Is there something they are not telling us...

[Thoughtsfortheday]

When they announced the start of this lock down, I though the advisers, scientists, Borris were very positive, it coincided with the huge roll out of the vaccine which was/is obviously very good news, I felt the over all message was positive “it’s just for a short time and then most things will be back to normal” type thing...

However I can’t get over, as we’re coming to the planned end of lock down the shift in positivity and what a gloomy picture seems to be painted...

Possibility of no holidays, uk included, no real map of schools returning, there was even news last night that this might last until all adults are vaccinated, the prognosis just seems to be getting worse by that day.

When will this ever end...

@StarCat2020

I'm sorry I've just had a gutful of it all now Don't be sorry when you have nothing to be sorry for.

Thank you Feels really out of order saying it as people do have it worse. I just want to see if I can salvage anything of my business. I don't want to let go quite yet. I miss my mates. I miss life. And I was so positive with the vaccine and then Sage said that last night and I cried. Like a div. I cried! And I felt selfish for it too.

Feels really out of order saying it as people do have it worse
Surely it is better to have an angry type online than to get upset and feel guilty??

Boris should feel guilty, Dildo Harding should feel guilty, we should not.

Sage advisors shouldn't be allowed to go on national TV to talk about long term social distancing and more measures next autumn. They are there to advise the government, not scare the public.

If there is a distinct possibility that the government might be thinking of longer term measures or further lockdowns it should be put through the proper channels (parliament), consent obtained and substantial genuine evidence provided and a proper announcement made free of propaganda and NLP techniques. This is not a game.

@dividedwefall

Sage advisors shouldn't be allowed to go on national TV to talk about long term social distancing and more measures next autumn. They are there to advise the government, not scare the public.

If there is a distinct possibility that the government might be thinking of longer term measures or further lockdowns it should be put through the proper channels (parliament), consent obtained and substantial genuine evidence provided and a proper announcement made free of propaganda and NLP techniques. This is not a game.

I disagree. I think SAGE do need to share knowledge.

Like Christmas, just because people could mix as per the political advice, doesn’t mean they should have. Same for schools remaining open with the case numbers there were. Look at the fallout after the Christmas mixing.

Yes, scientists views should not be censored, we are not an authoritarian state like China.

In any case, it's not SAGE saying this, it's the view of one member of SAGE.

I agree with PP that it’s to keep us locked down. If they said things were great people wouldn’t comply. They want the numbers to get to a certain point. BJ actually said in one of the press conferences he’d only open things back up when he was sure he wouldn’t shut them back down again, as businesses had told him that opening and shutting was much more detrimental than just shutting for a longer period and then opening again.

They're trying to keep us scared. Luckily it's not working very well anymore.

@CoffeeandCroissant

Yes, scientists views should not be censored, we are not an authoritarian state like China.

In any case, it's not SAGE saying this, it's the view of one member of SAGE.

I am definitely not saying we should censor scientists! That is the opposite of everything I stand for. I am saying that this is a serious situation where fundamental freedoms are being removed systematically. We hope we get them back, but we have unelected scientists from only ONE SIDE of the coin going on TV and telling people they are losing their freedom for longer. This is not Sage's place and it is creating uncertainty, fear and mixed messaging. And if it is that they should be allowed to do this then we need scientists on prime time TV who disagree giving their view too.

Due to their position advising government, the words of SAGE scientists are taken by the public as being policy.

They just don't want to give us false hope by saying that X will happen by a certain date, when they have no way of predicting what is going to happen with this virus in weeks to come. It's a moving target.

Well the public are adults and should realise that it's the view of one scientist who also happens to be a member of Sage, not necessarily the views of SAGE as a whole. Plenty of other scientists who are not members of SAGE are also frequently interviewed on TV, from Christina Pagel to Devi Sridhar as well as those with more fringe views like those who supported the Great Barrington declaration. I want to hear what scientists with relevant expertise have to say and to do that they would need to go on TV. Not sure why you equate scientists giving a view with trying to scare the public, you are not going to get a balanced and informed view by only hearing from people who tell you what you want to hear or only listening to people you agree with.

I disagree. I think SAGE do need to share knowledge.

Knowledge yes, scaremongering bollocks no.

@dividedwefall

Sage advisors shouldn't be allowed to go on national TV to talk about long term social distancing and more measures next autumn. They are there to advise the government, not scare the public.

If there is a distinct possibility that the government might be thinking of longer term measures or further lockdowns it should be put through the proper channels (parliament), consent obtained and substantial genuine evidence provided and a proper announcement made free of propaganda and NLP techniques. This is not a game.

SAGE are just being honest and frank though I think. What's the point in sugar coating the message? Not everyone will have the vaccine and it won't be 100% effective either- so there will be a very large pool of vulnerable people (who will need NHS treatment) if the virus is allowed to spread with no restrictions.

Surely no-one really believes we'll be back to our pre-March 2020 lifestyles by the Autumn of this year e.g. cramming onto trains with no masks/student attending lectures with 300 others?

Knowledge yes, scaremongering bollocks no.

But to some on here scaremongering bollocks simply means 'anything I don't like or don't want hear'.

There is a weird cognitive dissonance on here where it's "vaccines = amazing, isn't science great" but "scientists concerned about new variants = scaremongering bollocks".

Or 'study (pre-print, preliminary data, lots of uncertainty) shows certain drug may be effective treatment' = wow, this is amazing, check this out, good news but 'study (pre-print, preliminary data, lots of uncertainty) shows certain vaccine may be less effective against new variant' = scaremongering bollocks.

@TheDailyCarbunkle

Yes, we don't want people to have any hope, we want them as downtrodden and miserable as possible because miserable people are less likely to put their heads up and say 'when are we getting our lives back?' Miserable, exhausted people are more compliant.

Don't you have an other drums? You've beat this one to death.

Surely no-one really believes we'll be back to our pre-March 2020 lifestyles by the Autumn of this year e.g. cramming onto trains with no masks/student attending lectures with 300 others?

I think people want to do this, and the public appetite to do this can (and does) influence policy.

It'll be incredibly hard to persuade vaccinated people that they should not do the things they want to do, long term. I don't think I'll be persuaded to do so voluntarily - I would have to be forced (i.e shop closures). I don't think shops will be closed in September.

Surely no-one really believes we'll be back to our pre-March 2020 lifestyles by the Autumn of this year e.g. cramming onto trains with no masks/student attending lectures with 300 others

No but I think there's a big gap between that and where we are now. We could reopen schools, sporting facilities and non-essential retail and allow small group mixing. It's not perfect eg if you want to get married but would be far better than we have now, and if all the vulnerable have been vaccinated, new variants or not, those things are low risk.

The virus has obviously become more transmissible even before the Kent variant appeared, given the rates went up in the autumn when we were wearing masks, not mixing in large groups indoors or travelling on packed trains and working in busy offices like we were in the spring before lockdown.

Just stop watching the news, that's what I've done.