case you leap on it so it can't embed back in the community.

Eradication means covid is gone, can only be done globally or with a vaccine, currently impossible.

www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/10/elimination-what-new-zealands-coronavirus-response-can-teach-the-world