“I know of no episode in history, where a government has willingly aided and abetted the spread of a dangerous infectious disease amongst its own population”

Au contraire PippaZ I am not the poster dissecting every post on this thread ?

GrannyGravy13

PippaZ I was not putting forward an argument I was giving my opinion on this thread, which I am entitled to do as a member of GN

And I am allowed (certainly not "entitled") to explain my thoughts on your opinion. Or are you stopping general discussion and debate now?

Skydancer

Does anyone actually think we'll ever be free of this? If so, when? And how? Would be interested to hear opinions.

Brilliant. Quite possible that we won't. Also, I am sure that some people 18 months into the war were expecting some magic button to press to end it - it went on for another four years.

Now I know saying this will rouse the silly personal comment makers. But we cannot ignore our lack of knowledge in some areas. I would like this to be over, all around the world, by Christmas. However, that seems very unlikely.

We need to understand that it will change how we live - we don't yet know how that will immerge. But, if we do not adapt, we will not be able to co-exist with this or any virus. And this applies, in the same vein, to any other natural occurrence.

GrannyGravy13

PippaZ I was not putting forward an argument I was giving my opinion on this thread, which I am entitled to do as a member of GN

And anybody is entitled to challenge your opinion.

I actually listen to him because I know his background and his work rather than somebody who claims to be a scientist on GN. I follow a range of people online. It's not a question of "liking" what people say, but listening to respected scientific views and understanding facts. That's not what you appear to do.

You're not being boastful growstuff but you are being objectionable and insulting.

I certainly wouldn’t dream of questioning your partner’s qualification to talk about the coronavirus proteins. But I wonder what he knows about crowd psychology for instance. Or economics? An amateur interest, perhaps? That’s what SAGE have got Prof Reicher and the other non-clinicians for. The government need advisors from many different disciplines, not just medical-based sciences. Some of them, we will agree with, some of them we won’t. Its fair enough to pick on one that you disagree with wholeheartedly but to then set about demolishing the advice that the government is given is not on. And irrespective of how often you try to do it, neither is trying to make out that I’m not a scientist and that I don’t understand facts, good grief, perhaps your partner could explain to you how science is about interpretation and politics, not just “facts”.

PippaZ I was not putting forward an argument I was giving my opinion on this thread, which I am entitled to do as a member of GN

Kandinsky

I must admit I’ve stopped taking much notice of the coronavirus briefings.
But I agree entirely that we can’t stay in partial lockdown forever. We have to get back to some sort of normality at some point, so now is as good a time as any.
All adults have been offered the vaccine by now and the majority have had both doses, so why continue to lock us up?
There will always be a minority of people who will never have the vaccine, so what are we waiting for?
It’s the young people who are suffering the most in all this so it’s cruel beyond belief to put their lives on hold for another god knows how long waiting for what?

We may be able to move forward but who is to say the virus will not change our lives forever. Great events often do.

growstuff

MerylStreep

If there was ever a time to quote David Cameron, it’s now!!!
calm down dear ?

I find it despicable that people are being told to calm down when they are their relatives or friends are ill or dying unnecessarily.

Sadly it seems that various Conservative supporters have now descended to the point where they can only make personal attacks [read my recent posts GNHQ if you are checking this].

It is pretty sad but does tell us they have nothing concrete to say in favour of the government. It would be really interesting to hear, if they had.

Re the headline quote: I would encourage an in depth reading on the subject of US policy in the early 80s regarding HIV infection.

"Somebody with absolutely no medical or scientific qualification other than social sciences, has no business claiming to be an expert in viruses, but that's who is advising the government."

A lot of our problems would be solved if the right people had imposter syndrome.

GrannyGravy13

We will never know what a Labour Government would have done in these circumstances, it would have had Mr.Corbyn as PM (if he had won the election there would not have been a leadership contest, so no Mr.Starmer)

I guess we shall be enlightened to how dreadful/awful/immoral/corrupt (choose your own) this Conservative Government is until the next election?

It passes the time whilst GC eats their banana and breakfast.

We are not moving forward with this sort of "argument" to show the government is doing okay.

We don't know what anyone in a parallel world would have done. None of these "what ifs", except in the case of a coup, would have influenced what this PM and this government have done.

You are just deflecting because you have nothing to defend the way they have governed. I appreciate you want them to stay in that position. However, you should therefore be able to explain why what they are doing is a good thing. But all you do is attack yet another group of "others".

Mattsmum2

I think the issue is, no one really knows. We don’t have a crystal ball, we don’t have a time machine that means we can go back and replay the scenarios until we get one that the majority like better. If you get 100 scientists in a room and pose a question, any question, you will get different opinions and answers. How does that leave you and I? It leaves us all responsible for our own actions, good and bad. Life is full of risks, we all have to balance that and be brave.

I can see where you are coming from Mattsmum2 but, when you say "no one really knows", we do, don't we? Either that or what is the point of voting in a government?

By our votes, we pass some of our individual power to them in return, first and foremost, for keeping us safe.

They do not seem able to that. Therefore, I would suggest, it is perfectly reasonable to lay the poor governance of the country at the government's feet.

MerylStreep

If there was ever a time to quote David Cameron, it’s now!!!
calm down dear ?

And another non-argument.

Doesn't anyone have anything that defends the government? Has it sunk that low that all you have left is to be personally insulting?

I will plod on with reading the thread.

Alegrias1

growstuff

Alegrias1

The government is being advised by Robert Dingwall, a sociologist with no medical qualifications

So when I point out that certain commentators have no medical or epidemiological experience or qualifications, I'm being superior, but when you do it we all have to listen?

What are you on about? The government is listening to this man. He's a social scientist and has no medical qualifications. So why are people like you taking any notice of what he says?

The government listens to this man too. He doesn't have any medical qualifications either.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Reicher

This chap's on SAGE too: www.gov.uk/government/people/phil-blythe

Its the double standards growstuff. A person with a PhD in medical sociology says something you don't like, and you dismiss him. Somebody with a PhD in Space Physics says something you do agree with, and you wonder why she's being ignored.

So I expect "people like me" are able to make sensible value judgements about what everybody says.

I hope this doesn't sound boastful, but my partner with whom I (legally) spent the weekend is a professor of biochemistry at a prestigious university. He has spent many years studying virus proteins and over the last year or so, coronavirus proteins specifically. Some of his work and that of his team has been published. His work is highly specialised, but of course he's aware of the work of other scientists outside his own expertise and knows which ones are mavericks.

I actually listen to him because I know his background and his work rather than somebody who claims to be a scientist on GN. I follow a range of people online. It's not a question of "liking" what people say, but listening to respected scientific views and understanding facts. That's not what you appear to do.

Somebody with absolutely no medical or scientific qualification other than social sciences, has no business claiming to be an expert in viruses, but that's who is advising the government.

Kandinsky

Op. You really don’t need to spend your entire life on gransnet slagging off the government.
We’ve got Dominic Cummings now and some people will actually listen to him.

Take a break & enjoy the sun.

Yet another member who has nothing to say but make personal attacks. Very un-GNHQ guidelines, I would have thought.

But then ... if you don't have anything substantial to say ...

Spice101 Tue 20-Jul-21 06:32:00
Who is really to blame, the Government or the people who ignore any direction/restriction?

Who governs? If they cannot do it but only find a group, any group to blame, is that government?

This man, Johnson, will always offer you an "other". It is his modus operandi. If he can give you someone else to blame, no matter how much he has made your life worse, you will blame them rather than him. He knows that, so he uses it.

BTW - I think Johnson is a d*** and makes decisions that make him look good. I wouldn't trust him to run a village fete, let alone a country.

M0nica

What is the evidence that the alternative would do any better? None that I can see. We are damned if we vote for one and we are equally damned if we vote for the other.

Let me repeat. That is a deflection and not a defence of the government. It is in power because of our vote. If you can defend their actions, do so. The above is a non-argument; it is fallacious; it is a person with no defence to offer.

growstuff

Alegrias1

The government is being advised by Robert Dingwall, a sociologist with no medical qualifications

So when I point out that certain commentators have no medical or epidemiological experience or qualifications, I'm being superior, but when you do it we all have to listen?

What are you on about? The government is listening to this man. He's a social scientist and has no medical qualifications. So why are people like you taking any notice of what he says?

The government listens to this man too. He doesn't have any medical qualifications either.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Reicher

This chap's on SAGE too: www.gov.uk/government/people/phil-blythe

Its the double standards growstuff. A person with a PhD in medical sociology says something you don't like, and you dismiss him. Somebody with a PhD in Space Physics says something you do agree with, and you wonder why she's being ignored.

So I expect "people like me" are able to make sensible value judgements about what everybody says.

Kim19

You find the current opposition credible and/or attractive then?

That is so not the point and such a poor and limited none-argument about what the government - those with the countries permission to take power - are doing.

It is simply flagging up that you have no way to defend the acts of this government.

When I look down the page at thread titles, I try to guess who has started each thread.

Yes, I guessed right! ???

Alegrias1

^The government is being advised by Robert Dingwall, a sociologist with no medical qualifications^

So when I point out that certain commentators have no medical or epidemiological experience or qualifications, I'm being superior, but when you do it we all have to listen?

Excellent post Alegrias.
I won’t add my four penneth because I have no scientific qualifications whatsoever, except an ‘O’ level in Biology.
The only thing I have is an opinion.

Skydancer

Does anyone actually think we'll ever be free of this? If so, when? And how? Would be interested to hear opinions.

No. I suspect Covid will be around for another ten years or more in various mutations either more or less virulent and more or less dangerous.

I don’t doubt it’s severity but so are many other conditions.

On average, in England and Wales, over 600,000 people die every year. In the week ended 2 July 2021 8808 people deaths were registered - lower than the last five year average of 9293. Of those 8808 most recent deaths, 4585 deaths were people over 80. Add in the 65-80 age group, the total is 7258.

I’m struggling to locate the ONS chart but I believe it was 12% of all deaths recorded from March 2020-May 2021 had Covid noted on the death certificate although Covid may not have been the primary cause. Dementia and heart disease and non-Covid respiratory conditions are still the biggest killers along with cancer.

Today’s numbers. Just under 40,000 new Covid infections. 19 deaths where Covid may not have been the primary cause.

I don’t know the answer to your questions. With a world population of 8 billion, free movement and nations dependent on one another for goods and services the only thing that can stop the spread is by vaccinating 100% of the world population with a vaccine that is 100% effective against currently known and emerging variants … and that’s impossible.

Lincslass

Alegrias1

Lincslass

I would listen to Dr John Campbell, he has a calmer and shows a less pessimistic view from Professor Neil Ferguson. Shall we wait until winter, when it will be inside meetings for all, as well as the Influenza virus join up. Or wait till next year, vaccinations will still be going on throughout this. Even before this”freedom”, many youngsters and men in their 30s were going maskless in supermarkets, with no one to challenge them.

If you want less pessimism listen to Tim Spector.

If you want balance, listen to all of them.

Actually I do listen to Tim Spector, sign in with Zoe daily. I call climate change scientists and mathematicians, although have a right to voice their concerns, not an expert on pandemics. Although sure I will be disagreed with.

I was agreeing with you Linclass. I made a similar comment about mathematicians and climate change scientists a few days ago, so I will definitely not be disagreeing with you there .

We are, I fear, whistling in the wind.

learn to live with the virus is a soundbite that means different things to different people and is therefore largely meaningless.

We have been fed a vocabulary from the start of the pandemic - social distancing, flattening the curve, herd immunity, Covidiot, lockdown, super-spreader, plus all the medical ones.

Those terms all have relatively vague definitions too, so can be used to support different arguments. I very much doubt that this is accidental.