CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 10)

[dandarez]

Matt_N said:

Toyoda said:

pincher said:

The look of bewilderment, incredulity and disbelief at what he was being told on the presenter’s face is priceless

Marvellous, wasn't it!

BBC Peter: So what is local?
Police Boss: It's irrelevant, as I've just said, Peter.

You could see how he was trying to steer the discussion and then it’s almost like it gets cut short.

This needs circulating widely.

Agree!
That Assistant Chief Constable should be promoted forthwith to 'Chief'!

Articulate, and far, far too bright for the agenda-ridden clueless Beeb presenter!

Embarrassing for the Beeb and hilarious for viewers.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Boringvolvodriver said:

My take on it is that once Johnson read the bit where 500k could die, he panicked as politically he did not want that on his watch. Sadly he and his fellow cabinet members did not have the intelligence to look at the data presented and to challenge it for fear of looking stupid in front of the scientists.

Rings true. A few weeks in the polls looked good, there were no piles of bodies so he must have saved the day.

[Pete102]

Matt_N said:

That’s brilliant to see, not only from the police POV but also that the BBC were obviously not expecting that line in the interview!

The BBC were obviously frothing at the prospect of the police coming on to tell off all those naughty people daring to drive for a walk on the beach and got the exact opposite

My local area Fantastic.

[hyphen]

JagLover said:

If people barely have any symptoms they are unlikely I would suggest to want to be tested.

Japan has an obesity rate less than a quarter of our own and a healthy diet rich in oily fish. partly as a result their Vitamin D levels are typically higher as well

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16369890/#:~:text=...

Their diet also protects against heart disease (which is the other key risk factor)

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/0807...

We are a nation gorging ourselves to death on junk food so our higher death rate is entirely to be expected.

Perhaps if the Japanese ate more junk food they wouldn't be so miserable
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_Japan

[markcoznottz]

isaldiri said:

ant1973 said:

Just as a final point, the BoE minutes from 4th Feb make clear that asset purchases for the coming year are planned at £150bn.

Nope it didn't. It makes clear that 'for now' that's the plan. It made nothing clear about whether that figure would be amended later in the year

Is that qe? The government buying its own debt?

[isaldiri]

ant1973 said:

Nope

"Just as a final point, the BoE minutes from 4th Feb make clear that asset purchases for the coming year are planned at £150bn."

See above. I was pointing out what was planned. Do we need to discuss the definition of "planned".

We can continue this discussion about semantics forever. I possibly spend more time than you as part of my work reading general financial market crap inclusive of CB minutes. Absolutely no one cares anymore about what was planned and already stated but for forward guidance about what might happen next. There was nothing that suggested £150b would not be increased in future.

[jmflare]

Matt_N said:

That’s brilliant to see, not only from the police POV but also that the BBC were obviously not expecting that line in the interview!

The BBC were obviously frothing at the prospect of the police coming on to tell off all those naughty people daring to drive for a walk on the beach and got the exact opposite

The BBC presenter said there were many people incensed that they saw people were walking on a beach. I find this much more scary than the virus itself.

[Ntv]

Elysium said:

bodhi said:

isaldiri said:

well yes but to be fair, at the point people start to spontaneously change behaviour it probably does mean a whole heap of people have got infected already and you've got to still have used a heap of 'virus is killing everyone' messaging to get there. I suppose i can understand why it might be considered that waiting for infections to get to the level of end of March20 or end of Dec20 was rather too long as well if lots of restrictions ultimately still were needed.

Of course and I'm not suggesting that we should have just cracked on and let it rip - things like stopping large events, encouraging people to work from home where possible, putting an upper limit on gatherings and moving pubs to table service only I'd argue would have been just as effective. Sadly the need to "do something" has meant we've always taken it a stage further than needed.

I still maintain our initial strategy that week before LD1 was the correct one, borne out by the fact its highly likely that infections peaked in that week. We were treated like adults rather than disease infested children - if we'd stuck with that this last year would have been much easier on all of us and we wouldn't be seeing reports like that one I posted from LSE.

All the typical 20:20 vision associated with hindsight, but I'm not seeing too much evidence to disprove it right now.

I entirely agree. As do some of the worlds leading epidemiologists:

https://gbdeclaration.org/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33400268/

Ioannidis et al said:

While small benefits cannot be excluded, we do not find significant benefits on case growth of more restrictive NPIs. Similar reductions in case growth may be achievable with less-restrictive interventions.

As with most of life, the law of diminishing returns applies.

Good on LSE for that note.

When the atmosphere of intolerance of free speech lifts, I think the Government / lockdown loons are going to have a hard time justifying the closure of schools, in particular the closure of primary schools.

Just ask this question: has there been any convincing analysis of the harm done to children and families vs the benefits in lives not lost to COVID?

[ant1973]

isaldiri said:

ant1973 said:

Nope

"Just as a final point, the BoE minutes from 4th Feb make clear that asset purchases for the coming year are planned at £150bn."

See above. I was pointing out what was planned. Do we need to discuss the definition of "planned".

We can continue this discussion about semantics forever. I possibly spend more time than you as part of my work reading general financial market crap inclusive of CB minutes. Absolutely no one cares anymore about what was planned and already stated but for forward guidance about what might happen next. There was nothing that suggested £150b would not be increased in future.

I spend quite a lot of time quite closely reading what people actually say.... perhaps more so that you do? This is not an exercise in semantics. You simply read something into what I actually said.

I pointed out what was planned. It's a useful indication of expectations. By February 2021, the likely deficit for 2022 would have been broadly understood. They could have gone further in February and indicated further support. They didn't. Will it come? Maybe.

[isaldiri]

markcoznottz said:

Is that qe? The government buying its own debt?

Technically no but in practice yes. The ECB had done so to around the same extent in the EU (they have probably been the main (only?) buyers of newly issued Italian debt) and to a lesser extent the Federal reserve had done the same to finance the US budget deficit. The fed balance sheet has grown by quite an amazing amount over the last year for example....

[Elysium]

This 'one year ago' twitter account is fascinating:

https://twitter.com/YearCovid/status/1367773387947...

The redline on this graph showed the 'optimal' UK response as of 5th March 2020. Which was based on three key measures:

1. CI - Case isolation - 70% of symptomatic cases withdraw to the home for 7 days
2. HQ - Voluntary Home Quarantine - families of symptomatic cases withdraw to the home voluntarily for 14 days
3. SDO - Social Distancing for the over 65's only - 75% reduction in contacts



All over in a single wave, peaking at 4,500 deaths per day in summer, with herd immunity by September.

Replaced with lockdown within 7 tumultuous days!

[Ntv]

pincher said:

Matt_N said:

Elysium said:

Turns out you can travel anywhere in the country provided you have a reasonable excuse:

We have finally found a policeman who is willing to be honest about what the law actually says:

https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/yor...

Its taken us almost a year of nonsense to get here though:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-5...

That’s brilliant to see, not only from the police POV but also that the BBC were obviously not expecting that line in the interview!

The BBC were obviously frothing at the prospect of the police coming on to tell off all those naughty people daring to drive for a walk on the beach and got the exact opposite

The look of bewilderment, incredulity and disbelief at what he was being told on the presenter’s face is priceless

That interview sums up the BBC very well. The tie, the suit and the hapless mixture of bias and ignorance.

BTW, in that BBC story from March 2020 ... the picture .. bottom right in the car park ... looks like a PHer!!!

[bern]

Government debates the passport issue on Monday after the petition received over 260k signatures. Below is a copy of the email I have sent my MP. Please consider sending your own or feel free to copy and paste this one for me. Mine is a fully paid-up member of the Boris fan club so I expect no opposition from him whatsoever but at least I have done my bit. On another note, he has just posted on Facebook about rolling out mass LFT testing in workplaces with over 50 employees. Moonshot alive and well.

Email Alexander Stafford MP:

On Monday 15th parliament will debate vaccine passports after a petition that has raised over 260 thousand signatures. We have been repeatedly told that no such scheme will be put in place. That it is unworkable, unethical, and not needed by our own Prime Minister and Vaccine minster. Vaccines protect the vaccinated, that is how it works. It should have no bearing on the unvaccinated. If other countries and indeed our own country want to impose restrictions on entry based on a vaccination status, then that is entirely up to them and should be kept as a separate debate.

Restrictions on daily life in our own country should not be affected by a vaccination status. It is against everything we should value as a free western society. I am curious as to your position on this matter. Should we be restricting everyday activities based on a COVID-19 status certificate? I am a fit 41-year-old male, according to ONS data the population fatality rate, regardless of overall health, for my age group is 0.0024%. Based on this do you think it is reasonable to expect me to submit to regular vaccinations to work, shop, exercise, and partake in recreational activities? Personally, I will have the vaccine if it effects my ability to work. I am the sole earner for a family of four and would therefore have no choice, but I will do it under protest and sufferance.

Please consider the future of this country, the freedoms were have fought for over centuries and the society we are shaping for our children when this subject is debated.

[isaldiri]

ant1973 said:

I spend quite a lot of time quite closely reading what people actually say.... perhaps more so that you do? This is not an exercise in semantics. You simply read something into what I actually said.

I pointed out what was planned. It's a useful indication of expectations. By February 2021, the likely deficit for 2022 would have been broadly understood. They could have gone further in February and indicated further support. They didn't. Will it come? Maybe.

Well, I spend a lot of time reading into what MPC committee members say as they very seldom come out and explicitly state what they are going to do before the actual meeting but it's usually quite obvious the implication of what is going to happen later. I find that tends to work a little bit better in financial markets than simply taking statements at face value.

And I think you will find that more than one major investment bank fully expects additional QE to be announced later in the year as well fwiw. So whatever they say is planned is not widely expected as being anything as definitive for 2021 as your post is implying whatever you may or may not mean by 'planned'. And I'm going to leave this point so as to stop boring the wits off everyone else.

[Ntv]

isaldiri said:

markcoznottz said:

Is that qe? The government buying its own debt?

Technically no but in practice yes. The ECB had done so to around the same extent in the EU (they have probably been the main (only?) buyers of newly issued Italian debt) and to a lesser extent the Federal reserve had done the same to finance the US budget deficit. The fed balance sheet has grown by quite an amazing amount over the last year for example....

It's technically known as printing money

It's interesting that the whole response has been one that ultimate we can "afford" from a financial perspective, albeit at the cost of a reduced standard of living through tax/spending changes and probably higher inflation. The non-financial aspects are more unknown though - perhaps why the Government still hasn't "levelled" with the population on them.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

jmflare said:

The BBC presenter said there were many people incensed that they saw people were walking on a beach. I find this much more scary than the virus itself.

The BBC is incredible. I wonder if he has any idea just how incensed some people are that a walk on the beach is now a police matter at all, or that the state broadcaster has become a cheerleader for authoritarianism.

[Pete102]

Peter Levy (the BBC presenter) is a bit of a plank by all accounts. He has form for being antagonising, It's nice to see him getting put in his place to be honest.

[London424]

Elysium said:

This 'one year ago' twitter account is fascinating:

https://twitter.com/YearCovid/status/1367773387947...

The redline on this graph showed the 'optimal' UK response as of 5th March 2020. Which was based on three key measures:

1. CI - Case isolation - 70% of symptomatic cases withdraw to the home for 7 days
2. HQ - Voluntary Home Quarantine - families of symptomatic cases withdraw to the home voluntarily for 14 days
3. SDO - Social Distancing for the over 65's only - 75% reduction in contacts



All over in a single wave, peaking at 4,500 deaths per day in summer, with herd immunity by September.

Replaced with lockdown within 7 tumultuous days!

I’ve mentioned it a few times and it’s really eye opening looking back on what was being said and by which bodies. If anyone is expecting any politicians to get any comeuppance is barking up the wrong tree.

[JagLover]

jmflare said:

Matt_N said:

That’s brilliant to see, not only from the police POV but also that the BBC were obviously not expecting that line in the interview!

The BBC were obviously frothing at the prospect of the police coming on to tell off all those naughty people daring to drive for a walk on the beach and got the exact opposite

The BBC presenter said there were many people incensed that they saw people were walking on a beach. I find this much more scary than the virus itself.

Yes

It is a public service broadcaster whipping up the mob rather than reporting the news calmly and without bias (which is its remit).

[danllama]

JagLover said:

jmflare said:

Matt_N said:

That’s brilliant to see, not only from the police POV but also that the BBC were obviously not expecting that line in the interview!

The BBC were obviously frothing at the prospect of the police coming on to tell off all those naughty people daring to drive for a walk on the beach and got the exact opposite

The BBC presenter said there were many people incensed that they saw people were walking on a beach. I find this much more scary than the virus itself.

Yes

It is a public service broadcaster whipping up the mob rather than reporting the news calmly and without bias (which is its remit).

Hence the BBC losing fee payers in their droves, including our household over a year ago.