Emergency legislation - information and commentary

[RichardAP]

NickCQ said:

I am certainly not defending the government. I think the best explanation for their hyper-cautious actions at the moment is that they know they will not survive another lockdown. Therefore they are extending the current one as long as possible to give themselves the best chance on the way out. They went too far the other way last summer with the idea of "back to normal" and then got unlucky with variants.

That seems more probable than the idea that this is part of a masterplan to bankrupt airlines and the entertainment industry while reinvigorating domestic tourism and generating extra revenue from the speed cameras on the A303.

Having spent a number of years living near Stonehenge I am certain there won’t be any speeding if even more people start to use the A303

[Elysium]

NickCQ said:

jm doc said:

Show us the evidence that the threat we now face warrants this course of action? There is none, there is no existential threat now other than the continuation of their current policy.

The government's evidence, for what it's worth, is the SAGE "reasonable worst case" of 18k deaths from the current unlocking trajectory, presumably more if you accelerated it.

As we have discussed on here ad nauseam, that forecast suffers from an abundance of caution / application of the precautionary principle / "Goebbels-style propaganda" (depending on your viewpoint). But it's out there and it's put together by people that know far more than you or I and who, whatever the Conservative Woman blog says, don't want to control our lives for the sake of it.

This may be a controversial view, but I do not see any reason why the possibility of an additional 18k COVID deaths as part of an 'exit wave' justifies a single day of further restrictions.

I do not believe that is a 'justifed and proportionate' reason for our human rights to be suspended. Particularly at a time when all-cause deaths are at a 10 year minimum and are averaging 10% below 'normal' over the last 4 weeks:

[unident]

Elysium said:

This may be a controversial view, but I do not see any reason why the possibility of an additional 18k COVID deaths as part of an 'exit wave' justifies a single day of further restrictions.

I do not believe that is a 'justifed and proportionate' reason for our human rights to be suspended. Particularly at a time when all-cause deaths are at a 10 year minimum and are averaging 10% below 'normal' over the last 4 weeks:

Your first sentence is why you’re not making the decisions. A complete disregard for human life seems very much at odds with your constant moaning about human rights.

[jm doc]

NickCQ said:

jm doc said:

Show us the evidence that the threat we now face warrants this course of action? There is none, there is no existential threat now other than the continuation of their current policy.

The government's evidence, for what it's worth, is the SAGE "reasonable worst case" of 18k deaths from the current unlocking trajectory, presumably more if you accelerated it.

As we have discussed on here ad nauseam, that forecast suffers from an abundance of caution / application of the precautionary principle / "Goebbels-style propaganda" (depending on your viewpoint). 1) But it's out there and it's put together by people that know far more than you or I and who, whatever the Conservative Woman blog says, 2) don't want to control our lives for the sake of it.

1) Speak for yourself, but I am very happy that I have a reasonable understanding of the subject, having worked for 35 years in the field.
2) The constant bluster, distortions and downright lies as well as any rational case for lockdown makes this very debatable. In my opinion some of our politicians are clearly relishing their role as Gauleiters

[NickCQ]

jm doc said:

1) Speak for yourself, but I am very happy that I have a reasonable understanding of the subject, having worked for 35 years in the field.

Fair enough, what's your background?

[jm doc]

unident said:

Elysium said:

This may be a controversial view, but I do not see any reason why the possibility of an additional 18k COVID deaths as part of an 'exit wave' justifies a single day of further restrictions.

I do not believe that is a 'justifed and proportionate' reason for our human rights to be suspended. Particularly at a time when all-cause deaths are at a 10 year minimum and are averaging 10% below 'normal' over the last 4 weeks:

Your first sentence is why you’re not making the decisions. A complete disregard for human life seems very much at odds with your constant moaning about human rights.

There we go again, shroud waving. So every winter now we will have to lockdown as thousands die from flu. See how far we get without approach to remaining a first world country. A couple of years at most.

Have you any idea how many people are dying and going to die as a result of this lockdown? Please tell us as otherwise you cannot make any comment on this without looking like a complete and utter moron.

[anonymous-user]

jm doc said:

NickCQ said:

jm doc said:

Show us the evidence that the threat we now face warrants this course of action? There is none, there is no existential threat now other than the continuation of their current policy.

The government's evidence, for what it's worth, is the SAGE "reasonable worst case" of 18k deaths from the current unlocking trajectory, presumably more if you accelerated it.

As we have discussed on here ad nauseam, that forecast suffers from an abundance of caution / application of the precautionary principle / "Goebbels-style propaganda" (depending on your viewpoint). 1) But it's out there and it's put together by people that know far more than you or I and who, whatever the Conservative Woman blog says, 2) don't want to control our lives for the sake of it.

1) Speak for yourself, but I am very happy that I have a reasonable understanding of the subject, having worked for 35 years in the field.
2) The constant bluster, distortions and downright lies as well as any rational case for lockdown makes this very debatable. In my opinion some of our politicians are clearly relishing their role as Gauleiters

Quite!

I never understand how easily people throw out the comment “they obviously know more than us”.

Based on the last year I’d say it was a dead certainty that ‘they’ know fk all about anything bar lining their pockets and hungering for more control at our expense.

[NickCQ]

garyhun said:

I never understand how easily people throw out the comment “they obviously know more than us”.

Based on the last year I’d say it was a dead certainty that ‘they’ know fk all about anything bar lining their pockets and hungering for more control at our expense.

To be clear, I talking about the members of SAGE rather than the government.

[anonymous-user]

NickCQ said:

garyhun said:

I never understand how easily people throw out the comment “they obviously know more than us”.

Based on the last year I’d say it was a dead certainty that ‘they’ know fk all about anything bar lining their pockets and hungering for more control at our expense.

To be clear, I talking about the members of SAGE rather than the government.

Ditto. Maybe without the pocket lining but who knows!

[NickCQ]

garyhun said:

Ditto. Maybe without the pocket lining but who knows!

Why would someone "hungering for control at our expense" have made the life choice to become a scientific researcher or epidemiologist?

[Graveworm]

jm doc said:

There we go again, shroud waving. So every winter now we will have to lockdown as thousands die from flu. See how far we get without approach to remaining a first world country. A couple of years at most.

Have you any idea how many people are dying and going to die as a result of this lockdown? Please tell us as otherwise you cannot make any comment on this without looking like a complete and utter moron.

Thousands don't die "From flu", 1500 or so die from flu (due to), thousands die with flu (Associated with). Since the outbreak started about 120,000 have died "From Covid" and 120,000 excess deaths have happened over and above the average. Non Covid deaths, however, are below the 5 year average in the same period, we may be saving up deaths and many more may well die as a result of the lockdown, but the last few weeks has shown, that, with few covid deaths and with lockdown deaths are currently running at a record low. So I would appreciate your view of your own question how many are dying and will die as a result of this lockdown.

Edited by Graveworm on Thursday 15th April 17:54

[jm doc]

Graveworm said:

jm doc said:

There we go again, shroud waving. So every winter now we will have to lockdown as thousands die from flu. See how far we get without approach to remaining a first world country. A couple of years at most.

Have you any idea how many people are dying and going to die as a result of this lockdown? Please tell us as otherwise you cannot make any comment on this without looking like a complete and utter moron.

Thousands don't die "From flu", 1500 of so die from flu, thousands die with flu. Since the outbreak started about 120,000 have died "From Covid" and 120,000 excess deaths have happened over and above the average. Non Covid deaths, however, are below the 5 year average in the same period, we may be saving up deaths and many more may well die as a result of the lockdown, but the last few weeks has shown, that, with few covid deaths and with lockdown deaths are currently running at a record low. So I would appreciate your view of your own question how many are dying and will die as a result of this lockdown.

Well, interesting question and one you would have thought crucial to any decision about how to react to the pandemic. So have you seen anywhere from any official source these figures? And if not why not? Have they not done this? That's almost inconceivable. So why has there been no official release of this information?

Over to you....

[jm doc]

Graveworm said:

jm doc said:

There we go again, shroud waving. So every winter now we will have to lockdown as thousands die from flu. See how far we get without approach to remaining a first world country. A couple of years at most.

Have you any idea how many people are dying and going to die as a result of this lockdown? Please tell us as otherwise you cannot make any comment on this without looking like a complete and utter moron.

Thousands don't die "From flu", 1500 or so die from flu, thousands die with flu. Since the outbreak started about 120,000 have died "From Covid" and 120,000 excess deaths have happened over and above the average. Non Covid deaths, however, are below the 5 year average in the same period, we may be saving up deaths and many more may well die as a result of the lockdown, but the last few weeks has shown, that, with few covid deaths and with lockdown deaths are currently running at a record low. So I would appreciate your view of your own question how many are dying and will die as a result of this lockdown.

And 20 million didn't die from the last flu pandemic then?

[Gman20]

jm doc said:

And 20 million didn't die from the last flu pandemic then?

Correct

[Graveworm]

jm doc said:

Well, interesting question and one you would have thought crucial to any decision about how to react to the pandemic. So have you seen anywhere from any official source these figures? And if not why not? Have they not done this? That's almost inconceivable. So why has there been no official release of this information?

Over to you....

They have released the information. Immediate non covid deaths deaths are fewer than normal, probably as the NPIs, when trying to reduce Covid deaths will have reduced some non Covid deaths. These clearly exceed the deaths caused by the NPIs in the short term. I really don't know what the long term effect will be, there will likely be some missed treatments, diagnosis and other deaths. I haven't seen anything that suggests it will exceed the excess deaths from Covid.

[Elysium]

unident said:

Elysium said:

This may be a controversial view, but I do not see any reason why the possibility of an additional 18k COVID deaths as part of an 'exit wave' justifies a single day of further restrictions.

I do not believe that is a 'justifed and proportionate' reason for our human rights to be suspended. Particularly at a time when all-cause deaths are at a 10 year minimum and are averaging 10% below 'normal' over the last 4 weeks:

Your first sentence is why you’re not making the decisions. A complete disregard for human life seems very much at odds with your constant moaning about human rights.

Your response shows a complete lack of comprehension.

There is nothing in my post to suggest a disregard for human life. I just understand that death is a normal part of it.

[Elysium]

Graveworm said:

jm doc said:

Well, interesting question and one you would have thought crucial to any decision about how to react to the pandemic. So have you seen anywhere from any official source these figures? And if not why not? Have they not done this? That's almost inconceivable. So why has there been no official release of this information?

Over to you....

They have released the information. Immediate non covid deaths deaths are fewer than normal, probably as the NPIs, when trying to reduce Covid deaths will have reduced some non Covid deaths. These clearly exceed the deaths caused by the NPIs in the short term. I really don't know what the long term effect will be, there will likely be some missed treatments, diagnosis and other deaths. I haven't seen anything that suggests it will exceed the excess deaths from Covid.

The point is that there have not been any excess deaths from COVID or anything else since the end of February. Deaths in England and Wales since then have been considerably lower than normal.

If the prediction of 18,000 deaths in an exit wave holds true then I highly doubt that they will be excess deaths.

[NickCQ]

Elysium said:

If the prediction of 18,000 deaths in an exit wave holds true then I highly doubt that they will be excess deaths.

Per our previous conversation I understand what you mean here, but I think it can be misleading to laypeople such as myself. If SAGE is right, 18,000 will die earlier than they otherwise would have if restrictions were maintained. The number of years of life lost (& quality of those years) is obviously unknown.

[Elysium]

NickCQ said:

Elysium said:

If the prediction of 18,000 deaths in an exit wave holds true then I highly doubt that they will be excess deaths.

Per our previous conversation I understand what you mean here, but I think it can be misleading to laypeople such as myself. If SAGE is right, 18,000 will die earlier than they otherwise would have if restrictions were maintained. The number of years of life lost (& quality of those years) is obviously unknown.

I’m not sure that is right. All-cause deaths in week 13 were at a 10 year minimum, despite the NHS not being at full capacity. Since the end of Feb the number of people dying has been lower than usual. COVID is a new cause of death, but it’s no longer causing additional death.

[Graveworm]

Elysium said:

The point is that there have not been any excess deaths from COVID or anything else since the end of February. Deaths in England and Wales since then have been considerably lower than normal.

If the prediction of 18,000 deaths in an exit wave holds true then I highly doubt that they will be excess deaths.

I wasn't saying anything to the contrary. This was deaths caused by the lockdown vs non covid deaths.
I don't, personally, disagree with you about the current position. I think the government should review the requirement for the NPIs now. I have looked at the modelling and whilst it does add up, the vaccine effect is ongoing and growing. There is nothing to suggest that there will be a slowdown or reduction in take-up. If the VOC do become an issue then it won't be anything that could be resolved within the existing timetable. The government will probably argue that the experts have said they need 5 weeks after each relaxation, to evaluate each stage, so that's the reason for the timetable.

I think it's more likely that it's the pretty reckless "Irreversible" word of the week. I would rather have a "Reversible" opening up, when that is indicated rather than wasting time with potentially unnecessary restrictions until they are sure that they won't have to reintroduce them again. You have, throughout, been saying there has been no need to lockdown, which I have frequently disagreed with so it's only fair to say when I think you are right.