How do you think Boris has handled it so far ?

[vegster]

It seems Johnson's comments about being willing to shake CV19 victims by the hand were delivered just after SAGE had advised against hand-shaking. I wonder how that fits in with the "guided by the science" mantra?

That would probably because it was yet another of the meetings he missed.

 

[Swansman]

It seems Johnson's comments about being willing to shake CV19 victims by the hand were delivered just after SAGE had advised against hand-shaking. I wonder how that fits in with the "guided by the science" mantra?

While it was obviously stupid its also probably on the least important things to happen in 2020.

 

[drew]

Worst death count in Europe. Just imagine how bad it would be if Johnson had handled it badly!!!!

 

[The Clamp]

All news outlets reporting highest death toll in Europe. But obviously they are all wrong.

It’s remarkable how people will blindly defend Johnson and his ilk no matter what, no matter how many die. Quite scary actually. Perhaps for some, the alternative, admitting we have no real leadership and that’s why people are dying, is just too real for some to handle.

 

[Eeyore]

Are we? That Guardian piece also mentions ...

Ministers and experts have warned against international comparisons, saying the figure for excess mortality – the number of deaths from all causes that exceed the average for the time of year – is a more meaningful gauge...

Jenny Harris, the deputy chief medical officer for England, warned against international comparisons.

Speaking to MPs minutes after the ONS figures were released, she said: “It is extremely difficult to compare between countries at the moment. We need to not just look at the numbers clearly, but at the rates. The obvious one is age and standardised death rates per million population. Those are not the numbers that are routinely reported, so it is really difficult to do direct comparisons.”

The same article shows we are fourth if comparing deaths per 100,000 people. Numerous articles and experts have cautioned comparing international death rates for very good reason.

Italy's coronavirus death toll far higher than reported - stats office

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-h...gher-than-reported-stats-office-idUKKBN22G1XB

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...how-does-britain-compare-with-other-countries

A few things, as I don't belong to the left/right delineation in this argument.

1) I fail to see how 'per capita' will be relevant in any stats. A death is a death.
2) The most relevant barometer is missed and missed again. How many nationals brought the virus back into the country ? If a country had quite a lot and another very few it would be hoped that the lowest figure was acted upon in such a way as to cause a lower death rate. These figures appear not be available.
3) Year on year death rates are clearly a more reliable guide if analysed over a protracted period of time.
4) Age and demographics are another highly relevant factor. Italy is a nation where families are less nuclear.

So the upshot is that, at this stage, nobody has a ****ing clue about where the poorest responses have been. All I know is that Germany has a quarter of the number of deaths and has conducted twice the amount of testing. So there are certainly things that could have been done better.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

A few things, as I don't belong to the left/right delineation in this argument.

1) I fail to see how 'per capita' will be relevant in any stats. A death is a death.
2) The most relevant barometer is missed and missed again. How many nationals brought the virus back into the country ? If a country had quite a lot and another very few it would be hoped that the lowest figure was acted upon in such a way as to cause a lower death rate. These figures appear not be available.
3) Year on year death rates are clearly a more reliable guide if analysed over a protracted period of time.
4) Age and demographics are another highly relevant factor. Italy is a nation where families are less nuclear.

So the upshot is that, at this stage, nobody has a ****ing clue about where the poorest responses have been. All I know is that Germany has a quarter of the number of deaths and has conducted twice the amount of testing. So there are certainly things that could have been done better.

Good points, well put.

This has been a very bad day. Before pointing fingers, it's been a bad day for the country not just our decision-makers. I can't be the only one who watched the news clips from Italy back when they were in melt-down and thought 'my god it can't get that bad here, surely'. For one thing we could learn from their experience. For another we are an island with an integrated health system. We don't have the multi-generational households that Italy has. And we've been continually told that we have the best this and the world class that. Surely we couldn't do this badly?

And then we saw the horrific clips of the Spanish care homes. Surely, again, we'd have time to see this and do something proactive. It couldn't be that bad here.



And now we are Italy + and Spain ++

Wherever you stand on the political spectrum it's clear that something has gone badly wrong: PPE, testing, 18 million incoming visitors of which only a few hundred went into quarantine, care homes - all disastrous. And yet we have the repeated mantra - the 'science guides us'. We don't have a policy on face-masks. We have a part time PM. We have the same scientists finally beginning to admit that maybe, just maybe, we should have started testing earlier and that we are now moving to the South Korean model. How long have we known about the success of S. Korea?

Today, the robotic Raab stood there fronting it out. The scientist told us that we have 'beautiful' studies how the effects of obesity on health and that diet wasn't the answer. Raab tells us that because anyone can get COVID (wow, even the PM!) that it doesn't discriminate. Has he looked at the figures?

Bob Dylan once wrote that you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Well equally, you don't need to be an epidemiologist to know a shit storm when you see one.

 

[The Clamp]

Good points, well put.

This has been a very bad day. Before pointing fingers, it's been a bad day for the country not just our decision-makers. I can't be the only one who watched the news clips from Italy back when they were in melt-down and thought 'my god it can't get that bad here, surely'. For one thing we could learn from their experience. For another we are an island with an integrated health system. We don't have the multi-generational households that Italy has. And we've been continually told that we have the best this and the world class that. Surely we couldn't do this badly?

And then we saw the horrific clips of the Spanish care homes. Surely, again, we'd have time to see this and do something proactive. It couldn't be that bad here.



And now we are Italy + and Spain ++

Wherever you stand on the political spectrum it's clear that something has gone badly wrong: PPE, testing, 18 million incoming visitors of which only a few hundred went into quarantine, care homes - all disastrous. And yet we have the repeated mantra - the 'science guides us'. We don't have a policy on face-masks. We have a part time PM. We have the same scientists finally beginning to admit that maybe, just maybe, we should have started testing earlier and that we are now moving to the South Korean model. How long have we known about the success of S. Korea?

Today, the robotic Raab stood there fronting it out. The scientist told us that we have 'beautiful' studies how the effects of obesity on health and that diet wasn't the answer. Raab tells us that because anyone can get COVID (wow, even the PM!) that it doesn't discriminate. Has he looked at the figures?

Bob Dylan once wrote that you don't need to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Well equally, you don't need to be an epidemiologist to know a shit storm when you see one.

Very good post.

 

[Baldseagull]

I don’t think the government’s strategies are beyond reproach at all. Example: they lock us down but thousands of people are flying in every week? What’s that about? I think this lockdown could create more problems than it solves too. It’s not a cure, just a delay.

I don’t think many Western European countries are deliberately scheming to downplay the figures. But it takes a while to collate them and it’s a fact some doctors are writing Coronavirus on death certificates when the deceased hasn’t been tested. For that reason, I don’t think our figures are a true reflection of deaths directly from Covid-19.

No, a delay in the rate of infection, cures the issue of not enough ventilators to go around.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

A few things, as I don't belong to the left/right delineation in this argument.

1) I fail to see how 'per capita' will be relevant in any stats. A death is a death.
2) The most relevant barometer is missed and missed again. How many nationals brought the virus back into the country ? If a country had quite a lot and another very few it would be hoped that the lowest figure was acted upon in such a way as to cause a lower death rate. These figures appear not be available.
3) Year on year death rates are clearly a more reliable guide if analysed over a protracted period of time.
4) Age and demographics are another highly relevant factor. Italy is a nation where families are less nuclear.

So the upshot is that, at this stage, nobody has a ****ing clue about where the poorest responses have been. All I know is that Germany has a quarter of the number of deaths and has conducted twice the amount of testing. So there are certainly things that could have been done better.

Agreed, far too early to judge yet we appear to have numerous people who have already made up their minds that we are the worst despite the numerous expert's warnings about the unreliability of the statistics .. unsurprisingly this often aligns with their political delineation. No idea why there is such a rush to judgement as we are still in the middle of this crisis, still learning about this virus it will probably take several months probably years to learn the truth/lessons. I am sure any future public enquiry will be damning of the government's response in some areas and praise them in others just like numerous other government enquiries across Europe and beyond.

 

[The Clamp]

Yet again the world is open mouthed at Johnson’s failed response to Covid 19

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/04/...HaTJIwZEoq6hOIbPosdVG0Kq5jkSKjkRtY_i4EoFZpSqA

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Agreed, far too early to judge yet we appear to have numerous people who have already made up their minds that we are the worst despite the numerous expert's warnings about the unreliability of the statistics .. unsurprisingly this often aligns with their political delineation. No idea why there is such a rush to judgement as we are still in the middle of this crisis, still learning about this virus it will probably take several months probably years to learn the truth/lessons. I am sure any future public enquiry will be damning of the government's response in some areas and praise them in others just like numerous other government enquiries across Europe and beyond.

Or not. I otherwise agree with your post. Which is the reason for the first two words.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yet again the world is open mouthed at Johnson’s failed response to Covid 19

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/04/...HaTJIwZEoq6hOIbPosdVG0Kq5jkSKjkRtY_i4EoFZpSqA

Look, I loath Boris, but that article is just polemic. And the journalist is English. It means nothing.

The day of judgement will be later. If it transpires Boris has ****ed it up, I hope the labour powder can be kept dry till the ripe time and not spunked all over the left press to the boredom and disdain of the floating voter. I am not ready to judge Boris yet. If he has ****ed up I'll want to see his guts properly spilled. If he hasn't then credit where it's due.

 

[The Clamp]

Look, I loath Boris, but that article is just polemic. And the journalist is English. It means nothing.

The day of judgement will be later. If it transpires Boris has ****ed it up, I hope the labour powder can be kept dry till the ripe time and not spunked all over the left press to the boredom and disdain of the floating voter. I am not ready to judge Boris yet. If he has ****ed up I'll want to see his guts properly spilled. If he hasn't then credit where it's due.

My post was mildly tongue in cheek. But yes, you are quite right.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

Look, I loath Boris, but that article is just polemic. And the journalist is English. It means nothing.

The day of judgement will be later. If it transpires Boris has ****ed it up, I hope the labour powder can be kept dry till the ripe time and not spunked all over the left press to the boredom and disdain of the floating voter. I am not ready to judge Boris yet. If he has ****ed up I'll want to see his guts properly spilled. If he hasn't then credit where it's due.

In fairness it was made clear it was an opinion piece. I thought it was perceptive. Just as a matter of interest, which points did you disagree with?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

In fairness it was made clear it was an opinion piece. I thought it was perceptive. Just as a matter of interest, which points did you disagree with?

I only skimmed the first page. I certainly disagreed with the assertion that Boris has appointed a puppet cabinet of drooling fools so he can maintain control. He is a well-recognised delegator and waffer. The only proper eejit is the Priti; the rest seem unremarkable.

That aside I am only interested in not criticising Boris yet. I want to be sure that if he needs to be criticised it is done at a time that has effect. A constant stream of criticism will have no effect on his popularity.

 

[drew]

I only skimmed the first page. I certainly disagreed with the assertion that Boris has appointed a puppet cabinet of drooling fools so he can maintain control. He is a well-recognised delegator and waffer. The only proper eejit is the Priti; the rest seem unremarkable.

That aside I am only interested in not criticising Boris yet. I want to be sure that if he needs to be criticised it is done at a time that has effect. A constant stream of criticism will have no effect on his popularity.

Firstly, not sure you can judge if you only read part of the article. You then go on to say that Priti is an 'eejit' and the rest are unremarkable. Isn't that what the article was getting at, there is no talent in the cabinet and that in this time of crisis that is exactly what Johnson needs around him. Yet it was clear at the time of election that the only criteria that got you in Johnson's gang was to agree with Brexit.

 

[Hugo Rune]

The only proper eejit is the Priti; the rest seem unremarkable.

Patel is not a populist. She is a perma-smirked manipulative sociopath bully but like Farage, she was calling for the borders to be closed similar to New Zealand and Australia. She’d have saved thousands of lives if she’d been listened too but old Mr Johnson was never going to make an unpopular decision like that when he needed too.


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....OSED-stop-new-coronavirus-cases-imported.html

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Patel is not a populist. She is a perma-smirked manipulative sociopath bully but like Farage, she was calling for the borders to be closed similar to New Zealand and Australia. She’d have saved thousands of lives if she’d been listened too but old Mr Johnson was never going to make an unpopular decision like that when he needed too.


https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....OSED-stop-new-coronavirus-cases-imported.html

Very interesting and good point. Ironic, is it not, when the stars of the sociopath bullies and the national interest align. I call it coincidence, like the universal and repected love of children, and it's apparent avowed expression in the personality palette of one Adolph Hitler. I wouldn't vote for any of them old ***** though, none of them

 

[oldboyroy]

From mutterings in last few days it appears this country has ****ed up

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

I only skimmed the first page. I certainly disagreed with the assertion that Boris has appointed a puppet cabinet of drooling fools so he can maintain control. He is a well-recognised delegator and waffer. The only proper eejit is the Priti; the rest seem unremarkable.

That aside I am only interested in not criticising Boris yet. I want to be sure that if he needs to be criticised it is done at a time that has effect. A constant stream of criticism will have no effect on his popularity.

Thanks for getting back to me. I won't labour the point (says the guy about to labour the point) but my perception is that this is a Cabinet with an almost uniquely supine and talentless pedigree, purged of old style big beasts and anyone who might represent a serious dissenting voice, other than the ghastty plotter Gove who he clearly wants on the inside pissing out, rather than on the outside pissing in. But fair enough - maybe the PM didn't have a huge pool of talent to pick from.

Just one illustrative (I think) episode kind of sums this up. TV coverage (of course approved and orchestrated by Cummings) of the new Cabinet. All eyes lovingly on BJ. What does he do? He loudly asks them to chant the manifesto targets in unison. Which they do, like happy campers at Butlins c.1965. Just wow. (Echoes of Stalin, when the first person to stop applauding at the standing ovation following his speech would be taken out and shot as a traitor.)

I think that history might very well be a harsh judge on this mob.