Questioning "the science"

I do not trust the selective use of statistics either. We are not told where testing and what amount of testing is done in any area or region. Just that the numbers are going up or down.

It seems to me if you are doing more testing in a particular area then you would expect more positive results. I haven’t seen any charts, graphs etc. that show this type of information. Can anyone who has more experience in this point me in the right direction?

Wouldn’t it be informative if there were opposing views put by scientists in the form of a TV debate? I may be wrong but years ago I believed there were far more programmes where debate between opposing views were the norm.

I’d like to see all this discussed in the open rather than by Twitter etc. Maybe the non-scientists amongst us would be better informed and more able to make informed decisions.

People need to bear in mind that there are two very different suggested approaches. Firstly, there is the idea that the infection rate can be brought down to manageable levels, so outbreaks can be pounced on and dealt with. That's what New Zealand many Pacific rim countries have done.

Then there is the idea of "herd immunity", which is very much a minority view, as it involves many deaths and has never worked to eradicate any infection in the past. Nevertheless, there is a handful of people who believe in it.

Then there is the UK government, which doesn't seem to have decided what strategy it should follow.

Thank you for writing that Elegran. As ever, you explain thing so well. There is certainly not an equal weight given to both sides of the argument amongst scientists.

No, Riverdoll, you do not have to blindly accept what the government has said because you do not understand the science. There is a lot of information on the internet and in the papers expressed in accessible form suggesting alternative forecasts and strategies. If you stick to looking at those that come from universities you have heard of, Oxford, Leicester etc, or big cities in major countries; New York, California, Massichusetts, Paris you shouldn't go far wrong

But even looking at news online and on the radio it is clear that there is a lot of research being done that is providing contradictory advice. Look at the number of drugs that have been touted as the great cure-all, that within a month or two are found to be virtually useless.

The best thing to do is understand science is fallible and the government advisors are not necessarily correct. Just doing that means that if you accept the figures we are given, you also accept that they could be wrong so look at what other people are saying.

The doctor is saying that Sage have got it wrong and people do have immunity from previous coronavirus infections. It is a long read but the fact that Sage have 7 mathematicians and no immunologists does seem relevant. T cells play a part in this and antibody tests don't show T cell immunity.
But as I said before I will be keeping myself safe and abiding by the rules and keeping an open mind.

Just found this - it’s not a prevalence study but is early interesting research
T-cell response 'lasts six months after Covid infection' www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-54781496

There’s research on the prevalence of people with antibodies which includes how they taper off over time. What doesn’t appear to be available is how many people may hav3 T cell immunity and how long that lasts. I’ve no idea how T cell immunity can be measured easily.

I'd like to know how many people do have antibodies but I realise that immunity does not appear to last longer than a few months and those who have had COVID could catch it again, AGAA4.

I would like to think that many of us are immune and the pandemic is nearly over as the doctor in 'lockdownsceptics' suggests but I won't be taking any chances just yet.

I started to write just WHY so many respected and experienced scientists (who each reach their conclusions by reading and understanding statistics and epidemiology and by adding up the clues for themselves) almost unanimously advise the same ways to minimise the effects of the virus. Then I realised that there is no point me reiterating their arguments - those are out there for anyone to see, it is the way they are presented to us that is not understood.

It is very few who don't agree - but because of the way media journalists who don't have the knowledge to work it out independently always give what they think is equal coverage to "both sides of the argument" it appears to the average reader that there is equal weight in the views of "the many" as "the few". THAT IS NOT SO.

Globally, all countries get the same advice from experts in medicine, epidemiology, and the sociology of how people behave in groups when they are faced with a pandemic. The bottom line is that those responsible for public health should consider the best advice and make firm but humane decisions and implement them without fear or favour.

Large chunks of Europe are locking down. Are they all gullible fools then?

I know it is tempting to look for excuses to avoid keeping to the rules; and denying the science is one ruse. But we just have to bite the bullet and get on with it.

Scientists all disagree at times, but by far the biggest drift of scientific opinion is in the direction that a further lockdown is needed.

We can all cherry pick bits of science or anything else to suit our wishes and dreams, but dreaming and hoping will not get us through this.

Just stick to the rules and stop undermining the safety of our population - particularly the elderly and vulnerable.

What there is is a scientific consensus which isn’t the same as everyone agreeing or there being a split ( which implies two very equal sides). I think an important difference is the issue of immunity - there really is no evidence base yet that this can be achieved through general exposure.. It’s no good saying well there’s no evidence it can’t be achieved because that would be far too risky a plan to implement. Additionally, those who advocate herd immunity and protecting the vulnerable simply have not come up with ways to operationalise the latter. Gupta for example talks vaguely about the need perhaps to remove older people from multi generational households to protect them - well how? But for me, Gupta and her GBD mates lost all credibility when in the middle of a pandemic FGS they celebrated its signing with champagne.

Plus the peddlers of myths, such as more people dying from flu and suicide, which has been repeated so often people actually believe it.

petra

If anyone assumes that I'm a covid denier and believe the crap about Bill Gates they couldn't be further from the truth.
Of course there's a virus. My problem is the way it's been dealt with and not listening to other points of view. Points of view from scientists who have just as good a track record as witty and valance and sometimes better.

I don't think you're a covid denier.

However, it's not true that scientists are "split". The vast majority are of the same opinion, but some fringe scientists think differently and have been given a lot of publicity.

Very few argue about the science. The disputes are about how it should be dealt with (plus the deniers, who deny that the statistics are correct and the conspiracy theorists).

If anyone assumes that I'm a covid denier and believe the crap about Bill Gates they couldn't be further from the truth.
Of course there's a virus. My problem is the way it's been dealt with and not listening to other points of view. Points of view from scientists who have just as good a track record as witty and valance and sometimes better.

The conspiracy theorists and Covidiots are already out in force on Twitter, trying to persuade people the mass testing is all to do with Bill Gates and some mad plan to vaccinate the world or the government trying to control us.

BlueBelle

I will never understand (well I do it’s called big business) why they have not used the well worn and very successful trace system which all NHS have in every area used for notifyable diseases and sexual health tracing
They have it at their finger tips in every local hospital but of course that wouldn’t keep the Johnson/Cummins pockets lined would it
I believe lockdown is simply a delaying tactic and nothing like as useful as it is portrayed to us

Ask why NHS staff think lockdown is necessary, given that the government has totally failed on its testing system.

Watch how Liverpool deal with it and compare it to the governments failure.

There seems to be a problem with the second link. You have to be patient, before Mike Yeadon speaks.

I will never understand (well I do it’s called big business) why they have not used the well worn and very successful trace system which all NHS have in every area used for notifyable diseases and sexual health tracing
They have it at their finger tips in every local hospital but of course that wouldn’t keep the Johnson/Cummins pockets lined would it
I believe lockdown is simply a delaying tactic and nothing like as useful as it is portrayed to us

mary51

I believe Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance are appearing before a Commons select committee today. I hope they are really scrutinised. We didn't vote for SAGE to ruin people's liberty.

All governments use advisors. No-one is an expert in everything. We just have to trust that they choose wisely. If not, there is always the ballot box although, we do have to wait for that.

I have to blindly accept the science as I'm not an epidemiologist.

It's very different from when a government introduces economic, education, healthcare, law & order, business rules and regulations, etc where I might have an informed opinion to question their decision.

The overwhelmingly majority of world governments are following broadly the same rules of T&T, isolate, lockdowns etc. including 'maverick' states like Russia and Israel.

I question things like the ban on children's outdoor sport but overall think there is no alternative at present.

lockdownsceptics.org/what-sage-got-wrong

youtu.be/ZrPTTgAFZnE

Here are the hyperlinks which didn't work.

I think the major issue is that whatever scientist you choose to believe, and if you are not of a scientific background it really is simply down to opinion, there is very little disagreement that T&T as well as simple testing are absolutely essential to give us some control (false positives are about 1 in 1000) and essentially to protect the NHS.

I believe Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance are appearing before a Commons select committee today. I hope they are really scrutinised. We didn't vote for SAGE to ruin people's liberty.