I have no idea about the truth behind testing regimes or PPE supplies. There is too much finger pointing and journalistic pot stirring to be able to get a clear view. But, for heavens sake, why can't we just let our elected leaders get on with it, fight the fight and have a wash up afterwards? I don't believe there's a single one of them wants to feel responsible for any more deaths. The press should pipe down for the sake of us all. If it were me I'd ban them from the daily briefing.
Yes, I have read about the chequered forecasting history of Ferguson and I have sat alongside people making big decisions and thought "glad this isn't down to me" but I think Johnson's problem was that if he ignored mighty Imperial College then whom did he endorse?Originally Posted by Muddy Retriever
It used to be said that no stock broker ever got fired for recommending ICI shares: the safe choice, and I think Imperial College was the safe choice.
With the wisdom of hindsight and as someone with a passing interest in human behavior, it may be that a tougher version of voluntary isolation but short of total lock down would have got R to below 1 and not destroyed the economy. The behaviorists advising the cabinet underestimated the degree of compliance of the British public and we now will suffer the economic consequences.
Johnson is only as good as his advisers. His personal knowledge of the Peloponnesian wars hasn't been of much help to him recently.
Spot on. Like.
I agree, far too many armchair critics most of whom don't wish to follow official advice for a variety of irrelevant reasons. I await a link on this thread to that authorative source The Beano in order to justify another uninformed opinion.
I recall a 'Not the 9 o'clock News' sketch (I think!) -
"And now over to our reporter outside (insert location). Tell us (insert name), exactly what is it we don't know yet?"
The flaw of hindsight is that past decisions are evaluated using current data, not that available at the time. For example, the London Nightingale facility is being stood down due to lack of use, triggering media criticism that creating it was a waste of time and resources. Clearly there is no understanding on their part of risk management, or the value of proving for future reference that it could be created.
The strategy for the population is simple; follow the Government's/appointed advisers directives without trying to push the limits. The subsequent outcomes and accompanying data will be more straightforward to analyse due to high conformity. This should lead more quickly to informed revisions to those directives, and form the basis for future directives. It is unrealistic to expect 'right first time', but at least those making the decisions have got the ****'s to make them.
Obviously not by the same journalists who were praising it to the sky a few weeks ago.
Well obviously not.
At last common sense observstions and suggetions and without a hint of waffle
social media... 24hr news channels... instant news available online...
They all contribute to a perceived need for the latest exclusive news, answers, speculation. (edit: usually regardless of any factual content)
I liken it in some ways to running gear... a market has been created and a lot of the public feel they need it to function... hence why i see people doing my local parkrun wearing race-vests and arm-guards.
Last edited by Travs; 04-05-2020 at 07:54 PM.
Would you sign up to the new smartphone app?
I would even though I have reservations about it being an NHS app. It probably won’t work based on track record. Other countries are using the Google/Apple version, which is thought to be more secure.
I'm not sure, I'd like to know more about the practicalities of how it works, specifically how close/long you need to be to another phone to record as a 'contact'. I'm currently sitting in my kitchen and 20' away over a low drystone wall is a well used public footpath. If everyone walking along that with the app records as a contact on my phone then there's probably a reasonable chance of me being asked to isolate if one of them becomes Ill - even if at the time they happened to pass my house I was safely inside. Maybe I'm underestimating how sophisticated it is - if for example it knows the range and duration and works something out from that it might be different. So it would help to know before I decide.
I've no concerns about privacy. I don't normally take my phone if I'm out and about and if I'm driving it's switched off and put away in the glove box - it wouldn't be too hard to change that if I do use the app.
