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

Akrasia wrote: »

They’re just spoofers in every way that actually matters. spoofing the number of deaths, spoofing the number of cases and spoofing the number of tests.

They’re also spoofing the science, spoofing the lockdown and will probably end up spoofing the roadmap to raising the lockdown which will possibly result in the worst 2nd wave in Europe to go along with the worst 1st wave


And half the UK population will cheer them on as the mass graves are dug and their economy evaporates around them

Brexit hasn’t gone away either, these spoofers are still trying to engineer a no deal crash out in 7 months time. It’s breathtaking how a once respectable country/union has so comprehensively self destructed in such a short timeframe

Excellent post. Be it PPE, testing, mortality rates, staffing or containment, they have lied consistently. As you say, as a functioning democracy, the UK is unrecognisable today.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

To be honest, I get the impression that professional pricks like Brendan O'Neil and Toby Young are the sort of people who would have switched their lights on during the blitz as some sort of onanistic act of defiance for freedom.

Or started up a home for stray rats during the plague. They are utterly wedded to some anarchic ideology that puts right wing fantasies before society and people.

Rival group to UK government's scientific advice set up

A lack of transparency over the advice guiding the UK government's coronavirus response has spurred a former chief scientific adviser to create his own "independent" group.

Sir David King said he was worried about the lack of transparency around the government's Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) committee and keen to "demonstrate what independent science advice looks like".

This clip is from an article that appears in the BBC live feed on the news website just now.

It is truly extraordinary that a rival expert group is being established to essentially challenge the SAGE group at a time of national crisis, but it reflects a level of unease about just how independent the SAGE advice actually is.

The effect of Sir David King's action might undermine SAGE credibility, although you would have to think that he didn't do this lightly.
What it does say is that the recent media coverage about the type of expertise on the SAGE panel is worrying real independent experts to the extent that want to demonstrate true transparency.

Above all, it is further evidence of the current UK government's lack of transparency throughout the CoViD-19 pandemic in the UK.

Interesting that the Culture Secretary would send a letter to the BBC about their program on PPE shortages.

BBC stands firm against minister's criticism of Panorama show on PPE

This is most definitely not a case of going after the messenger because you don't like the message.:rolleyes:

The BBC has stood by its defence of a Panorama investigation exposing shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) among healthcare workers, after a formal complaint from the culture secretary.

Oliver Dowden, in a letter to the BBC director general, Tony Hall, claimed the corporation was at risk of losing the public’s confidence amid accusations of political bias.

Last week Panorama reported that gowns, visors, swabs and body bags were left out of the government’s stockpile when it was set up in 2009. Some of the items are now in short supply.

Since the programme aired, a number of NHS workers who were interviewed for it were reported to be either longstanding members or supporters of the Labour party.

I saw a tweet commenting that they should check the political affiliation of those that have died, they might come to the conclusion that this was all just a ploy from Labour members to embarrass the Tories.

Gove is at the press briefing today. First question from the public and he has mentioned this is a new virus that everyone is learning from. I hope to get the bingo of "Stay at home, save the nhs, save lives", "unprecedented challenge" to win.

As for the tests, due to the weekend they have dipped below 100K tests for yesterday.

https://twitter.com/RaynerSkyNews/status/1256969577554206720?s=20

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Partly. To be honest, it's Brexit that has exacerbated the political divide. In terms of national crises, that's probably the main one for a long time.

I really am struggling with it, everything is just steeped in tribalism at this stage. It's just another layer of bullsh*t on top of what's already an incredibly difficult situation. Genuinely thinking of resorting to the "bury my head in sand" strategy at this stage.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You can always tell when a post is extremely insensitive.

Fixed that for you.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

50,000 corpses laying on slabs, but let's not be impolite about it!

A particular distasteful post. There are people dead all over the world including the republic. Have some respect.

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Fixed that for you.

Edgy.

Some people are very tetchy this weekend.

Aegir wrote: »

There are political divisions in the U.K., but if you are looking for somewhere to get a balanced view then this is most certainly not the place.

This thread, like the Brexit threads, the thread on the U.K. general election and the the general British politics thread are simply an echo chamber, where any post that is not a direct criticism of the U.K. government (or to be precise, the Conservative party) is just shut down as defending the Tories. You’ll note the distinct lack of critique of the Stormont and Holyrood governments.

British politics may become far less polarised now that labour has a decent leader rather than the 1970s socialist they had previously, time will tell. Unfortunately due to weak flip flopping opposition, the Conservative party were able to get re elected with a very poor leadership, an election result that the far left are still hurt by.

The amount of deflection and whataboutery engaged on here by those offering the different view means the thread can become adversarial. The jumps to slight the Labour party, like it is some slight on Irish people who has no real affinity for the party and cannot vote for them is strange as well. I note that your post itself again offers no real data points to links or points made on the thread other than to moan about how much of a echo chamber it is.

I expect you are itching to use NHS_Susan as an example now, on how we go overboard on here. As for the the criticism of Holyrood or Stormont, well I think it is easy to see how following the UK approach seemed to work out north of the border.

Coronavirus: Ireland is one island with two very different death rates

There is now strong evidence of two Covid-19 death rates on the island of Ireland. Far from being one epidemiological unit, public-health policies for fighting the disease either side of the Border have produced different results.

As for the SNP, show me video of their leader make light of the virus by making jokes about the operation to secure more ventilators or bragging about shaking hands with people who were possibly infected when it should have been evident at that this is a serious disease that needed, well just not Boris the joker at the helm.

There has been way too much complaining about this thread than engaging with the posts that people find offensive.

robinph wrote: »

Any particular point you want to mention?

Seems like a necessary tool to enable speed of contacting people. Not sure if enough people will make use of it for it to be useful. Not sure what Apple and Google problem with it is. Not sure how they control the self declaration of someone having symptoms will be controlled, although now testing is more available maybe the self declaration isn't needed. Not sure if I'd use it as my office window is right on a busy street so if people queue on the street outside or stand around for a smoke then I'll get linked to their chain of contacts. Need to know what details the government is actually collecting to link phones to people and what they are then allowed to do with it.

I think the idea of such an app is good, I am not sure I would be comfortable if I didn't know how my data would be used. Seems to me the UK and France is going a bit against the grain by going for a centralised system of collecting the data instead of a decentralised system that is being done by most other European countries and it is the system used by Google and Apple.

I think people would have a problem if there is a way their data can be used for more than just checking for contact tracing. It seems at the moment this is what the centralised system is more pointed towards. The problem I guess then is will enough people install the system to make it functional if there is a cloud on how your personal data will be used.

I don't even know if the other system will work, but it is interesting to see where the countries go. I actually think people will not be too concerned about their data, they will look at battery usage more than anything and if any app drains too much battery people will not use it.

Legal Advice on Smartphone Contact Tracing Published

Its conclusions include the following:

• A de-centralised smartphone contact tracing system – the type contemplated by “DP-3T” and being considered by governments across Europe and also Apple and Google – would be likely to comply with both human rights and data protection laws. In contrast, a centralised smartphone system – which is the current UK Government proposal – is a greater interference with fundamental rights and would require significantly greater justification to be lawful. That justification has not yet been forthcoming.
• The UK Government’s announcements in March and April for sharing health data between the private and public sector appear to be flawed. This means such data sharing is potentially not in compliance with legal requirements. Further information needs to be provided to ensure compliance and a data impact assessment should be conducted and made public.
• Any attempt to introduce ‘immunity passports’ would be a dramatic measure, both socially and legally. It would need a clear scientific basis and would also have to address the significant impact on fundamental rights including the risk of indirect discrimination.

Aegir wrote: »

There are political divisions in the U.K., but if you are looking for somewhere to get a balanced view then this is most certainly not the place.

To be honest, I'm not looking for a 'balanced view'. I'm looking for an apolitical view where analysis of a governments approach isn't met with this tribalistic bullsh*t in such important times.

I'm looking for this on a micro level when it comes to online discussion like this thread and a macro level from the media and the government itself but I'm starting to think it's not possible.