Select Page
Poker Forum
Over 1,282,000 Posts!
Poker ForumFTR Community

CORONAVIRUS PANIC WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE

Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 1,051 to 1,079 of 1079
  1. #1051
    But afaik, the problem wasn't just that they went from A to B, it's that a) it took them too long to do it; and b) they're still not fully prepared to implement B properly.
    It's likely this is fair and true. But their actions can still be in good faith, the advice they were getting could have been ambiguous enough for them to think they were doing the right thing.

    That we were even talking about "herd immunity" in the early stages shows how unprepared we were. It was a serious option at the time, considered to be viable. It was only when it became clear the NHS would not be able to cope that we changed course. The shift to plan B was far from ideal, but idk how you can expect it to be perfect. You're expecting those in charge to balance health, economics and politics. Under normal circumstances, that's their job. But these are not normal circumstances.

    The transition from plan A to B was probably too long. Ten days to implement a lockdown is a long time. But you haven't once even acknowledged the point I made about India doing it in four hours. Clearly doing it immediately is worse than doing it in stages. I agree doing it in ten days is too much, but how are we supposed to know this? It's obvious four hours is not enough.

    I mean, there are people who considered all these things in advance. You say it's unprecedented, but that's not entirely true, at least not in the general sense. They've had models for how infectious diseases behave, and how to deal with pandemics for a long time.

    Of course they plan for this, but this is the first time such plans have been put into action.

    One argument against an early lockdown is it hurts the economy. Well, we ended up having to be in full lockdown for 8 weeks, and are only now just easing out of it, and possibly too early because we don't have adequate TTI yet. Meanwhile other places have had things under control earlier and so their lockdowns lasted less time than ours.

    You're still citing mistakes that can be made in good faith, ie forgivable mistakes.


    I do strongly suspect they're being influenced by big business to open up and/or never to have closed, if that makes you feel better.

    Why would it make me feel better? I'd rather them be incompetent. Bur it's this kind of thing that isn't forgivable. This is corruption.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  2. #1052
    The UK, and the USA, are refusing to share coronavirus vaccine research with the rest of the world. The race to make a vaccine is not a race to save lives, it's a race to make money. China and Russia are probably doing the same.

    If Cummings was "testing his eyesight" then I'm the Queen of England.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  3. #1053
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's likely this is fair and true. But their actions can still be in good faith, the advice they were getting could have been ambiguous enough for them to think they were doing the right thing.
    It's a subtle but important point that the advice from SAGE wasn't ambiguous, it was conflicting. It said you can either do A or do B. Once you start doing A, it's too late to do B effectively. So you've got to make a decision and be prepared to face the consequences.

    The best estimates around early Feb. were that the case fatality rate was about 1%, and that 60% or more needed to be infected in order to achieve herd immunity. So Plan A assumed something like 400k deaths in the UK. That's a pretty fucking stark choice to be considering. And it would have been clear right away the NHS was not going to be able to cope with that. Right then and there they should have been saying "what's Plan B and how do we implement it?"

    As it happens (according to the Times story) the official gov't pandemic response plan to an infectious disease was a fully developed and detailed Plan B. IOW, years ago a group of experts had already worked out how to do it and what needed to be done and when, and had written it down. So there was a step-by-step Plan B ready to be implemented, and they chose not to.

    But ok fine, a lot of countries made that mistake too, they didn't have their Plan B ready, or they hesitated because it would have meant a big disruption. A lot of the ones that were even going with Plan B from the start, started it too late. We're not alone in that.

    The thing is, once we decided we weren't prepared to stick to Plan A and instead needed to get to Plan B, we needed to fucking get to Plan B pronto. Not in some hypothetical time in the future, or a couple of weeks, or ten days, but sooner because every day counts.

    And certainly once they decided they were going to Plan B they had to make it clear to everyone this was going to be happening very soon, within days, as soon as practical. That's kinda the whole point of Plan B; you have to lock the stable door before the horses get out.

    Their problem was they based their actions on wishful thinking. They seemed to have it in their heads that this would somehow not hit us like it was hitting ITA and SPA at the time. There was no scientist telling them that, they just based it on what they were hoping would be true.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  4. #1054
    As it happens (according to the Times story) the official gov't pandemic response plan to an infectious disease was a fully developed and detailed Plan B. IOW, years ago a group of experts had already worked out how to do it and what needed to be done and when, and had written it down. So there was a step-by-step Plan B ready to be implemented, and they chose not to.
    Does this not naturally cause you to lean more towards corruption than incompetence?

    A lot of your comments assume the govt have acted incompetently in good faith, and you're critical. I'm thinking the govt have acted corruptly, and I want to wait for an inquiry before judging, basically hoping they are just incompetent. It's an interesting difference of opinion, if I'm honest.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  5. #1055
    I'm not sure how to define 'good faith' in this context because to me it assumes they were trying to do what's best for the country. I think the problem is they were given a clear indication of the best course of action and didn't take it. Their motives for that may well have been tempered in a number of ways that aren't all necessarily honorable.

    e.g., the Times article suggested that Boris didn't like the idea of a lockdown because it went against his libertarian instincts. That's naive and shows poor judgment, but it's not corrupt.

    And if by 'corrupt' you mean GSK or whoever was bribing them to let the virus spread so they could make money off a vaccine, and they deliberately followed the one course of action that would maximize suffering, I find that hard to believe, even for this gang.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  6. #1056
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  7. #1057
    "Good faith" is a pretty subjective term, but for me it's acting with good intention. If they took a path they knew was inferior, then it's hard to see how that decision can be made in good faith.

    e.g., the Times article suggested that Boris didn't like the idea of a lockdown because it went against his libertarian instincts. That's naive and shows poor judgment, but it's not corrupt.

    It's also pretty naive to give any credit to a tabloid that is psychoanalysing a politician.

    And if by 'corrupt' you mean GSK or whoever was bribing them to let the virus spread so they could make money off a vaccine, and they deliberately followed the one course of action that would maximize suffering, I find that hard to believe, even for this gang.

    I agree that's pushing the boundaries of viability. But GSK lobbying for access to the vaccine rights, with a few dirty handshakes and briefcases handed over, is certainly within the realms of possibility. The UK and USA are not sharing their vaccine research with the rest of the world, and the reason is money.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  8. #1058
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    "Good faith" is a pretty subjective term, but for me it's acting with good intention. If they took a path they knew was inferior, then it's hard to see how that decision can be made in good faith.
    It's a bit more nuanced than that I think. I think they probably didn't accept what they were being told about how bad things were likely to get. Does that mean they had bad intentions, or just that they were subject to cognitive biases? And if the latter, then you can argue their intentions were good, but their decision making was foggy or clouded or whatever word you want to use.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    It's also pretty naive to give any credit to a tabloid that is psychoanalysing a politician.
    To be clear, the Times was reporting what people around Boris were reflecting on as their impressions about him at the time. Another quote from the same article was 'deer in the headlights'. So it's not them analysing him. Obv. we can't know what was going on in his head, and you can clearly question what kind of bias an official willing to talk to the left-wing press might harbor.

    More to the point, I think this comes back to my reference to character. A good leader like Churchill would not say 'well it looks like I fucked up but that's fake news.' He'd say "it looks like I fucked up because I very well might have fucked up. Give me another chance, and I'll do better." I think the latter attitude shows a lot more character and ultimately inspires more confidence in the public. The Boris attitude seems to be a Trumpian 'never admit to a mistake' and when the mistakes are so blatant for all to see that's a bad look.



    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    I agree that's pushing the boundaries of viability. But GSK lobbying for access to the vaccine rights, with a few dirty handshakes and briefcases handed over, is certainly within the realms of possibility. The UK and USA are not sharing their vaccine research with the rest of the world, and the reason is money.
    I thought it was just the US that wasn't sharing; I thought the UK was getting together with Europe on this one. But that was a couple of weeks ago so maybe it's changed, or the news was incorrect.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  9. #1059
    Also, you know, it's not just like they made one bad mistake back in March and have making up for it since then. The bumbling seems to just keep going on and on. Their recent opening up strategy and "stay alert" slogan has come under attack from the experts - Independent Sage and others - because it's not supported adequately by TTI.

    Most recently, they announced a further loosening for Monday, still without adequate TTI in place and that seem sto go against their own plan which was to implement the stages of loosening based on the current Alert Level. The current AL is still 4 which is 'high' but they're now loosening up as if it were 3. I mean it's pretty obvious they don't know what they're doing.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  10. #1060
    FWIW, Independent Sage is an interesting and afaik unprecedented phenomenon. It's a group of renowned world experts in the UK who weren't on the gov't SAGE team but nonetheless are willing to risk their reputations by making their views public (something that SAGE failed to do). It gives them incredible accountability and public credibility that the gov't SAGE team is lacking. IS is open to criticism from other experts. If they say something controversial, anyone can question them.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  11. #1061
    I thought it was just the US that wasn't sharing; I thought the UK was getting together with Europe on this one. But that was a couple of weeks ago so maybe it's changed, or the news was incorrect.

    Here's an article from your least favourite former ambassador... https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...m-coronavirus/

    I mean there's nothing concrete, but he cites articles that claim Russia, China and Iran are trying to hack into pharma and uni websites to gain access to research.

    This was posted May 17th. Murray is clued up and honest. If the UK was working with the EU on this, he would add an update to his article. Even in the EU, we were closer to USA, that only increases now. If their pharma companies are trying to profit from this, ours are too.

    The UK govt do not like Murray, they have their sights set on him. He's charged with contempt of court and faces court next month in relation to the Alex Salmond case. You'd probably like him if you gave him a chance, he's heavily left-leaning economically. I read him for his foreign affairs, and his views on govt corruption. I ignore his views on socialism and Scottish independence.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  12. #1062
    Quote Originally Posted by OngBonga View Post
    Here's an article from your least favourite former ambassador... https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archi...m-coronavirus/ .
    Not sure that talks about cooperation between UK and EU. Here's the article I saw:

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a9496696.html
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  13. #1063
    Well those comments from Boris are a direct contradiction. Let's see where it goes.
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    ongies gonna ong
  14. #1064
    Deputy Chief Medical Officer Van Tam has given the Cummings fiasco some fresh legs today. This shit isn't going away.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  15. #1065
    So Hancock just announced vulnerable would be allowed to leave their homes tomorrow.

    When did we go to Alert Level 1?
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  16. #1066
    It actually looks like they've given up on Plan B and are going back to Plan A? Or are they? They've started some feeble attempts to implement TTI, but Sridhar thinks the numbers are too high for that.

    Ong will be pleased at least there is some evidence that there was groupthink going on in SAGE. Good thing they didn't make their minutes public until now- someone might have asked some tough questions!



    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  17. #1067
    More political point-scoring by the libs

    https://twitter.com/NHSMillion/statu...61874062372864
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  18. #1068
    SAGE scientist says "We should have gone into lockdown sooner." Yeah no shit.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  19. #1069
    Was just waiting for someone to come with a syringe and a strait jacket

    https://twitter.com/RexChapman/statu...12010555932672
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  20. #1070
    Our governments' uneducated responses to COVID is deeply unsettling to me.
  21. #1071
    MadMojoMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    9,132
    Location
    St Louis, MO
    I'm particularly upset by Trump denying it's a national issue, and blaming the states for something they had every precedent of expecting federal support with.

    I'm particularly offended that Trump threatened governors who "weren't nice" to him with actions that would put every person in that state at greater risk of death.

    The reduction of the national pandemic response staff and capabilities is deeply upsetting. It's not like anyone could have known that this would happen in 2020, but it was a morally questionable and mortally dangerous gamble to take.
    You can find any pattern you want to any level of precision you want, if you're prepared to ignore enough data.
  22. #1072
    The response here has not been as outrageously off-key as Trump's, but it could hardly be described as competent either.

    Gov't spent a big pile of money to a private company for a 'world beating' contact tracing app, and this company is only contacting 1/3 people who test positive, never mind their contacts. So it's basically next to useless. That's just the latest fuckup in a long string of fuckups going back to Jan.

    Here's Johnson doing his best impression of more articulate version of Trump.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  23. #1073
    And here he is doubling down on a lie that's pointed out straight to his face. Our own little Trump.

    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  24. #1074
    Anybody have stats on mortality rates and causes relative to initial reported mortality rates and causes from previous years?
  25. #1075
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMojoMonkey View Post
    I'm particularly upset by Trump denying it's a national issue, and blaming the states for something they had every precedent of expecting federal support with.

    I'm particularly offended that Trump threatened governors who "weren't nice" to him with actions that would put every person in that state at greater risk of death.

    The reduction of the national pandemic response staff and capabilities is deeply upsetting. It's not like anyone could have known that this would happen in 2020, but it was a morally questionable and mortally dangerous gamble to take.
    He's done such a bad job managing the psychology.

    There's no gameplan, no end in sight. Officials don't have adequate guidance and are making concrete decisions based on unknown or inadequately used statistics.
  26. #1076
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Anybody have stats on mortality rates and causes relative to initial reported mortality rates and causes from previous years?
    Financial Times has been tracking this in the UK for weeks now. We're at about 65k excess deaths relative to the five-year average for this year up to now. Our official CV deaths is at 43k, so yeah either they're missing a lot or people are dying 'cause they can't get the health care they could pre-CV.

    I think this is the US equivalent. Not sure how up-to-date it is though.

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...ess_deaths.htm
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  27. #1077
    Quote Originally Posted by Poopadoop View Post
    Financial Times has been tracking this in the UK for weeks now. We're at about 65k excess deaths relative to the five-year average for this year up to now. Our official CV deaths is at 43k, so yeah either they're missing a lot or people are dying 'cause they can't get the health care they could pre-CV.

    I think this is the US equivalent. Not sure how up-to-date it is though.

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/c...ess_deaths.htm
    Do you know if the previous numbers are revised of if they are at-the-time recordings?
  28. #1078
    Quote Originally Posted by wufwugy View Post
    Do you know if the previous numbers are revised of if they are at-the-time recordings?
    There's about a four-day lag between the death and when it's registered with the Office of National Statistics which records the numbers, if that's what you mean. So e.g., the count on June 11 is actually the deaths up to about June 7.

    That's in the UK, can't speak to what happens elsewhere.
    I just think we should suspend judgment on Trump until we have all the facts through an inquiry
  29. #1079
    I'm getting at revisions of numbers at later dates.

    The piece of fake news that had pneumonia deaths at significantly lower was because it was using initial figures and comparing them to historical figures that were revised at what looked to be months later.

    It's regular in economics. Each month, the employment data you hear is revised down the road to more accurate figures. Frequently the revisions are big. I forget how much it lags, but it's long(ish).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •