The big Coronavirus thread

1…13391340134213441345…1347

Comments

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    edited November 2023
    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Having it on public record what actually happened during the decision making is good practice in general.

    Good for Historians, anyway ;-).
    _
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,916
    edited November 2023
    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Point fingers. Lessons learned, which will be forgot. Ultimately nothing.
    I was thinking about lessons learned and clearly updating the pandemic preparedness report might be helpful, but I'm still not sure what the optimum approach was and how this varies by disease. So, for example, is it a good idea to mandate effective masks at an early stage? Have lockdowns helped or hindered? Etc. I'm not sure how Whatsapp messages help with these questions.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    TheBigBean said:

    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Point fingers. Lessons learned, which will be forgot. Ultimately nothing.
    I was thinking about lessons learned and clearly updating the pandemic preparedness report might be helpful, but I'm still not sure what the optimum approach was and how this varies by disease. So, for example, is it a good idea to mandate effective masks at an early stage? Have lockdowns helped or hindered? Etc. I'm not sure how Whatsapp messages help with these questions.
    I have learnt that it is better to have a plan of some sort than to robustly assert that you have a plan that doesn't exist.

    I am also expanding my vocabulary. Useless f***pig is quite, er, useful.
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,605
    I guess there's two aspects.

    Understanding how decisions ended up being made, WhatsApp bitching about each other potentially adds some colour to that.

    Understanding what the optimal decisions would have been so that lessons can be learned for next time.

    The issue with understanding what the optimal decisions would have been is that the next pandemic is likely to be different, so the optimal policies are likely to be different too.
  • pblakeney
    pblakeney Posts: 27,329
    TheBigBean said:

    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Point fingers. Lessons learned, which will be forgot. Ultimately nothing.
    I was thinking about lessons learned and clearly updating the pandemic preparedness report might be helpful, but I'm still not sure what the optimum approach was and how this varies by disease. So, for example, is it a good idea to mandate effective masks at an early stage? Have lockdowns helped or hindered? Etc. I'm not sure how Whatsapp messages help with these questions.
    IIRC, didn't the government scrap pandemic preparations around 2018 to save money? I'd say there is a simple lesson to be learned right there.
    In my experience "lessons learned" is a management tick box function as it is usually overruled later on the grounds of cost. Which ends up being more costly.
    The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
    I am not sure. You have no chance.
    Veronese68 wrote:
    PB is the most sensible person on here.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,916
    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Point fingers. Lessons learned, which will be forgot. Ultimately nothing.
    I was thinking about lessons learned and clearly updating the pandemic preparedness report might be helpful, but I'm still not sure what the optimum approach was and how this varies by disease. So, for example, is it a good idea to mandate effective masks at an early stage? Have lockdowns helped or hindered? Etc. I'm not sure how Whatsapp messages help with these questions.
    IIRC, didn't the government scrap pandemic preparations around 2018 to save money? I'd say there is a simple lesson to be learned right there.
    In my experience "lessons learned" is a management tick box function as it is usually overruled later on the grounds of cost. Which ends up being more costly.
    There was a report with all the scientific evidence in it e.g. closing borders just delays things a few weeks. It didn't consider lockdowns though.
  • veronese68
    veronese68 Posts: 27,817
    First.Aspect said:


    I am also expanding my vocabulary. Useless f***pig is quite, er, useful.

    Helps people differentiate from Cameron who was a useless pigfucker.
    Kinesis Pro6
    Marin Nail Trail
    Cotic Solaris
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,556
    First.Aspect said:

    TheBigBean said:

    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Point fingers. Lessons learned, which will be forgot. Ultimately nothing.
    I was thinking about lessons learned and clearly updating the pandemic preparedness report might be helpful, but I'm still not sure what the optimum approach was and how this varies by disease. So, for example, is it a good idea to mandate effective masks at an early stage? Have lockdowns helped or hindered? Etc. I'm not sure how Whatsapp messages help with these questions.
    I have learnt that it is better to have a plan of some sort than to robustly assert that you have a plan that doesn't exist.

    I am also expanding my vocabulary. Useless f***pig is quite, er, useful.
    Also dithering is really, really bad.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152
    I remember on here asking whether there was any reason that we wouldn't be seeing what Italy had seen. Apparently the government decided it wouldn't happen to us because we're Britain.

  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,605
    I think Boris was on this forum posting under copster.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    You can't say Britain failed to get what they voted for.
    _
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    rjsterry said:

    First.Aspect said:

    TheBigBean said:

    pblakeney said:

    TheBigBean said:

    Not sure I get the point of this enquiry.

    Point fingers. Lessons learned, which will be forgot. Ultimately nothing.
    I was thinking about lessons learned and clearly updating the pandemic preparedness report might be helpful, but I'm still not sure what the optimum approach was and how this varies by disease. So, for example, is it a good idea to mandate effective masks at an early stage? Have lockdowns helped or hindered? Etc. I'm not sure how Whatsapp messages help with these questions.
    I have learnt that it is better to have a plan of some sort than to robustly assert that you have a plan that doesn't exist.

    I am also expanding my vocabulary. Useless f***pig is quite, er, useful.
    Also dithering is really, really bad.
    It is fine if you do it decisively.
  • shirley_basso
    shirley_basso Posts: 6,195
    "Watchful waiting"
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    edited November 2023
    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what they voted for.

    Genuinely I'm not sure many people thought he was quite this bad. While you might not have agreed with the shenanigans that forced Brexit through, they did at least show a level of intellect.

    By the time COVID had hit, he seemed to have surrounded himself by low quality such as Handoncock, and descended into full on belief in his own myth.
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,463
    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what 43.6% of those who turned out voted for.

    Fixed.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what they voted for.

    Genuinely I'm not sure many people thought he was quite this bad. While you might not have agreed with the shenanigans that forced Brexit through, they did at least show a level of intellect.
    What level of intellect?! Any examples?
    _
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    rick_chasey said:

    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what they voted for.

    Genuinely I'm not sure many people thought he was quite this bad. While you might not have agreed with the shenanigans that forced Brexit through, they did at least show a level of intellect.
    What level of intellect?! Any examples?
    That time he had perogies?

    Perhaps it was more cunning and devious than clever.
  • wallace_and_gromit
    wallace_and_gromit Posts: 3,618
    Pross said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what 43.6% of those who turned out voted for.

    Fixed.
    Even though Boris only got 43.6% of the vote, plenty of folk could have voted tactically to aid in getting a "Not Tory" government in 2019, but chose to not do so because they preferred to kick the Lib Dems in the nadgers re tuition fees or didn't want to vote for Corbyn.

    Folk who didn't want the Tories / Brexit who could have voted Lib Dem but didn't, thus allowing a Tory win in their constituency certainly deserve the government they got, because whatever the Lib Dems' sins in Coalition, they weren't worse than facilitating a Johnson government.
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,605
    wallace_and_gromit said:

    Pross said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what 43.6% of those who turned out voted for.

    Fixed.
    Even though Boris only got 43.6% of the vote, plenty of folk could have voted tactically to aid in getting a "Not Tory" government in 2019, but chose to not do so because they preferred to kick the Lib Dems in the nadgers re tuition fees or didn't want to vote for Corbyn.

    Folk who didn't want the Tories / Brexit who could have voted Lib Dem but didn't, thus allowing a Tory win in their constituency certainly deserve the government they got, because whatever the Lib Dems' sins in Coalition, they weren't worse than facilitating a Johnson government.
    Corbyn might have done a better job at the pandemic.

    But it'd be a bit of a shit situation having him in charge during the Ukraine war.

  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    Jezyboy said:

    wallace_and_gromit said:

    Pross said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what 43.6% of those who turned out voted for.

    Fixed.
    Even though Boris only got 43.6% of the vote, plenty of folk could have voted tactically to aid in getting a "Not Tory" government in 2019, but chose to not do so because they preferred to kick the Lib Dems in the nadgers re tuition fees or didn't want to vote for Corbyn.

    Folk who didn't want the Tories / Brexit who could have voted Lib Dem but didn't, thus allowing a Tory win in their constituency certainly deserve the government they got, because whatever the Lib Dems' sins in Coalition, they weren't worse than facilitating a Johnson government.
    Corbyn might have done a better job at the pandemic.

    But it'd be a bit of a censored situation having him in charge during the Ukraine war.

    Sorry but Corbyn wouldn't have been good at anything, or someone would have noticed his talent in the preceding 40 years of his political career.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152
    Agreed, but that also doesn't mean he wouldn't have been better.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    kingstongraham said:

    Agreed, but that also doesn't mean he wouldn't have been better.

    Fair point.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    edited November 2023
    Going through some of my posts in March 2020...:
    rick_chasey said:

    People losing their sh!t over BoJo listening to experts to the letter isn’t how I imagined 2020 turning out.

    rick_chasey said:

    Interesting the heat Sturgeon is getting for shutting down schools. Even admits herself it was not done on the basis of 'scientific evidence'.

    I know it's BoJo, but I really get the impression the UK is actually doing everything by the letter of the expert, not least as it seems so counter-intuitive.

    surrey_commuter said:

    tailwindhome said:

    tailwindhome said:

    This Irish fella Dr Michael Ryan at the WHO is impressive.

    Looks like a farmer, speaks like a leader

    so do you think we can count him as thinking Boris is wrong.
    The WHO video was indeed correct in that timing was everything.

    Then a few weeks later
    rick_chasey said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rick_chasey said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    tailwindhome said:

    Tracking deaths instead of positives


    That looks like we are about to take a decisive lead
    People also seem to forget the y axis isn’t linear...
    OK, I get yours (and RJST’s) points about the scale but why does this not mean that Boris’s plan is not working and our number of deaths is not outstripping countries who have tried to control the spread.

    Personally I would have learnt from the countries on the right of the graph.
    I tend to agree.

    I have read it's because the UK is eyeing up the 2nd wave and not the first, but I am not convinced by this.

    It would be nice if they articulated why they are doing things differently.
    Now we know why they weren't articulating why they were doing things differently.
    _
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152
    I'm sure I heard one of the witnesses ascribing the high number of cases in the cabinet office to a lack of hand sanitiser.

    Even now.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    kingstongraham said:

    I'm sure I heard one of the witnesses ascribing the high number of cases in the cabinet office to a lack of hand sanitiser.

    Even now.

    No she was commenting on how the cabinet office was following guidelines, i.e. not at all. That was the guidance at the time, hence all of the dispensers in offices around the UK with evaporated gel in them now.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 28,152
    edited November 2023
    First.Aspect said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I'm sure I heard one of the witnesses ascribing the high number of cases in the cabinet office to a lack of hand sanitiser.

    Even now.

    No she was commenting on how the cabinet office was following guidelines, i.e. not at all. That was the guidance at the time, hence all of the dispensers in offices around the UK with evaporated gel in them now.
    Ah fair do's.

    I'm now surprised we didn't all get nostril dryers just in case.
  • Jezyboy
    Jezyboy Posts: 3,605
    First.Aspect said:

    Jezyboy said:

    wallace_and_gromit said:

    Pross said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what 43.6% of those who turned out voted for.

    Fixed.
    Even though Boris only got 43.6% of the vote, plenty of folk could have voted tactically to aid in getting a "Not Tory" government in 2019, but chose to not do so because they preferred to kick the Lib Dems in the nadgers re tuition fees or didn't want to vote for Corbyn.

    Folk who didn't want the Tories / Brexit who could have voted Lib Dem but didn't, thus allowing a Tory win in their constituency certainly deserve the government they got, because whatever the Lib Dems' sins in Coalition, they weren't worse than facilitating a Johnson government.
    Corbyn might have done a better job at the pandemic.

    But it'd be a bit of a censored situation having him in charge during the Ukraine war.

    Sorry but Corbyn wouldn't have been good at anything, or someone would have noticed his talent in the preceding 40 years of his political career.
    Meh, he's had a long career as a back bencher, and mostly managed to stay true to his principles. To an extent I think that's something to admire, even if it extends to a lack of pragmatism that renders him unsuitable for the top jobs.

    I suspect he would have found COVID boring, so may have simply "followed the science" throughout. He probably never be accused of putting the "economy" ahead of octogenarians either.
  • First.Aspect
    First.Aspect Posts: 17,167
    kingstongraham said:

    First.Aspect said:

    kingstongraham said:

    I'm sure I heard one of the witnesses ascribing the high number of cases in the cabinet office to a lack of hand sanitiser.

    Even now.

    No she was commenting on how the cabinet office was following guidelines, i.e. not at all. That was the guidance at the time, hence all of the dispensers in offices around the UK with evaporated gel in them now.
    Ah fair do's.

    I'm now surprised we didn't all get nostril dryers just in case.
    More, or less, effective than injecting bleach, do we think?
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,867
    First.Aspect said:

    rick_chasey said:

    You can't say Britain failed to get what they voted for.

    Genuinely I'm not sure many people thought he was quite this bad. While you might not have agreed with the shenanigans that forced Brexit through, they did at least show a level of intellect.

    By the time COVID had hit, he seemed to have surrounded himself by low quality such as Handoncock, and descended into full on belief in his own myth.
    My theory is that the more people see of him, the less they like and is why by 2019 London did not like him.

    Cummings knew he was that bad and helped make him PM, yet does not think he is any way responsible
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    surrey_commuter said:



    Cummings knew he was that bad and helped make him PM, yet does not think he is any way responsible

    Let me think 🤔. Oh yeah.

    Money, money, money
    Always sunny
    In the rich man's world

Categories