The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

Experts have voiced growing frustrations over the UK government’s claim that it is “following the science”, saying the refrain is being used to abdicate responsibility for political decisions.

They also raised concerns that the views of public health experts was being overlooked, with disproportionate weight being given to the views of modellers.

“As a scientist, I hope I never again hear the phrase ‘based on the best science and evidence’ spoken by a politician,” Prof Devi Sridhar, chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh, told the Guardian. “This phrase has become basically meaningless and used to explain anything and everything.”

With all the secrecy, even some of Britain’s top scientists say they don’t know whether they can trust the government’s approach.

“Is the science being followed by the government on coronavirus?” said David King, a former chief scientific adviser to the government. “I don’t know, because I don’t know what the advice is, and there isn’t the freedom for the scientists to tell the public what their advice is.”

...

Some said the frequent references of Mr. Johnson and his aides to the scientists should be a warning sign. If, as is likely, the government’s handling of the crisis is scrutinized in a future parliamentary inquiry, officials are likely to justify their actions by saying they were listening to the experts.

“It has become a shield for them,” said Devi Sridhar, director of the global health governance program at Edinburgh University. “If things go off, you can always say, ‘Well, it was the experts who told us.’”

...

Some of SAGE’s internal debates play out in competing research studies published by their authors. A few days after Imperial College released its dire projections about the deadliness of the virus, a team at Oxford University published a study that considered a scenario in which more than half of the population might already have been infected — a theory that, if valid, would argue for a less draconian response.

Scientists, of course, often disagree and change their minds, based on new data. To some, that is yet another argument for lifting the veil on the advisory group.

“The idea that a small group of experts can never make a mistake or miss out on any information is never right,” said Sarah Wollaston, a former chairwoman of the House of Commons Health Select Committee. “But you can’t challenge the advice if other experts can’t see what they are looking at.”

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I find this a little depressing. For once I've actually thought a couple of the usual partisan outlets have been genuinely doing a fair job of trying to hold the government to account. The telegraph has been good, even the mail has had its moments. Overall i would say the coverage has been very good, very informative but the public doesnt seem impressed. Government will be pleased to see this for sure.

https://twitter.com/chriscurtis94/status/1253363615572406273?s=20

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Would be interesting to see a wider survey. I think its indicating though that nothing happening so far is really changing anything substantial as regards the tory electoral base. They still love the nhs, like johnson and dont like experts or journalists. Even poor Keir Starmer got no bounce from becoming opposition leader.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yeah it's mirroring Trumpism. Amazing how gullible large swathes of a population can be.

Enzokk wrote: »

I do wonder how much of this is hoping the Government doesn't fail so you trust them to do the right thing and what they are telling you, and also Johnson has been out sick so he has not had to announce the numbers of dead or answer questions why NHS staff are dying or not having enough PPE. Not having to do that surely must play a role in people not viewing him negatively.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Aspects of it, yes for sure. While i believe johnson was genuinely ill, it couldnt have worked out better for him from a Cummings script. Not only was he the Churchillian hero battling and beating death, he also got to be MIA for the trickiest bit while Raab and Hancock took the heat and now gets to come back as things look like easing off. They'll forget his earlier idiocies and give him a hero's return just as media fixates on the trivia of a missed testing target. Can see how this narrative goes.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Aspects of it, yes for sure. While i believe johnson was genuinely ill, it couldnt have worked out better for him from a Cummings script. Not only was he the Churchillian hero battling and beating death, he also got to be MIA for the trickiest bit while Raab and Hancock took the heat and now gets to come back as things look like easing off. They'll forget his earlier idiocies and give him a hero's return just as media fixates on the trivia of a missed testing target. Can see how this narrative goes.

quokula wrote: »

He didn't even just go MIA when he fell ill - he also didn't bother turning up to the cobra meetings related to coronavirus before that. The illness really has given him the perfect excuse to continue not bothering to do his job at the time when the country needs good leadership most, yet continue to avoid being held to account in any way.

blinding wrote: »

A Country that has had Berti Ahern, John Bruton, Jack Lynch, Leo Varadkar as Taoiseach is in no position to caste aspirations about the Political leaders of Other Countries. A Country that has had FFG in Government so often should show some self awareness when criticising Politicians or Political Parties in Other countries. These people probably would not rise above County Councillor in other Countries !