CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 5)

[ORD]

2gins said:

Yes, it's a fair point. I studied chemistry but what I do now, while still in the same field, is very far removed from what I studied. But, a scientific training teaches you about properly analysing problems, testing a hypothesis, having controls, and being sceptical. I have no confidence that Boris (classics!) or Hancock (PPE) are in any way capable of challenging what SAGE presents. Law teaches you similar disciplines, and may go a long way to making up that ground in (e.g.) constitutional or other non-technical problems, but this right now is a technical, scientific problem - test probabilities, immunology, vaccine efficacy, viral spread, etc. Law does not teach you the language of these subjects. My wife is a very talented lawyer, she hasn't got a clue about technical matters, even basic DIY she doesn't get why certain things can/can't be done.

If one were a physicist, you'd have a hope of engaging with an immunologist. You're from the same world. You don't speak the same language but you have a common base to start from. A lawyer? Completely different species. And in this moment, if the politicians are going to be led by the science, they must be able to challenge the scientists, otherwise they will end up being led by the nose instead. It's like the plumber telling Mrs Jones she needs a new boiler and the whole house will need to be re-piped. At the mercy of the 'experts'.

edit
And I agree too with your second paragraph - post-grad experience is very relevant. I don't really care if they've done a degree in humanities but then spent 10-15 years running a business (a proper one, not some charity or consultancy) or teaching or working in medical practice, for example. But most of them have just gone straight for the political role. And I have to ask - most of us, probably, had some idea what we wanted to do in life from A Level. We targeted our A levels at a certain career direction to enable certain degrees. Engineering in my case. These guys chose politics. Ergo: career politicians. This is what we have leading us through a technical crisis. Hence, no confidence here. Even more important we have a genuinely free press, but it seems we don't. I haven't checked the Ofcom details yet, link much appreciated.

Edited by 2gins on Sunday 25th October 23:51

I agree that it would be good to have more scientists.

But it ultimately comes down to intelligence and a willingness to learn and analyse. Someone with a PPE or law degree should be perfectly capable of applying their minds to scientific material. It turns out that those in government aren’t willing or able to do so in any meaningful way. It does not suite them, having panicked back in March, to now apply any scrutiny to ‘the science’.

The Govt is conspiring against its people, and most people dont mind at all.

[danny tattersall]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I don't underestimate how inept a lot of people are; rather, I chose to allow people to read behind the lines rather than state it outright. Education would go a long way to resolving a lot of the issues, but we seem to prefer to make excuses for them instead. There is an overwhelming mentality that it is always somebody else's fault. I wholeheartedly agree that the kids aren't to blame.

[bodhi]

It would just be nice to have some scientists looking at the data, rather than what their 15 year old cobbled together computer model is telling them.

[320d is all you need]

danny tattersall said:

The Spruce Goose said:

danny tattersall said:

Ok, time to don my flame suit. If I was to fall on hard times, like I have done temporarily in the past, I would eat meals that are cheap and also healthy such as stews, broth and bulk cooking things such as Spaghetti Bolognese and converting it into chilli con carne before freezing the remainder. Perhaps that it is because, amongst other things, I have been brought up in a certain manner. Unfortunately, society appears to be too ready to make excuses for people that may have a lot more spare time on their hands, yet are more likely to order takeaways, which in turn make them more likely to be obese and not benefit from a balanced and nutritious diet. Incidentally, whilst I am on the subject of takeaways, I think it is a travesty that they received £10k grants under the Covid-19 Small Business Grant Scheme despite not being required to close. My guess is that business has never been so good.

I think the real issue is, and this is all govs, that healthy food should be subsidised from increasing the price on junk foods.

You can buy a triple cheeseburger for 2 quid. Try and buy a balanced food for the same.

In the case of buying pre-prepared food I agree that it might be a good idea to subsidise the healthier food by slightly increasing tax on the less healthy food. However, if I was poor I would buy the raw materials and make my own food for less money and it would be far healthier. Quite why people think takeaways are a cheaper option, or that buying a stack of frozen pizzas and chips is cheaper and/or better, is beyond me and is surely a damning indictment of how our society is failing.

I have to say, it's substantially more expensive to eat a Spag bol, even if you buy the pasta/spaghetti, and then the cheapest Mince, and some peppers/onions and then Passata/Tomato Paste and some herbs to make your own sauce, than it is to buy Chicken nuggets and chips.

You can buy a value bag of chips which will serve, what must be over 10 portions for £2, and you can do the same for chicken nuggets.

So your meal cost of the cheapest chips and chicken for example is perhaps 50p but even the cheapest of Spag Bols is going to cost at least double that.

For some people, especially with a lot of mouths to feed , that is a problem.

[ChocolateFrog]

markyb_lcy said:

The Spruce Goose said:

not sure where to post this, but come on blaming Boris and Hancock for a packed Rhodes airport..

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/fights-break-greek-airpo...

https://twitter.com/Joshua_Jr_1/status/13200432415...

10 flights crammed into 1 room for 3 hours, no windows, no air con, kids crying. Is this what it has come too?
@MattHancock

@BorisJohnson
you have some explain to do? Flying back to manc.

It’s a “slow news day” if you’re lifting this crap off Twitter and dumping it here.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Twitter is a cesspit of fktards.

I've said it before I'll day it again.

Twitter isn't bad for porn, st at everything else.

[alangla]

320d is all you need said:

danny tattersall said:

The Spruce Goose said:

danny tattersall said:

Ok, time to don my flame suit. If I was to fall on hard times, like I have done temporarily in the past, I would eat meals that are cheap and also healthy such as stews, broth and bulk cooking things such as Spaghetti Bolognese and converting it into chilli con carne before freezing the remainder. Perhaps that it is because, amongst other things, I have been brought up in a certain manner. Unfortunately, society appears to be too ready to make excuses for people that may have a lot more spare time on their hands, yet are more likely to order takeaways, which in turn make them more likely to be obese and not benefit from a balanced and nutritious diet. Incidentally, whilst I am on the subject of takeaways, I think it is a travesty that they received £10k grants under the Covid-19 Small Business Grant Scheme despite not being required to close. My guess is that business has never been so good.

I think the real issue is, and this is all govs, that healthy food should be subsidised from increasing the price on junk foods.

You can buy a triple cheeseburger for 2 quid. Try and buy a balanced food for the same.

In the case of buying pre-prepared food I agree that it might be a good idea to subsidise the healthier food by slightly increasing tax on the less healthy food. However, if I was poor I would buy the raw materials and make my own food for less money and it would be far healthier. Quite why people think takeaways are a cheaper option, or that buying a stack of frozen pizzas and chips is cheaper and/or better, is beyond me and is surely a damning indictment of how our society is failing.

I have to say, it's substantially more expensive to eat a Spag bol, even if you buy the pasta/spaghetti, and then the cheapest Mince, and some peppers/onions and then Passata/Tomato Paste and some herbs to make your own sauce, than it is to buy Chicken nuggets and chips.

You can buy a value bag of chips which will serve, what must be over 10 portions for £2, and you can do the same for chicken nuggets.

So your meal cost of the cheapest chips and chicken for example is perhaps 50p but even the cheapest of Spag Bols is going to cost at least double that.

For some people, especially with a lot of mouths to feed , that is a problem.

Yep - on the "why buy a stack of frozen pizzas" question, this should answer it - https://www.iceland.co.uk/frozen/pizza-and-garlic-... plus 1.25kg of chips for £1, add in a tin of beans for 42p (6 for £2.50 just now) and you've got a meal for 4 for about £1.80. That's why eating crap is more attractive. If you want to be really flash, you can spend another £1 and have a magnum-a-like each as a dessert. 50p extra for a choc-ice each.

Chips -https://www.iceland.co.uk/frozen/chips-and-potatoes?srule=price-low-to-high&start=0&sz=24
Beans - https://www.iceland.co.uk/search?q=baked%20beans
Ice cream - https://www.iceland.co.uk/frozen/ice-cream-and-lol...

If anyone can get a meal for 4 for under that price (45p/person) using fresh ingredients I'd be surprised. I'm not suggesting that the one detailed above is in any way sensible BTW.

[stitched]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

In my experience it is not a lack of competence with some parents, just laziness.
A couple I knew who owned the fattest kid in my sons school year were a prime example, the child was invited to a party at my house, 5 kids and I had decided to let them, with supervision, cook cottage pie.
He had never seen potatoes or carrots peeled before. Never seen mince cooked.
12 years of age and never seen a meal cooked. Unable to comprehend that the house contained no crisps, sweets or fizzy drinks.
He actually got embarrassed as he thought I was too poor to supply such things, when I realised what he was thinking I pointed out that the house belonged to me outright, the 2 decent cars were mine and so were the 2 motorcycles in the garage.
That the lack of ste in the cupboards was a lifestyle choice was completely alien to his thinking

[BrabusMog]

stitched said:

In my experience it is not a lack of competence with some parents, just laziness.
A couple I knew who owned the fattest kid in my sons school year were a prime example, the child was invited to a party at my house, 5 kids and I had decided to let them, with supervision, cook cottage pie.
He had never seen potatoes or carrots peeled before. Never seen mince cooked.
12 years of age and never seen a meal cooked. Unable to comprehend that the house contained no crisps, sweets or fizzy drinks.
He actually got embarrassed as he thought I was too poor to supply such things, when I realised what he was thinking I pointed out that the house belonged to me outright, the 2 decent cars were mine and so were the 2 motorcycles in the garage.
That the lack of ste in the cupboards was a lifestyle choice was completely alien to his thinking

You had a party and made the kids cook a cottage pie

[ChocolateFrog]

CrutyRammers said:

Elysium said:

Good chart from Alistair Haimes on Twitter, July, August and Sept all low mortality compared to previous years:

That really puts this in perspective doesn't it?

Looks like August 2020 has one of the lowest recorded deaths.

I'd imagine we've done a good job storing up some sick people ready for winter.

[johnboy1975]

Darth Paul said:

CrutyRammers said:

Elysium said:

Good chart from Alistair Haimes on Twitter, July, August and Sept all low mortality compared to previous years:

That really puts this in perspective doesn't it?

The monthly figures are out this morning and the total for September is the highest in the last 10 years at least. England figure is 39822, previous high was 15 with 38876. Nothing crazy, but significant enough to warrant discussion. So what do we think? Genuine Covid excess, undiagnosed conditions due to nhs under use or a combination. Discuss!

Edit to add that is about a 6% increase on last September which looked a very average number for a September. And to also add I’m playing a bit of devils advocate on this as I’m very much on the Yeadon end of the playground for this one.

Edited by Darth Paul on Monday 26th October 10:25

Covid took what, 3,000 (ish) in September? More than enough to tip it over the average. Although how many of those would have died of flu if covid wasnt around?

Lots of green on that graph in recent times, seems we've been storing up problems for quite a while.....2004 and before are noticeably worse. Overall 2020 looks fairly unremarkable

I heard 2020 was the 8th worst for deaths in recent times, that heatmap would appear to back that up. Tellingly, we didnt do all this st the other 7 times

[Pupbelly]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Unfortunately the kids who will be potentially suffering the most will already be getting fed ste on a daily basis. The parents will be happy to receive the free handouts but will still find the money for fags, cans from newsagents, buy scratch cards and take aways.

[stitched]

BrabusMog said:

stitched said:

In my experience it is not a lack of competence with some parents, just laziness.
A couple I knew who owned the fattest kid in my sons school year were a prime example, the child was invited to a party at my house, 5 kids and I had decided to let them, with supervision, cook cottage pie.
He had never seen potatoes or carrots peeled before. Never seen mince cooked.
12 years of age and never seen a meal cooked. Unable to comprehend that the house contained no crisps, sweets or fizzy drinks.
He actually got embarrassed as he thought I was too poor to supply such things, when I realised what he was thinking I pointed out that the house belonged to me outright, the 2 decent cars were mine and so were the 2 motorcycles in the garage.
That the lack of ste in the cupboards was a lifestyle choice was completely alien to his thinking

You had a party and made the kids cook a cottage pie

Yep, guess what, they loved doing it.
Potatoes were free from a local farm 'cos I fixed his bagging line for free.
Mushrooms were from the fields at the back, mushroom hunting was apparently the best activity.
Carrots dug up from the garden so all it cost was the mince and sauce.
Probably 30p a head.

[964Cup]

ORD said:

2gins said:

Yes, it's a fair point. I studied chemistry but what I do now, while still in the same field, is very far removed from what I studied. But, a scientific training teaches you about properly analysing problems, testing a hypothesis, having controls, and being sceptical. I have no confidence that Boris (classics!) or Hancock (PPE) are in any way capable of challenging what SAGE presents. Law teaches you similar disciplines, and may go a long way to making up that ground in (e.g.) constitutional or other non-technical problems, but this right now is a technical, scientific problem - test probabilities, immunology, vaccine efficacy, viral spread, etc. Law does not teach you the language of these subjects. My wife is a very talented lawyer, she hasn't got a clue about technical matters, even basic DIY she doesn't get why certain things can/can't be done.

If one were a physicist, you'd have a hope of engaging with an immunologist. You're from the same world. You don't speak the same language but you have a common base to start from. A lawyer? Completely different species. And in this moment, if the politicians are going to be led by the science, they must be able to challenge the scientists, otherwise they will end up being led by the nose instead. It's like the plumber telling Mrs Jones she needs a new boiler and the whole house will need to be re-piped. At the mercy of the 'experts'.

edit
And I agree too with your second paragraph - post-grad experience is very relevant. I don't really care if they've done a degree in humanities but then spent 10-15 years running a business (a proper one, not some charity or consultancy) or teaching or working in medical practice, for example. But most of them have just gone straight for the political role. And I have to ask - most of us, probably, had some idea what we wanted to do in life from A Level. We targeted our A levels at a certain career direction to enable certain degrees. Engineering in my case. These guys chose politics. Ergo: career politicians. This is what we have leading us through a technical crisis. Hence, no confidence here. Even more important we have a genuinely free press, but it seems we don't. I haven't checked the Ofcom details yet, link much appreciated.

Edited by 2gins on Sunday 25th October 23:51

I agree that it would be good to have more scientists.

But it ultimately comes down to intelligence and a willingness to learn and analyse. Someone with a PPE or law degree should be perfectly capable of applying their minds to scientific material. It turns out that those in government aren’t willing or able to do so in any meaningful way. It does not suite them, having panicked back in March, to now apply any scrutiny to ‘the science’.

The Govt is conspiring against its people, and most people dont mind at all.

I think there's a danger in looking for an argument from authority in scientific qualifications. Some cases in point:

Hancock's PPE degree means he read both philosophy - the most rigorous training in understanding the difference between fact and hypothesis - and economics - a degree reliant amongst other things on a solid grasp of statistics. Neither has stopped him being either (at best) a credulous fool or (at worst) a cynical chaser after power.

By the same token Ferguson is a physicist by training and an epidemiologist by profession and professorship. Neither has stopped him being (at best) a terrible software engineer or (at worst) a publicity-seeking doomsayer.

We have a moral problem, not a scientific one - or at least we do now. Back when there might have been some justification for thinking that Coronvirus was the "killer flu that's going to wipe us out" politicians were perhaps justified in grasping at the straws offered by one or other scientific faction. Now that we know it's certainly nasty but equally certainly no real threat to humanity, we have to choose between protecting (or trying to protect) the elderly & frail and the human and economic costs thereof.

This is absolutely a job for politicians with a solid grasp of the ethical concerns, the underlying realpolitik and the long-term public interest.

What a shame we presently have no politicians of that ilk.

[johnboy1975]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Surely the problem caused by covid is very limited, and applies to those who have lost their jobs, and gone onto benefits. Trying to pay a mortgage on benefits plus all your other commitments cannot be much fun.....(group A). However if you are firmly entrenched in the benefit system, covid hasn't really changed anything (group B). Group c (still employed) remain the same too, give or take a week of self isolation here or there.

For all the hand wringing, I think it's a bit ambitious to hope group B are going to use any extra money to cook nutritious healthy meals. Scratch cards and booze would be a better guess as you say.

Maybe benefits need to be higher initially when you lose your job? I believe this system is in place in other countries

But again, it's such a bad look for the government when they got in on a mandate of "levelling up". They've spent 200b-300b on covid, is it really worth fighting about a few million? Especially if you end up doing a u turn. Although if they have put up benefits as they claim, I fail to see why they need to do the school dinners on top. If they've just given councils more money, then I dont see how this helps wrt hungry kids? Are the councils meant to spend the money on soup kitchens for malnourished kids?

[johnboy1975]

stitched said:

BrabusMog said:

stitched said:

In my experience it is not a lack of competence with some parents, just laziness.
A couple I knew who owned the fattest kid in my sons school year were a prime example, the child was invited to a party at my house, 5 kids and I had decided to let them, with supervision, cook cottage pie.
He had never seen potatoes or carrots peeled before. Never seen mince cooked.
12 years of age and never seen a meal cooked. Unable to comprehend that the house contained no crisps, sweets or fizzy drinks.
He actually got embarrassed as he thought I was too poor to supply such things, when I realised what he was thinking I pointed out that the house belonged to me outright, the 2 decent cars were mine and so were the 2 motorcycles in the garage.
That the lack of ste in the cupboards was a lifestyle choice was completely alien to his thinking

You had a party and made the kids cook a cottage pie

Yep, guess what, they loved doing it.
Potatoes were free from a local farm 'cos I fixed his bagging line for free.
Mushrooms were from the fields at the back, mushroom hunting was apparently the best activity.
Carrots dug up from the garden so all it cost was the mince and sauce.
Probably 30p a head.

I can see why he thought you were poor

Fair play though, cheap, nutritious and healthy

[stitched]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Malnourished kids?
The sooner we start treating obese children as cases of child abuse the better.
Hint, the fattest kids are always from the 'poorest' families, money is spent on booze and fags, one lad at my sons school had not seen an oven used before, though it had been provided, all food was ding ding peel or delivered.

[Pupbelly]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I agree, and sadly those on benefits already will know how to work the system to their advantage, not to ensure their kids get fed but to free up their handouts for the previously mentioned daily purchases. For those Group A folk, can they access benefits straight away or is there a range of fiery hoops that have to be jumped through before they are deemed 'acceptable'?

Your comment over the council paying for these meals is a fair question, as I've asked before where does all the 'free' money being given to councils go and does it have to be accounted for? Somehow I think it will be dissolved into local authorities financial black hole plugging.

[BrabusMog]

johnboy1975 said:

stitched said:

BrabusMog said:

stitched said:

In my experience it is not a lack of competence with some parents, just laziness.
A couple I knew who owned the fattest kid in my sons school year were a prime example, the child was invited to a party at my house, 5 kids and I had decided to let them, with supervision, cook cottage pie.
He had never seen potatoes or carrots peeled before. Never seen mince cooked.
12 years of age and never seen a meal cooked. Unable to comprehend that the house contained no crisps, sweets or fizzy drinks.
He actually got embarrassed as he thought I was too poor to supply such things, when I realised what he was thinking I pointed out that the house belonged to me outright, the 2 decent cars were mine and so were the 2 motorcycles in the garage.
That the lack of ste in the cupboards was a lifestyle choice was completely alien to his thinking

You had a party and made the kids cook a cottage pie

Yep, guess what, they loved doing it.
Potatoes were free from a local farm 'cos I fixed his bagging line for free.
Mushrooms were from the fields at the back, mushroom hunting was apparently the best activity.
Carrots dug up from the garden so all it cost was the mince and sauce.
Probably 30p a head.

I can see why he thought you were poor

Fair play though, cheap, nutritious and healthy

In all seriousness, that does actually sound fun. From the initial post I thought stiched just said something like "right kids, wash your hands as you're all going to make me dinner"

[wombleh]

croyde said:

eMail from my private health provider offering Antibody tests for £65.

Any here had one?

I would like one as we think we had it back in March, but have also read that they become less effective after 6 months or so as the antibodies flush out of the blood (probably not the correct terminology), however immune system can create more if needed.

The Boots tests probably would be worthwhile under certain circumstances, if I was just back off holiday and had to isolate for 14 days and it was keeping me off work then might save on losing 2 weeks income.

[Disastrous]

stitched said:

In my experience it is not a lack of competence with some parents, just laziness.
A couple I knew who owned the fattest kid in my sons school year were a prime example, the child was invited to a party at my house, 5 kids and I had decided to let them, with supervision, cook cottage pie.
He had never seen potatoes or carrots peeled before. Never seen mince cooked.
12 years of age and never seen a meal cooked. Unable to comprehend that the house contained no crisps, sweets or fizzy drinks.
He actually got embarrassed as he thought I was too poor to supply such things, when I realised what he was thinking I pointed out that the house belonged to me outright, the 2 decent cars were mine and so were the 2 motorcycles in the garage.
That the lack of ste in the cupboards was a lifestyle choice was completely alien to his thinking

I know it's not what you mean but I love the mental picture of an adult angrily setting a child straight on the material value of his assets at a kids party. "No mate, it's an S1000rr and it is NOT on a PCP. This watch? Omega. Your dad got one of them? Didn't think so."