It's just possible that Cummings is there to provide input on available research funding and how the government could help SAGE members obtain private lab support or other government assistance. Cummings has access to data science - again it's just possible modelers etc might find that useful (especially older modelers).
I would imagine a group of highly experienced PhD's and research scientists could fend off the odd political adviser with a few well chosen technical terms.
There's so much you could be complaining about - for example the incredibly stupid policies toward care homes - rather than this piffling item.
It's a bit harsh to include Ben Warner in 'neither are qualified to serve any scientific role'. He does have a PhD in quantum physics and is a professional data scientist.
SAGE should be based purely on science, there should be no involvement at that level with politicians or their advisors, that science should then be presented by Vallance & Whitty at COBRA where policy can be decided based on that evidence.
By having Government advisors at that level you are always going to give the impression that policy is driving the science rather than the correct way round, it taints the neutrality of the committee and neither are qualified to serve any scientific role, which begs the obvious question of why are they there if not to assert Government influence on the science that we are intent on following.
It’s a massive faux pas, it beggars belief that they think that they can say they are acting on the scientific advice when the whole time they are having input on it.
Maybe he was present but not involved?
Maybe he was present but not involved?
It involves the group giving timely information to the government, surely sitting in on a meeting in these exceptional circumstances will aid that. I’m not sure why everyone assumes the worst. Rather than both groups going back and forth with questions surely it helps to have reps observing the group and available for answering questions. Will certainly save time in that aspect.Wooooosh
If that was reason, it confirms he shouldn't have been there. The line of communication was from SAGE to Cobra. No wonder Johnson didn't bother going to the first few Cobra meetings, no wonder the government response to this pandemic has been poor from the beginning.It involves the group giving timely information to the government, surely sitting in on a meeting in these exceptional circumstances will aid that. I’m not sure why everyone assumes the worst. Rather than both groups going back and forth with questions surely it helps to have reps observing the group and available for answering questions. Will certainly save time in that aspect.
It involves the group giving timely information to the government, surely sitting in on a meeting in these exceptional circumstances will aid that. I’m not sure why everyone assumes the worst. Rather than both groups going back and forth with questions surely it helps to have reps observing the group and available for answering questions. Will certainly save time in that aspect.
I get that but you wouldhave to assume that they are actively involved and making decisions not just observers, either way it’s not ideal but I’m not so sure it’s as dramatic as people are making out on here.It’s a tiered system, SAGE is purely about the science and the nature of the virus and that data should be collated and agreed with by those present and then the Chairman attends COBRA where policy is decided based on the purely scientific evidence he presents. Like I say it’s like a trial with the defendants mother on the jury, there’s an outside bias that should not he there, and why do people think the worst ??? Look at how many have died and some of the decisions made and you have your answer, by having Cummings and Warner present you potentially taint the science with politics, you can argue for different scenarios to be accepted best or worst case to suit an agenda.