Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Reorte]

56 minutes ago, EddieB said:

While we couldn't escape the pandemic, lessons were available for foresight, not just hindsight.  Many countries in SE Asia had had to cope with similar outbreaks before and their response, had we investigated, could have been instructive.  The situation in Italy gave us two weeks' notice to learn and prepare.

 

Need to be careful with that - I wouldn't be surprised if the situation in Italy was what resulted in so many people being moved in to nursing homes and out of hospitals, with the view that absolutely everything needed to be done to take pressure off hospitals even if that would have bad consequences elsewhere. Benefit of hindsight and all that... Remember in the early days the worry everyone had was hospitals being completely and utterly overwhelmed in short order.

[alastairq]

Mention is made of Southeast Asia, and even, Italy.

What is not mentioned [but was brought out by many, even on this thread, at the time?} is that the societies, the general populations, of these places are so vastly different in character,  to the sorts of folk we have living in the UK.

 

One only has to view the bleatings about 'not being able to fly off abroad for the hard-earned hols, etc etc?

Also, good or bad, the UK [its population I should say...the ''voters'']...has decided to make itself the centre of the travelling world...a global transport hub.

Not so easy, given our [self-imposed?] global responsibilities. to simply 'shut down' , when compared to places like SE Asia?

 

Like it or not, politics was continually thrust to the fore...by media, mainly...social or otherwise....everyone trying to make a meal out of the situation.

[rocor]

3 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Indeed! Either QED, or, as they might say in a Bond movie "Right on, Q"!

 

A "Right on" Q?

 

That would be the one, that pre Daniel Craig, whilst kitting Bond out with the latest gadgetry, would advise, "Bond, in this day and age, I don't think you should still be treating women as luxury willy warmers".

[chris p bacon]

 

2 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

But Neil is pointing out the similar reporting, from both ends of the journalistic political spectrum, of the formal findings of the Health and Social Care Committee and the Science and Technology Committee, which contain MPs from all parties, but happen to be chaired by MPs from Government benches. So who is holding a different opinion, and on what basis? Is the 150-page report wrong? 

 

It matters not to the many, many, many bereaved who is responsible. This all-party report finds lives were wasted.

Your response below was a sarcastic dig at John as he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads.

 

4 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

It's alright. Someone will be along in just a minute to assure us no other Government would have done better. So that's that.

 

 

What John actually said was that everyone has made mistakes and there are things we need to learn.

4 hours ago, hayfield said:

 

I think you will find many other countries were much the same, few European countries were prepared or even encountered anything similar,  what the headlines in the red tops have missed out, is the reliance on what the experts were advising, especially in the early days. The report also mentioned things that we actually did well, respirators, vaccine research and roll out, only the higher quality papers reported this

 

One thing I seem not to get an answer on is that I believe 50% of care homes had little or no covid infections, the other half saw the virus spread widely. We need to learn what made the difference, secondly in hospitals cross infection seemed an issue. Again what lessons can we learn

 

 

[woodenhead]

44 minutes ago, alastairq said:

Mention is made of Southeast Asia, and even, Italy.

What is not mentioned [but was brought out by many, even on this thread, at the time?} is that the societies, the general populations, of these places are so vastly different in character,  to the sorts of folk we have living in the UK.

 

One only has to view the bleatings about 'not being able to fly off abroad for the hard-earned hols, etc etc?

Also, good or bad, the UK [its population I should say...the ''voters'']...has decided to make itself the centre of the travelling world...a global transport hub.

Not so easy, given our [self-imposed?] global responsibilities. to simply 'shut down' , when compared to places like SE Asia?

 

Like it or not, politics was continually thrust to the fore...by media, mainly...social or otherwise....everyone trying to make a meal out of the situation.

Sadly there is an element of society that do not believe in 'big government' and any interference is a bad thing.

 

The Government though underestimated the support they would get from the population if they were asked to isolate, it of course had to go hand in hand with financial support but I think the overwhelming majority of the population did as they were asked, with little fuss.

 

A lot of the voices in the back benches asking to open up, let people go on holiday etc I think came from vested interest and lobbying, possibly similar voices who in the beginning resisted any lockdown or government encroachment on civil liberties in a time a real crisis.

[alastairq]

8 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

but I think the overwhelming majority of the population did as they were asked, with little fuss.

 

 The so-called 'silent' majority?

 

Perhaps the real issue on the part of the Government wasn't that they did, or did not, heed the 'advice' that was coming from Sage and others..but that they took the advice of those whose brief is to advise on the moods & responses of the voters? A psychology team? [or whatever 'ology they go under?} 

 

Perhaps it was that team that got it wrong?

[hayfield]

6 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Sadly there is an element of society that do not believe in 'big government' and any interference is a bad thing.

 

The Government though underestimated the support they would get from the population if they were asked to isolate, it of course had to go hand in hand with financial support but I think the overwhelming majority of the population did as they were asked, with little fuss.

 

A lot of the voices in the back benches asking to open up, let people go on holiday etc I think came from vested interest and lobbying, possibly similar voices who in the beginning resisted any lockdown or government encroachment on civil liberties in a time a real crisis.

 

I think you are correct there where our government and many others underestimated the dire effect of covid infections, probably lulled into a false sense of security after dodging the bullet of the earlier viruses, Ebola, bird flu etc. The carnage tore into most countries in central and western Europe. Then effected all the Americas as badly if not worse

 

I would say most of the western governments were found wanting, all seemingly locked down too late, all had shortages of PPE and ventilators. The governments were being led by their scientific advisers. However what has been reported badly was the praise this same report on the UK's response to vaccine procurement and vaccination rollout, sadly too few countries were quick off the ground in both producing vaccines and getting it into its population. If the same process was done in all Western countries, how many would have done as well?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[woodenhead]

16 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 The so-called 'silent' majority?

 

Perhaps the real issue on the part of the Government wasn't that they did, or did not, heed the 'advice' that was coming from Sage and others..but that they took the advice of those whose brief is to advise on the moods & responses of the voters? A psychology team? [or whatever 'ology they go under?} 

 

Perhaps it was that team that got it wrong?

I think it may have been one of the 'research groups' the party is so fond of. Only recently realised they call themselves this because if it is 'research' they get funding from central government.

[woodenhead]

4 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

I think you are correct there where our government and many others underestimated the dire effect of covid infections, probably lulled into a false sense of security after dodging the bullet of the earlier viruses, Ebola, bird flu etc. The carnage tore into most countries in central and western Europe. Then effected all the Americas as badly if not worse

 

I would say most of the western governments were found wanting, all seemingly locked down too late, all had shortages of PPE and ventilators. The governments were being led by their scientific advisers. However what has been reported badly was the praise this same report on the UK's response to vaccine procurement and vaccination rollout, sadly too few countries were quick off the ground in both producing vaccines and getting it into its population. If the same process was done in all Western countries, how many would have done as well?

 

i don't disagree that it was wider than just our Government, we've all watched from afar and gone 'glad it wasn't us'.

 

With regards the vaccines, yes it has been a great success although the eye has been taken off the ball recently in my view in the 25-39 age range, even the 40-49 age group are only just scraping the magic 80% figure.

 

It's interesting to see that the 16-17 age range tail off is not as flat as those in the 25-39 range, even the 18-24 range is heading above the 25-39 age range.

 

 

If we are not careful, what began as a great success may yet be turned into a failure.

[alastairq]

I note the 'traffic light'  furrin travel system has quietly been disposed of?  Much yippeeing from a large percentage of the less ancient population?

Clever move by government, in my view.

In concert with 'allowing' or , not preventing?] the ever increasing rise in infections....I see we are now being red-lighted by other countries...so the government no longer can be 'blamed' for restricting peoples' travel plans....let the other countries do it for us??

 

Turning us into the dirty man of the world is clever...

[hayfield]

38 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

Your response below was a sarcastic dig at John as he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads.

 

 

What John actually said was that everyone has made mistakes and there are things we need to learn.

 

 

 

 

Clearly what the report actually found would not quite make as good headlines, I guess all the findings were not as interesting

 

Quotes

The vaccination program represented one of the most effective initiatives in the history of the UK.

World leading work on covid therapies

 

OK politicians may deserve what they get, but the report was also criticizing the scientific/medical community and the civil servants involved in the decision making process. 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, would those MP's have done anything different if they had to make the decisions.?

 

[Zero Gravitas]

1 hour ago, chris p bacon said:

 

Your response below was a sarcastic dig at John as he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads.

 

 

What John actually said was that everyone has made mistakes and there are things we need to learn.

 

 

 

Sorry - are you suggesting that it’s OK for the right-wing leanings in the thread to be tolerated, but not those that are left of centre? 

[hayfield]

5 minutes ago, Zero Gravitas said:

 

Sorry - are you suggesting that it’s OK for the right-wing leanings in the thread to be tolerated, but not those that are left of centre? 

 

Read what Chris said first, quite the opposite. Its supposed to be non political

 

Facts and information

No politics !!!

[Zero Gravitas]

5 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Read what Chris said first, quite the opposite. Its supposed to be non political

 

Facts and information

No politics !!!

 

Yes, I did. But I’m not so sure you did - what part of “ he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads” do you think isn’t a political point? 

[hayfield]

24 minutes ago, Zero Gravitas said:

 

Yes, I did. But I’m not so sure you did - what part of “ he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads” do you think isn’t a political point? 

 

Its the context of what you are replying to, taken out of context it means something else

[chris p bacon]

39 minutes ago, Zero Gravitas said:

 

Sorry - are you suggesting that it’s OK for the right-wing leanings in the thread to be tolerated, but not those that are left of centre? 

 

It is supposed to be a non political thread

23 minutes ago, Zero Gravitas said:

 

Yes, I did. But I’m not so sure you did - what part of “ he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads” do you think isn’t a political point? 

 

It is quite obvious in this and other threads that politics are tolerated if left leaning or anti 'B'. I even read a 'B' diatribe in an Accurascale thread a day ago, I reported it but it's still there.

 

[AY Mod]

9 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

I even read a 'B' diatribe in an Accurascale thread a day ago, I reported it but it's still there.

 

I have checked back through the report notifications for the last four weeks and cannot see anything that has come through for the Accurascale subforum. The implication is that I don't remove left wing stuff but remove right wing is unfounded; if I did the latter there would be a lot fewer posts in this topic from the poster who walked straight into the mantrap earlier today.

 

[Zero Gravitas]

11 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

It is supposed to be a non political thread

 

It is quite obvious in this and other threads that politics are tolerated if left leaning or anti 'B'. I even read a 'B' diatribe in an Accurascale thread a day ago, I reported it but it's still there.

 

 

And to me it's quite obvious that politics leaning to the right are tolerated in this and other threads.

 

I think Andy has done a splendid job to keep the debate alive without stifling the differences of opinion that are bound to occur. However, I was unable to let your comment about the one-sided tolerance of views pass.

 

To my mind it's a bit like the BBC - if both sides are complaining of bias it's probably got it about right.

[Neil]

2 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

..... the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads

 

I'm an unrepentant lefty and from that standpoint I see that right of centre viewpoints are tolerated here too. I suspect that a bit like the BBC,  RMweb could be criticised from both left and right,  so I reckon the balance is about right.

 

Posted at the same time as Mr Gravitas.

 

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by Neil

[chris p bacon]

4 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

 

I have checked back through the report notifications for the last four weeks and cannot see anything that has come through for the Accurascale subforum. The implication is that I don't remove left wing stuff but remove right wing is unfounded; if I did the latter there would be a lot fewer posts in this topic from the poster who walked straight into the mantrap earlier today.

 

 

From this post onwards (Saturday 10.27)

 

 

I clicked report as I have done before.

 

 

[AY Mod]

21 minutes ago, chris p bacon said:

 

From this post onwards (Saturday 10.27)

 

 

I clicked report as I have done before.

 

 

 

So, it wasn't a day ago (otherwise I'd have included it in the screenshot).

 

 

I've taken a look at the post - 10.36 not 10.27 (and removed it only because of one phrase).

 

Therefore your assertion of my bias is incorrect in this instance and an apology wouldn't go amiss for that. You would have grounds to say that if I said what I actually thought about some individuals in public roles where no benefit of hindsight was needed to see what they were doing and why. I have respect and disrespect for individuals on both sides of the house - take that as you see fit.

[EddieB]

2 hours ago, chris p bacon said:

Your response below was a sarcastic dig at John as he obviously doesn't espouse the left wing leanings which are so openly tolerated on this (and other) threads.

There may be such a leaning on this site (recently exemplified by quoting an outspoken opinion piece from an ex-pat in Spain?), but there is also a tendency to read politics into neutral statements - and react to those suppositions.  To highlight an all-party report as being critical of Government failings is not to adopt a party-political stance (as ably demonstrated by showing the headlines of two newspapers at opposite ends of that spectrum).

 

You might be surprised at what I actually think.

[beast66606]

4 minutes ago, Neil said:

 

I'm an unrepentant lefty and from that standpoint I see that right of centre viewpoints are tolerated here too. I suspect that a bit like the BBC,  RMweb could be criticised from both left and right,  so I reckon the balance is about right.

 

Posted at the same time as Mr Gravitas.

 

Like those who claim the BBC is balanced - saying it doesn't make it so.

[APOLLO]

Covid hit the world out of the blue early last year (a bit earlier for China where the source was).. It was a steep, fast learning curve for everyone, especially politicians, clinicians etc

 

Not one country shone, yes some did better than others. I think we did OK - and yes hindsight says we could have been better.

 

But we SHOULD be better armed for future pandemics - fingers crossed.

 

Brit15

[chris p bacon]

1 minute ago, EddieB said:

There may be such a leaning on this site (recently exemplified by quoting an outspoken opinion piece from an ex-pat in Spain?), but there is also a tendency to read politics into neutral statements - and react to those suppositions.  To highlight an all-party report as being critical of Government failings is not to adopt a party-political stance (as ably demonstrated by showing the headlines of two newspapers at opposite ends of that spectrum).

 

You might be surprised at what I actually think.

It wasn't the headlines but the inference that a specific poster would be along to dispute it. He did post but not in the way presumed and yet it's described as "A Mantrap" as if posted to elicit a specific response, ffs it's like being in Junior School again.

 

In 99% of places I am able to cut through and see a middle ground, but this place is getting way too political.