Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This really is one of those "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situations for the government. The bottom line is nobody knows what the right course of action to take is, and nobody will know until much further down the line which methods were successful. For the time being I think the government is probably taking the right course of action in following the advice of the CMO and CSO (isn't that what most people argued for during Brexit, the "listen to the experts" line ?) - but of course the problem with that is those type of people tend not look at things from a humanitarian perspective but rather from a raw science and statistical probability one. So the right course of action from a scientific/medical point of view isn't necessarily the right one to appease the masses. It's science versus emotion. A tricky conundrum.

  • Like 6

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

But don't walk down steps or indeed terracing like that , a good friend of mine died a couple of years ago from doing exactly that ūüôĀ

See , this is what happens when you listen to advice from amateurs ūüėČ

I am, and always shall be an amateur. I am a professional troublemaker, and that's about it.

  • Sad 1

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

As Andy Burnham stated this morning on BBC Breakfast , the statements from the government should come from the experts , not the politicians , because as always the press will then as a stupid question , which will usually result in a stupid reply 

The problem with scientists is they give accurate answers:

Q: How many people will die as a result of this virus?
A: Don't know

Q: What's your worst case guess?
A: 60% of people might get it, 1-2% will die at current rates, so let's say 600,000 or perhaps 750,000 to cover the ones who die because we can't treat them

They may of course say "I refuse to speculate because I don't know", but that may be equally alarming

A good politician would deflect such a question in a slicker way.

  • Like 1

"I am the avenging angel; I come with wings unfurled, I come with claws extended from halfway round the world. I am the God Almighty, I am the howling wind. I care not for your family; I care not for your kin. I come in search of terror, though terror is my own; I come in search of vengeance for crimes and crimes unknown. I care not for your children, I care not for your wives, I care not for your country, I care not for your lives." - (c) Jim Boyes - "The Avenging Angel"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Derwent said:

This really is one of those "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situations for the government. The bottom line is nobody knows what the right course of action to take is, and nobody will know until much further down the line which methods were successful. For the time being I think the government is probably taking the right course of action in following the advice of the CMO and CSO (isn't that what most people argued for during Brexit, the "listen to the experts" line ?) - but of course the problem with that is those type of people tend not look at things from a humanitarian perspective but rather from a raw science and statistical probability one. So the right course of action from a scientific/medical point of view isn't necessarily the right one to appease the masses. It's science versus emotion. A tricky conundrum.

The government can't win, you're right. They're choosing between the least worst options knowing that whatever they do some people will inevitably suffer. There is no black/white "right" answer.

  • Thanks 1

"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

As Andy Burnham stated this morning on BBC Breakfast , the statements from the government should come from the experts , not the politicians , because as always the press will then as a stupid question , which will usually result in a stupid reply 

It's embarrassing right now that we have people who have absolutely no qualifications but get treated as if they do (in this case I mean the vast commentariat who make a living out of having contrary opinions for cash - people like Dan Hodges, Owen Jones, Timothy Stanley) mocking other people who have absolutely no qualifications but get treated as if they have no right to a view (in this case, well-meaning but naive slebs) when all they themselves can do is toe whichever party line they've followed and pretend they understand the science behind it.

Idiots everywhere.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Derwent said:

This really is one of those "damned if they do, damned if they don't" situations for the government. The bottom line is nobody knows what the right course of action to take is, and nobody will know until much further down the line which methods were successful. For the time being I think the government is probably taking the right course of action in following the advice of the CMO and CSO (isn't that what most people argued for during Brexit, the "listen to the experts" line ?) - but of course the problem with that is those type of people tend not look at things from a humanitarian perspective but rather from a raw science and statistical probability one. So the right course of action from a scientific/medical point of view isn't necessarily the right one to appease the masses. It's science versus emotion. A tricky conundrum.

The issue I have on that - and I put my hand up and say I do not understand the science behind the CMO's position and thus the government's - is that we now have a government that effectively won a referendum and subsequent election on appeals to populism/don't listen to the experts. I have absolutely no faith that if the science (as presented by the CMO) moves to a position they do not like that they will continue down the path that aligns most closely with their ideology.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tim2 said:

The problem with scientists is they give accurate answers:

Q: How many people will die as a result of this virus?
A: Don't know

Q: What's your worst case guess?
A: 60% of people might get it, 1-2% will die at current rates, so let's say 600,000 or perhaps 750,000 to cover the ones who die because we can't treat them

They may of course say "I refuse to speculate because I don't know", but that may be equally alarming

A good politician would deflect such a question in a slicker way.

He was recalling how as Health Secretary in 2008 he had to deal with bird flu ( I think ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, JohnM said:

No they didn't.  Listen again to exactly  what was said.

In any case, there is no proof, no evidence that the leak was from the govt, though clearly that is a possibility.

Then the leak wasn't to a journalist. It was to someone called Robert Peston,  who then proceed to sensationalise it and misrepresent it.

 

Surely the fact that someone thinks that they did and that you are advising them to listen again suggests that there is confusion and therefore not a clear message. 

Personally I think that it has been ok but if there are any people who aren't clear about what the advice is then it surely isn't clear enough. Especially as there is a high probability that those who are unclear are those who could be most severely affected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tim2 said:

The problem with scientists is they give accurate answers:

Q: How many people will die as a result of this virus?
A: Don't know

Q: What's your worst case guess?
A: 60% of people might get it, 1-2% will die at current rates, so let's say 600,000 or perhaps 750,000 to cover the ones who die because we can't treat them

They may of course say "I refuse to speculate because I don't know", but that may be equally alarming

A good politician would deflect such a question in a slicker way.

I think that is right. Vallance the other day shouldn't have been drawn on the detail and numbers around herd immunisation, leaving Hancock to have to clean up that mess. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

The issue I have on that - and I put my hand up and say I do not understand the science behind the CMO's position and thus the government's - is that we now have a government that effectively won a referendum and subsequent election on appeals to populism/don't listen to the experts. I have absolutely no faith that if the science (as presented by the CMO) moves to a position they do not like that they will continue down the path that aligns most closely with their ideology.

We unfortunately get what we vote for.

Please keep this thread as politics free as possible, there's a perfectly good thread for politics on this subject, and one for rugby related matters, allowing this one for health concerns and general stuff.


"When in deadly danger, when beset by doubt; run in little circles, wave your arms and shout"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It's embarrassing right now that we have people who have absolutely no qualifications but get treated as if they do (in this case I mean the vast commentariat who make a living out of having contrary opinions for cash - people like Dan Hodges, Owen Jones, Timothy Stanley) mocking other people who have absolutely no qualifications but get treated as if they have no right to a view (in this case, well-meaning but naive slebs) when all they themselves can do is toe whichever party line they've followed and pretend they understand the science behind it.

Idiots everywhere.

Fair doo's to Andy , he said in no way am I criticising the actions currently being taken , his point being essentially how having too many politicians answering too many questions in too many different ' forums ' was and will create confusion 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ckn said:

We unfortunately get what we vote for.

Please keep this thread as politics free as possible, there's a perfectly good thread for politics on this subject, and one for rugby related matters, allowing this one for health concerns and general stuff.

Yes - I'm not going any further on the politics issue here.

  • Thanks 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't want are actions being taken driven by politics or media pressure.

My sense is that those pressure are  building, hence behind the scenes spokespersons or advisors briefings to show things will be implemented as to show we aren't sitting on our hands.  Leading to sowing of media stories and hence sowing further confusion...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One cracking idea that a lady on Radio 4 ( yes, yes ,yes , I know my car radio has a mind of its own since I broke the ariel ) this morning , she suggested that ' locally ' they should keep open through both the Easter and summer holidays a dedicated school , this school along with the requisite staff needed would be available to health professionals and other dedicated carers for their children to attend , reducing the need for them to find family members ( potentially elderly ) or indeed take time off themselves from their much needed work 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

 

This is really now starting to show the fragility of the ' civilisation ' we have built 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Popped into sainsbury's at lunch (working from home so needed a walk!).  Carpark was as full as Christmas.  Even more empty shelves.  


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, ckn said:

I am, and always shall be an amateur. I am a professional troublemaker, and that's about it.

Too late, You have professionalised yourself. Expect to be Ostracised. 

Edited by Shadow
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bedford Roughyed said:

Popped into sainsbury's at lunch (working from home so needed a walk!).  Carpark was as full as Christmas.  Even more empty shelves.  

as ever I wonder how big their storage cupboards or freezers are...

to me hoarding is self centred... unfortunately we have too many self centred around us.  Yep I understand some stocking in case need to self isolate down the line... but not to the extent some are.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, redjonn said:

as ever I wonder how big their storage cupboards or freezers are...

to me hoarding is self centred... unfortunately we have too many self centred around us.  Yep I understand some stocking in case need to self isolate down the line... but not to the extent some are.

It's the world we now live in. Years ago there used to be a great community spirit, now it's become self, self, self.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I popped into my local Aldi and am pleased to say that there is no need to panic.

There is no shortage of the stuff they have plenty of.

I hope that helps.

  • Like 2

Ron Banks

Bears and Barrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our IT system has pooped the bed.  Too many remote users.  


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eamonn McManus is saying that RL "may go out of existence" .

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/51905897

No it won't ... Rugby League will always be played !

OK maybe not at fully professional level (which is all McManus is really bothered about) but the game will always be played and supported by those who want to do so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...