Do you think that at times what we have referred to as ‘the science’ has got it wrong?

[MarshaBradyo]

I’m thinking about the many times people said well it’s going to go badly wrong and the science backs this up

But a few times this hasn’t happened

July opening
Omicron and not doing ‘circuit breaker’ and not ending in lockdown
Not getting close to best case for omicron

And so on - maybe other examples

What do you think - was it unnecessarily pessimistic?

My father a 70 year old was taken from us thanks to "mild" Omicron on January 4th this year. The amount of peopke who have asked me if he had underlying conditions has been upsetting. As though it's ok that he was taken before his time. The I'm alright Jack mentality some have is staggering. The government have mishandled this whole health crisis from the start. The scientists are discovering new things all the time about this novel virus. Our family have been absolutely devastated by this virus. I'm aware to many my precious, gentle Dad is just a statistic though which is unbearably hard to take in. People are still dying of this horrendous virus. I don't want lockdowns all the time but the totally opposite approach has cost so many lives and left so many grief stricken and having to come to terms with the suffering inflicted on our lost loved ones by this.

I don't think science is one set path

I also see science as evidence based, not modelling based. I would separate science from theoretical models.

I do think it was hugely OTT but Ferguson has form for this.

I also see science as evidence based, not modelling based. I would separate science from theoretical models.

Absolutely modeling is all about also how the data and programming is put in, basically put crap in get crap out.

The idea that there is such a thing as "The Science" is fundamentally flawed. We are in an evolving situation and lots of scientists will form educated views on many different aspects of the pandemic and then alter those opinions as new information comes to light or as new developments arise. It's highly unlikely that any one scientist will be right all of the time. One key thing that some senior scientists clearly got wrong initially (-I think responsibility for this may lie with the WHO) was to vastly underestimate the extent to which the virus was airborne. This led to messaging which told us our focus should be on cleaning surfaces and washing hands when our key focus as far as Covid transmission was concerned should have been on ventilation.

I’ve read a few times recently re the lifting of isolation I’d rather ‘listen to the science’

It’s interesting to see that most get it’s a flawed concept.

Mark Woolhouse, a member of the modelling arm of SAGE, has written a book called ‘The Year The World Went Mad’.

He now believes that ‘the science’ was deeply flawed and that lockdowns were the wrong policy, even though he was part of it.

@MarshaBradyo

I’ve read a few times recently re the lifting of isolation I’d rather ‘listen to the science’

It’s interesting to see that most get it’s a flawed concept.

I think we need to distinguish between those areas where there is a high level of consensus among scientists (whilst acknowledging that there are times when the majority can get it wrong) and those areas which are sufficiently uncertain that well informed experts will hold different views. We also need to recognise that sometimes the debate is not over the science itself, but over the policy. For example, I doubt you would find any scientist who would disagree that reducing the average number of close contacts a person has will, at population level, reduce the spread of the virus. The question as to the extent to which it is desirable for the state to intervene to that end is a political one.

@Flyonawalk

Mark Woolhouse, a member of the modelling arm of SAGE, has written a book called ‘The Year The World Went Mad’.

He now believes that ‘the science’ was deeply flawed and that lockdowns were the wrong policy, even though he was part of it.

I'm sure it's very interesting but I can't put money in his pocket.

@EmmaH2022 my thoughts exactly. I wouldn’t dream of enriching any of SAGE.

The Telegraph cover his book today online.

…I mention his book for interest only, as he is publicly turning his back on what he and the rest of SAGE imposed on the country.

I certainly don’t suggest that anyone should support his work.

Yes of course. It's a novel virus.

@luckylavender

Yes of course. It's a novel virus.

Do you feel there is this same uncertainty re isolation stopping?

And this too could be more ok than suggested currently by some

As it has been a few times

Well “the science” told me in March 2020 that masks were useless and now according to “the science” we should wear them forevermore so I think yes in an evolving situation the science often got it wrong! What I find interesting is that science will go “yep got it wrong sorry guys new virus it happens!” But the public (well mumsnet!) go the science is right and we got it wrong when we failed to follow the science!it’s weird the narrative is boris was stupid to not follow the science and that is why he locked down late in March 2020 yet Chris witty admits that he didn’t support an earlier lockdown at the time (even if the public have now recreated the situation as him calling for one and boris saying no it’s not actually what happened!!)

[quote PAFMO]@nojudgementhere

Anyway, thanks for jogging my memory as to who you are. I've just done a quick AS and reported more of the lies and vaccine misinformation you've been scattergunning MN with over the past year.

Your supreme ignorance over what a vaccine is, your likening Covid passes to past historical events, your claim that the vaccine leads to heart issues and death.

Thought you lot had been banned tbh as it's been strangely normal round here for a while.[/quote]
Now, now @PAFMO - there's really no need to get so nasty and personal! Or if you are going to insult me then please could you try and stick to the truth at least?

I have not likened Covid passes to past historical events and have in fact stated that I would never do this as I would not want to offend or upset anyone. I do however feel they are impractical, illogical and extremely divisive and I'm happy that they are no longer being used in the UK.

I have also said that there have been rare occurences of pericarditis and myocarditis that have been caused by the vaccine as well as a very small number of deaths. As far as I am aware this is the truth but if you don't think it is then please feel free to report me for misinformation (again).

Finally, as I have only been a member of Mumsnet for a couple of months, I think I can safely say I have not been 'scattergunning MN with lies over the last year'. Maybe you should try and get your facts straight next time?

Yes.

In particular I'd like an explanation as to how the revolting (and subsequently lockdown breaking) Ferguson who had been proven utterly wrong in the shameful Foot and Mouth slaughter debacle of the early 2000's ever got near the government's ear.

@CathyorClaire

Yes.

In particular I'd like an explanation as to how the revolting (and subsequently lockdown breaking) Ferguson who had been proven utterly wrong in the shameful Foot and Mouth slaughter debacle of the early 2000's ever got near the government's ear.

Wikipedia says this about his bird flu prediction

-

Bird flu – 2005

In August 2005, Neil Ferguson said in an interview that bird flu could kill as many as 200 million people worldwide. He stated that "Around 40 million people died in 1918 Spanish flu outbreak" and that "There are six times more people on the planet now so you could scale it [the death toll from bird flu] up to around 200 million people probably".[25]

In the interview, he warned that failure to take swift action would be catastrophic for the United Kingdom, saying that "If the virus got as far as Britain, it would effectively be too late".[26]

The virus did not reach Britain and 74 persons worldwide died of bird flu in 2005.[27]

@nojudgementhere I expect that people who shouted for lockdown and wanted it to be even harsher are going to feel uncomfortable about it, now it emerges that some of the lockdown policy-makers consider it an appalling mistake.

It's not really science though, it's mathematical models based on the science we know at the time.

There are / were a lot of unknown assumptions that need to be made. More how bad it could be or a range of severity than what it actually will be. No one can predict the future of a new disease.

@Flyonawalk - Will be interesting to see that's for sure! Have definitely noticed a few of the more vocal pro-restrictions TV presenters like Jeremy Vine starting to soften their stance a bit over the last couple of weeks as the mood has shifted!

Let us not forget that at the start of the pandemic there was a horrendous death rate among care home residents due to Covid positive people being discharged from hospital into care homes. I don't know whether that particular outcome was due to the scientists who advised the Government being way too optimistic, or whether the scientists advising the Government issued dire warnings about what would happen but the Government failed to act on those warnings.

@GoldenOmber

"Yes - a lot of people still seem very set on the idea that The Science is some kind of oracle that will tell you the single right answer for any given question. Doesn't work like that!"

+++

Over history it seems that we have removed the infallibility and divine right of rule from firstly the Church then secondly Monarchs only for it now to be replaced by "The Science".

As with all these things people are more likely to “listen to the science” that fits what they are comfortable with at this point in time than they are prepared to admit. I count myself in this, none of us objective. It would be more accurate for people to say things like “I prefer to pay attention to the more pessimistic/optimistic predictions for XYZ reasons” than simply “I follow the science”

It is worth noting too that on here there have been a handful of obvious wind-up merchants who have made one prediction or another seem more prominent than they might have been. A couple I haven’t seen around for a while, maybe bored or banned. The media has been similar. The nuance and measured opinions get lost

@VikingOnTheFridge

The major problem is that there isn't and couldn't ever be one unified 'the science'. It's always been about priorities and tradeoffs. Unfortunately, lots of people don't understand this, and indeed are very keen on the idea of The Science.

Not surprising when Boris Johnson always spoke about following ‘the science’, as though nothing was his responsibility.

Now it’s advantageous for him to drop the restrictions and he is no longer flanked by scientists.

Andrew Pollard good this morning re finding balance long term and not getting fixated on right week