Steve Baker MP spot on today

bear66

Well-known member
There is a gigantic discrepancy between 250k deaths by June and 40k deaths by June. The latter is just above the expected national average. The former was wildly inaccurate and was the major model cited by the government at the time.
The 250,000 was by November 2021 if we did nothing but increased ICU beds. It looks like it was a total underestimate but it was based on the initual Ro of 2.6. That was later believed to be 5.7 but the Kent variant was 70% higher with an Ro of 9.
 

Same_as_before

Well-known member
Utter nonsense, wrapped in a smattering of truisms and stating the bluddy obvious.

He's talking about turning pandemic decision making into a committee process. Does anyone believe that the decision making has been too fast this time around? Anyone seriously believe that by introducing a greater number of voices into any process speeds it up? Or makes better decisions? That response to a threat to the people of this country would be better by going through a series of parliamentary debates?

Look, this government of which Mr. Baker is a member, has been appalling at responding to this crisis with decisions to lockdown coming too late and opening up done too soon.

Also "monopoly advice" would be better applied to the likes of the loathsome Cummings and his ilk than SAGE which consists of many scientists from many different disciplines none of whom (and this is important) gain anything from their decisions nor have to answer to sponsors or voters.
You could have stopped after 'utter nonsense'
 

Redwurzel

Well-known member
Soon 50% of UK adults will be vaccinated, if vaccines are reliable and a lot of the unvaccinated (mainly 18 -49 year olds) have had CV19 thats another 25% fairly safe. CV19 is going to struggle to spread when only 25% can spread it. It needs live receptive bodies to survive. Will lockdowns be required beyond July?
 

Abel Tasman

Well-known member
Soon 50% of UK adults will be vaccinated, if vaccines are reliable and a lot of the unvaccinated (mainly 18 -49 year olds) have had CV19 thats another 25% fairly safe. CV19 is going to struggle to spread when only 25% can spread it. It needs live receptive bodies to survive. Will lockdowns be required beyond July?
Hopefully the UK won't need the body equivalent of Handforth Parish Council to decide whether to or not.
 

Expat Smoggie

Active member
Lockdowns are very contentious that's for sure -- did they work?-- it's all in the data as they say. But my main issue with the lockdowns -- and this is globally it seemed as though each and every government made the same styled moves-- and through it the same mistakes, i.e. not really protecting the elderly as they said they would. NY was a classic example of the lack of oversight with assisted living and how those places became an absolute death trap for everyone associated with them. I have to wonder sometimes if Governments actually let the virus spread in the assisted living dwellings -- after all many of these places are government funded-- conspiracy hmmm.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
It was (and in some countries still is) the only measure we had to fight Covid. Lockdowns are only contentious when people don't understand the basic idea that viruses need human contact to spread rapidly - reduce that and you reduce the spread.
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
Soon 50% of UK adults will be vaccinated, if vaccines are reliable and a lot of the unvaccinated (mainly 18 -49 year olds) have had CV19 thats another 25% fairly safe. CV19 is going to struggle to spread when only 25% can spread it. It needs live receptive bodies to survive. Will lockdowns be required beyond July?
Soon? Currently 0.9% of the UK is fully vaccinated. It doesn’t look like that’ll leap to over fifty times that soon
 

Corcaigh_the_Cat

Well-known member
Are some of those applauding the government for their only ssuccesful swift action during the Covid crisis now saying it should have gone through a full parliamentary debate, Commons and Lords?
 

Corcaigh_the_Cat

Well-known member
Soon 50% of UK adults will be vaccinated, if vaccines are reliable and a lot of the unvaccinated (mainly 18 -49 year olds) have had CV19 thats another 25% fairly safe. CV19 is going to struggle to spread when only 25% can spread it. It needs live receptive bodies to survive. Will lockdowns be required beyond July?
It should depend on how many are hospitalised and dying from the disease at the time.
 

Same_as_before

Well-known member
Are some of those applauding the government for their only ssuccesful swift action during the Covid crisis now saying it should have gone through a full parliamentary debate, Commons and Lords?
That's a great question, logically I think of course it should, but the hindsight of how successful it is the scientists have been proved right.
 

Lefty

Well-known member
Baker didn't seem to mind subverting the conventions and scrutiny of Parliament when it came to Brexit. They were warned these power grabs were likely to bite them back.
 

T_A_D

Active member
It was (and in some countries still is) the only measure we had to fight Covid. Lockdowns are only contentious when people don't understand the basic idea that viruses need human contact to spread rapidly - reduce that and you reduce the spread.

Ahhh, lockdowns. Something the WHO did not recommend pre-2020 because of the damage they cause (economic, social, health) and because there was no evidence of benefit. Initially I was in favour of an earlier and tougher "lockdown" as it seems to make sense right? Sadly not. By the time formal restrictions were brought in we were already past peak infections. Voluntary measures combined with the onset of summer were enough, like in other other european countries.

As summed up by the excellent tweet I've copied below the epidemic will run its natural course (looks like vaccines will thankfully help on an ongoing basis as the virus is endemic). If lockdowns had a major impact it would be utterly clear in the data. It isn't.

Sweden vs UK (yes yes, Sweden vs Norway/Finland). Florida (open) vs California (restrictions) yet very similar results. North vs South Dakota...... similar result despite very different restrictions. At some point we will realise that generally Europe and the Americas were hard hit and Asia and Africa less so. Maybe we'll focus on the reasons for this instead of being obsessed with lockdowns and NPIs.

1614126419858.png


Not to say I think we should have had no restrictions, we should have some. Just the sensible ones..... work from home where possible, reduce social contacts, shield vulnerable where possible, ramp up healthcare, ventilate, ensure the ill isolate.

Instead we have had a government and a scientific advisory board (and "independent" versions) terrifying its people when it should be doing the exact opposite in a time of crisis. We lurched from a standard established response to panic and enacting measures and restrictions which likely had minimal impact and caused huge damage, stress, and anxiety.

No need to believe me though, below are the words of Donald Henderson (epidemiologist involved in the eradication of smallpox). Wise wise words.......

1614128188535.png
 

Lefty

Well-known member
Ahhh, lockdowns. Something the WHO did not recommend pre-2020 because of the damage they cause (economic, social, health) and because there was no evidence of benefit. Initially I was in favour of an earlier and tougher "lockdown" as it seems to make sense right? Sadly not. By the time formal restrictions were brought in we were already past peak infections. Voluntary measures combined with the onset of summer were enough, like in other other european countries.

As summed up by the excellent tweet I've copied below the epidemic will run its natural course (looks like vaccines will thankfully help on an ongoing basis as the virus is endemic). If lockdowns had a major impact it would be utterly clear in the data. It isn't.

Sweden vs UK (yes yes, Sweden vs Norway/Finland). Florida (open) vs California (restrictions) yet very similar results. North vs South Dakota...... similar result despite very different restrictions. At some point we will realise that generally Europe and the Americas were hard hit and Asia and Africa less so. Maybe we'll focus on the reasons for this instead of being obsessed with lockdowns and NPIs.

View attachment 14219


Not to say I think we should have had no restrictions, we should have some. Just the sensible ones..... work from home where possible, reduce social contacts, shield vulnerable where possible, ramp up healthcare, ventilate, ensure the ill isolate.

Instead we have had a government and a scientific advisory board (and "independent" versions) terrifying its people when it should be doing the exact opposite in a time of crisis. We lurched from a standard established response to panic and enacting measures and restrictions which likely had minimal impact and caused huge damage, stress, and anxiety.

No need to believe me though, below are the words of Donald Henderson (epidemiologist involved in the eradication of smallpox). Wise wise words.......

View attachment 14220

How does he explain New Zealand and some of the South Asian countries?

And Sweden did what he advocates.

 
Top
X