How the UK Sleepwalked into Another Covid Disaster article

[middleager]

'By failing to prevent the rapid spread of coronavirus in schools, Boris Johnson has thrown children and adults to the wolves.'

As a late 40 something who caught Covid off my son in September (who caught it at secondary school) and was ill for weeks, there's a lot in this article that resonates. My other son caught Covid at his secondary school and while it was inevitable, schools have just been left to get on with it.

Wanted to share:

www.newstatesman.com/comment/2021/11/how-the-uk-sleepwalked-into-another-covid-disaster

I don’t know who the author is.

But The New Statesman has more credibility than ‘Spiked’

Also the JCVI are by definition in the public domain; hard to see how they could stop being in the public domain.

And given that that they took so many months to publish minutes of meetings that were supposed to be public, it's also hard to see how they could be much less transparent than they already are.

The whole idea of Evidence Based Medicine is that decisions are supposed to be based on evidence and clear rationale and this is meant to be available to Joe or Joanne Public who is not only allowed but encouraged to take an active interest in it.

and you don't like it because it doesn't fit with your existing prejudices.

Nope. Incorrect anything that comes in from a credible source will make me adjust my view. I just don’t seek out stuff that is uninformed or emotive as it’s not useful to me.

@bumbleymummy

This dithering and lack of organisation has put vulnerable children at risk.

Dithering over vaccinating the vulnerable children themselves when they were approved early on, yes. ‘Dithering’ over waiting to determine whether the risks outweigh the benefits for a second dose for healthy teens, no.

Actually, there was so much dithering that non-vulnerable teens got vaccinated before some of the highly vulnerable ones.

Also, I don't see that there was any earth-changing advance in knowledge about the extremely low incidence of myocarditis in post vaccine teens between June and September, enough to delay the whole vaccination programme.

The JCVI handed over the decision-making to the CMOs didn't they? and that was the dramatic step that resulted in a change in advice.

I’m not sure Spiked is that credible though. It’s supported Farage amongst others.

New Statesman was linked with the intellectual Fabian society, and has a left wing slant. I don’t think it’s journalism has ever been suspect.

@MarshaBradyo

and you don't like it because it doesn't fit with your existing prejudices.

Nope. Incorrect anything that comes in from a credible source will make me adjust my view. I just don’t seek out stuff that is uninformed or emotive as it’s not useful to me.

Do you think that Boris Johnson is a credible source?

Saying this or that is "a credible source" is just another way of saying you are prejudiced.

Do you think that Boris Johnson is a credible source?

I don’t know why you are so sure what information I listen to.

I pretty much always state source so people can see where I got it from. It’s why I often mention R4 and who is speaking in a post. I often reference Chris Whitty, and SG or Patrick Valance less so

If people have an issue with that source they can say why.

I know you’re going for the derision angle, as per, but I’m happy with the information I’ve sought out and the expertise of the people I listen to.

Minghella read PPE at Oxford. It's fair to assume that he is capable of critically assessing the actions of the government and their advisers.

Is expertise a thing at Spike?

Ds is a journo on national news. It’s not that highly thought of in the media. Both New Statemen and Spectator are.

I know you’re going for the derision angle

Irony.

Not sure why he feels that is enough to have an uninformed opinion re JCVI but he’s a TV writer campaigning after being in hospital for Covid so I guess that’s his motivation

I agree the 12 - 15 vaccination should have been sooner.

However, the illness in almost all children is mild and the best immunity level comes from natural infection followed by vaccination. A lot of children will benefit from this and were never particularly ill to achieve it.

A fair proportion of the double jabbed will still get Covid and hopefully will have better future protection after 1 infection where their vaccinations stopped them getting seriously ill. These people will largely be parents of school children so not of a very vulnerable age.

The elderly and most vulnerable should be triple jabbed by now which is really as much protection as they can be given while still allowing the economy and day to day life to function.

The unvaccinated make their own decisions and take their risk. Hopefully without putting too many others at risk but you'll always have an element of society that aren't prepared to act for the good of society.

No strategy is perfect but I don't think we're doing too badly at all actually. Covid will circulate in every country and a lot of people will catch it. It's more about managing the timings of that than avoidance.

Actually, there was so much dithering that non-vulnerable teens got vaccinated before some of the highly vulnerable ones.

Well, yes, that’s ridiculous but I still don’t see how that justifies your rage about the vaccines for healthy teens being delayed and why you think it impacts vulnerable teens.

Also, I don't see that there was any earth-changing advance in knowledge about the extremely low incidence of myocarditis in post vaccine teens between June and September, enough to delay the whole vaccination programme.

Well, that was the point of waiting wasn’t it? To make sure that they had enough information to make an informed decision - there was some concern about the increased incidence of myocarditis in teenage boys.

The JCVI handed over the decision-making to the CMOs didn't they? and that was the dramatic step that resulted in a change in advice.

The CMO advice was a single dose and it was justified on the grounds of potential disruption to school. As shown above, a single dose has little impact on transmission so would be of limited benefit to vulnerable teens - they would have been far more protected by their own 2 doses of the vaccine which should have been delivered in a more timely manner.

@CorrBlimeyGG

I know you’re going for the derision angle

Irony.

Not sure why he feels that is enough to have an uninformed opinion re JCVI but he’s a TV writer campaigning after being in hospital for Covid so I guess that’s his motivation

Why?

It’s stated online. He’s a campaigner.

‘Among the very first wave of Covid-19 patients in the UK to be hospitalised, Dominic has written influential articles on his experience, and since then has fought for recognition and action for those affected.’

Why do people throw out assessment of source so easily - wouldn’t you want an informed scientific opinion or just more of what you know and think

Easy wins for writers I guess

However, the illness in almost all children is mild and the best immunity level comes from natural infection followed by vaccination. A lot of children will benefit from this and were never particularly ill to achieve it.

@Lindy2

This isn't true - best level of immunity is produced by vaccination & infection, but this doesn't mean someone must be infected first before vaccination.

If teens want to take up the offer of vaccination (and thus happy with the benefit/risk profile) it is crazy so many have been forced to do this after they have been infected, meaning that they didn't have protection when it would've made the biggest difference, due to our incompotent government.

@ollyollyoxenfree

However, the illness in almost all children is mild and the best immunity level comes from natural infection followed by vaccination. A lot of children will benefit from this and were never particularly ill to achieve it.

@Lindy2

This isn't true - best level of immunity is produced by vaccination & infection, but this doesn't mean someone must be infected first before vaccination.

If teens want to take up the offer of vaccination (and thus happy with the benefit/risk profile) it is crazy so many have been forced to do this after they have been infected, meaning that they didn't have protection when it would've made the biggest difference, due to our incompotent government.

The research shows immunity levels hold strong and high for individuals who had infection followed by vaccination.

Studies are still ongoing regarding how well immunity levels hold, over the longer term, for vaccination followed by infection.

Hopefully it will have the same strong immune effect but there hasn't been enough time yet to know for sure.

I don’t believe that I or some random journalist know more than the JVCI on this. When it comes to children’s health I’m really glad they’ve proceeded with caution. Some of what’s happening in e.g. certain US states, with what effectively amounts to mandatory vaccination for 5 year olds, is worrying.

It’s not fair to suggest the JVCI have been swayed by anti-vaxxers unless you have some rock solid evidence of that.

And would releasing the vaccine to teenagers earlier have solved everything? Because most of Europe is struggling now, and they did just that.

@MarshaBradyo

Do you think that Boris Johnson is a credible source?

I don’t know why you are so sure what information I listen to.

I pretty much always state source so people can see where I got it from. It’s why I often mention R4 and who is speaking in a post. I often reference Chris Whitty, and SG or Patrick Valance less so

If people have an issue with that source they can say why.

I know you’re going for the derision angle, as per, but I’m happy with the information I’ve sought out and the expertise of the people I listen to.

Actually, that (as per usual) isn't derision, but is a valid point.

As you so often have defended the decisions of the government, and you are now saying you think we should only heed "credible" sources, so you think Mr Johnson is a credible source?

@RobinPenguins

I don’t believe that I or some random journalist know more than the JVCI on this. When it comes to children’s health I’m really glad they’ve proceeded with caution. Some of what’s happening in e.g. certain US states, with what effectively amounts to mandatory vaccination for 5 year olds, is worrying.

It’s not fair to suggest the JVCI have been swayed by anti-vaxxers unless you have some rock solid evidence of that.

And would releasing the vaccine to teenagers earlier have solved everything? Because most of Europe is struggling now, and they did just that.

How has the "caution" helped the situation at all?

I can see several ways in which it has made the situation a bit worse and no way at all in which it has been helpful.

Vaccinating teenagers sooner would not have "solved everything"; but then no one is suggesting that.

It would have been a sensible, practical measure which we could have carried out that would have reduced infections in schools a bit.

Ah all this top secret information that the JCVI must have access to that informed their decision when they are supposed to be operating in a culture of transparency. Their belatedly released minutes weren't very reassuring were they? Like the howler that was suggesting that there is a low risk of child-to-child transmission. They must have been very surprised by the quarter of a million kids that were off before half term with covid. Where on earth did they catch it from?

No you are interpreting the wrong way Here

I try to listen to the experts behind the decisions as much as I can

Hence heavy reliance on R4 and scientists etc speaking and analysis rather than print / headline media or Twitter - which are emotive and where people tend to follow if they agree already (Twitter)

I have generally agreed with all Chris Whitty’s decisions which obviously inform the government.

The people I listen to are JCVI particularly Andrew Pollard, CMO, CSA, MRHA, SG and Oxford team

Every now and then other stuff gets linked and I’ll have a view like anyone else

I agree with the U.K. scientific approach that underpins decisions, maybe a few questions I’d like to ask as obviously I don’t have complete picture. I’d like to ask more about messaging re vaccine for 12 plus and other stuff

If government has diverted from above then maybe I’d have a view on that too

I haven’t included SAGE as I rate Chris Whitty’s advice higher and whilst they are very useful to have they are quite focused on their own remit, understandably, but the issues are broader than that remit.

@MarshaBradyo

No not a good article

Too muddled, emotive and personally driven

He’s a TV screenwriter / producer and campaigner so it’s not a surprise

He doesn’t have access to information so is just offloading

He's also a trustee of a charity which helps people affected by covid.

I'm not sure why you think the article is "too muddled,emotive and personally driven". Do you disagree with anything the article is claiming? I also don't see why you assume he "doesn't have access to information". I don't see why he would have less access to information than most columnists.

Yes, I also rely heavily on Radio 4 and am interested in what medical experts have to say

I find the second article strange. It suggests NHS saying 'no one wants lockdown' is a veiled threat. As if government acts on NHS concerns. It makes not even a passing mention of long covid. It refers to Delta as 'so-called Delta variant'. Odd.