Coronapanic - was it avoidable?
Discussion
I've just been reading an essay by Dr. Ben Irvine on the Daily Sceptic website. The principal point being made is that pressure from the unions created the government's change in policy from herd immunity, to lockdowns and regulations.
A couple of times, I thought that some of the reasoning sounded a bit thin (my cat has four legs, my desk has four legs therefore my cat is a desk), with the occasional dash of what comes across as faked-moon-landing conspiracy.
But it is interesting to follow the doctor's timeline of communication and policy. You could question the unions' motivation, possibly to arrive at the point that they want their members to be paid for not working or to engender a greater level of state control (both of which have worked).
See what you think.
A couple of times, I thought that some of the reasoning sounded a bit thin (my cat has four legs, my desk has four legs therefore my cat is a desk), with the occasional dash of what comes across as faked-moon-landing conspiracy.
But it is interesting to follow the doctor's timeline of communication and policy. You could question the unions' motivation, possibly to arrive at the point that they want their members to be paid for not working or to engender a greater level of state control (both of which have worked).
See what you think.
In this, as in most things, I say "follow the money".
Vested interests, contracts for chums, backhanders and promises of future benefits are just the tip of the iceberg. Some people are getting even more rich and powerful from the incoherent response to what is a virus with an IFR of less than 0.1%.
As we saw after 9/11, some things that we took for granted before March 2020 are gone for good. Freedoms lost never to be restored.
Vested interests, contracts for chums, backhanders and promises of future benefits are just the tip of the iceberg. Some people are getting even more rich and powerful from the incoherent response to what is a virus with an IFR of less than 0.1%.
As we saw after 9/11, some things that we took for granted before March 2020 are gone for good. Freedoms lost never to be restored.
thiscocks said:
This is what happens when a libertarian democracy panics and copies the actions of an eastern communist state and several European countries, who apparently don't want to let go of their fascist roots.
Libertarian as in the not-actually-libertarian mob who refer to themselves as liberal? I suppose you could get mass psychosis in a truly libertarian society which would need to be centrally controlled in order to stop it, but an authoritarian-esque government could call themselves liberal (or even libertarian) for the lulz and exploit mass psychosis to further entrench their authority and thus compliance of the population.No, it wasn't avoidable in reality - theoretically yes, there were planning meetings, 'war games' stockpiles and so on but the reality really put those activities in to stark contrast.. The preparedness for a pandemic has been found to be lacking.
In my opinion it comes down to a system of systems approach to running a country. This country is now far too reliant on offshored industries to provide some of the most basic materials. Had we been more self sufficient things may well have gone differently for us early on.
We have now witnessed a modern respiratory disease pandemic, we should change to be able to perform better in future.
- Better understanding of risk management at the country level - costs and benefits of actions
- Better production facilities for equipment for essential protective and healthcare equipment
- Re-organising health services in order to re-create more overhead in the operational health system (severe flu years already showed that the operational health system 'front line ' was being run far too near capacity).
The people that need to plan for the future pandemic have now lived one. It's time to start an honest appraisal of what went well and what didn't across the board and then write the books, papers and best practices so that next time we manage this as a country a lot better.
In my opinion it comes down to a system of systems approach to running a country. This country is now far too reliant on offshored industries to provide some of the most basic materials. Had we been more self sufficient things may well have gone differently for us early on.
We have now witnessed a modern respiratory disease pandemic, we should change to be able to perform better in future.
- Better understanding of risk management at the country level - costs and benefits of actions
- Better production facilities for equipment for essential protective and healthcare equipment
- Re-organising health services in order to re-create more overhead in the operational health system (severe flu years already showed that the operational health system 'front line ' was being run far too near capacity).
The people that need to plan for the future pandemic have now lived one. It's time to start an honest appraisal of what went well and what didn't across the board and then write the books, papers and best practices so that next time we manage this as a country a lot better.
I think the lack of transparency from the Chinese in didn't help at all. Remember in the initial stages when we were all watching videos of people apparently falling down dead in the street, the Chinese building that hospital really fast, Chinese authorities welding their citizens into their apartments.
At that time not many knew much about the virus as it takes time to study and make a sensible decision. The problem is that whilst people were busy making sensible decisions and waiting for actual data and facts to come to light, others were running around causing panic.
To answer the question - Given the information available (from China) at the time, panic was not avoidable.
Again, we have to blame the Chinese.
At that time not many knew much about the virus as it takes time to study and make a sensible decision. The problem is that whilst people were busy making sensible decisions and waiting for actual data and facts to come to light, others were running around causing panic.
To answer the question - Given the information available (from China) at the time, panic was not avoidable.
Again, we have to blame the Chinese.
200bhp said:
To answer the question - Given the information available (from China) at the time, panic was not avoidable.
Again, we have to blame the Chinese.
Blame the government, they make the decisions. Panic was "understandable" at the beginning, but once it became clear that most people were not going to drop dead from this thing, that it wasn't Ebola like in that Dustin Hoffman film, that should have been the end of it. Its beyond hysteria now, it's just a sick joke.Again, we have to blame the Chinese.
To still be freaking out, with all the massive consequences that brings, nearly two years later is unforgivable.
Lotusgone said:
I've just been reading an essay by Dr. Ben Irvine on the Daily Sceptic website . . . But it is interesting to follow the doctor's timeline of communication and policy . . .
I’d never heard of the guy, but a quick Google suggests he’s not a “Doctor” of medicine? Philosophy? Anything? Not that that necessarily negates his views, but reading a few tweets does incline me to file under T for Tin Foil . . .
It’s an interesting experience to see us anti-lockdown/vaxx types derided as crazy fringe lunatics, then people slowly start to make the same realisations.
We predicted coerced jabs, vaccine passports, lockdowns, censorship, people dying *with* Covid etc and were derided as conspiracy theorists.
We pointed out a thousand ways the cure was worse than the disease - education, health, mental health, vulnerable children, the economy - but were deplatformed and derided as uncaring.
We pointed out quite early that jabbing young people with a vaccine which didn’t stop transmission was pointless and therefore all risk but were labelled “anti vaxxers”.
Then slowly people slowly come to the same conclusion and even have the audacity to claim the arguments as their own. My primary emotion when I read the news lately is “no s
t Sherlock!”
Yes, the whole thing could have been avoided. It is primarily politics. At the start, leaders could have levelled with the population:
- This is not a dangerous virus to the vast majority of people
- It is impossible to control. At best you get a delay and even that is difficult
- The cost of doing any restrictions is likely to outweigh the benefits in short order
- Vaccines are great for the vulnerable but limited benefit for the rest of us
- If you do want to protect yourself, you can do it with X
Unfortunately, we responded to the screaming herds on Twitter and the rest is history
We are still in a hell of a pickle to unwind this mess.
We predicted coerced jabs, vaccine passports, lockdowns, censorship, people dying *with* Covid etc and were derided as conspiracy theorists.
We pointed out a thousand ways the cure was worse than the disease - education, health, mental health, vulnerable children, the economy - but were deplatformed and derided as uncaring.
We pointed out quite early that jabbing young people with a vaccine which didn’t stop transmission was pointless and therefore all risk but were labelled “anti vaxxers”.
Then slowly people slowly come to the same conclusion and even have the audacity to claim the arguments as their own. My primary emotion when I read the news lately is “no s
t Sherlock!”Yes, the whole thing could have been avoided. It is primarily politics. At the start, leaders could have levelled with the population:
- This is not a dangerous virus to the vast majority of people
- It is impossible to control. At best you get a delay and even that is difficult
- The cost of doing any restrictions is likely to outweigh the benefits in short order
- Vaccines are great for the vulnerable but limited benefit for the rest of us
- If you do want to protect yourself, you can do it with X
Unfortunately, we responded to the screaming herds on Twitter and the rest is history
We are still in a hell of a pickle to unwind this mess.
Jasandjules said:
Yes.
I think the Govt have done about the worst things possible in almost every respect. We will see the consequences of their failures and corruption for years, in terms of financial and human lives and health.
YepI think the Govt have done about the worst things possible in almost every respect. We will see the consequences of their failures and corruption for years, in terms of financial and human lives and health.
and someone mentioned the unions but some cabinet ministers, such as Gove, were pushing misinformation from the start. Apparently he stated in a meeting early on, paraphrasing, "the virus doesn't discriminate and everyone is at risk", talking about a virus that has a 10,000 difference in risk level by age.
dmahon said:
It’s an interesting experience to see us anti-lockdown/vaxx types derided as crazy fringe lunatics, then people slowly start to make the same realisations.
We predicted coerced jabs, vaccine passports, lockdowns, censorship, people dying *with* Covid etc and were derided as conspiracy theorists.
Nope, those people are still crazy fringe lunatics and conspiracy theorists. We predicted coerced jabs, vaccine passports, lockdowns, censorship, people dying *with* Covid etc and were derided as conspiracy theorists.
Predicting things that were an entirely expected response to a pandemic, like lockdowns and keeping records of people who died with the virus - is not an achievement. It's like seeing a fire and celebrating how you correctly predicted the arrival of a fire engine.
And when extra measures like vaccine mandates have only been raised because of anti-vax loons, that's a strange thing to claim victory on. Let's throw some fuel on that fire to help it spread and then claim we were right for predicting a second fire engine...
durbster said:
Nope, those people are still crazy fringe lunatics and conspiracy theorists.
Predicting things that were an entirely expected response to a pandemic, like lockdowns and keeping records of people who died with the virus - is not an achievement. It's like seeing a fire and celebrating how you correctly predicted the arrival of a fire engine.
And when extra measures like vaccine mandates have only been raised because of anti-vax loons, that's a strange thing to claim victory on. Let's throw some fuel on that fire to help it spread and then claim we were right for predicting a second fire engine...
Nonsense. To choose one, the powers that be have been ignoring the distinction between dying of Covid and incremental infections for 2 years. Only this week you get Fauci and bedwetters like Piers Morgan raise the topic like it’s some groundbreaking insight. Predicting things that were an entirely expected response to a pandemic, like lockdowns and keeping records of people who died with the virus - is not an achievement. It's like seeing a fire and celebrating how you correctly predicted the arrival of a fire engine.
And when extra measures like vaccine mandates have only been raised because of anti-vax loons, that's a strange thing to claim victory on. Let's throw some fuel on that fire to help it spread and then claim we were right for predicting a second fire engine...
My point is that people are waking up to stuff that some of us have been shouting from the rooftops for 2 years
durbster said:
dmahon said:
It’s an interesting experience to see us anti-lockdown/vaxx types derided as crazy fringe lunatics, then people slowly start to make the same realisations.
We predicted coerced jabs, vaccine passports, lockdowns, censorship, people dying *with* Covid etc and were derided as conspiracy theorists.
Nope, those people are still crazy fringe lunatics and conspiracy theorists. We predicted coerced jabs, vaccine passports, lockdowns, censorship, people dying *with* Covid etc and were derided as conspiracy theorists.
Predicting things that were an entirely expected response to a pandemic, like lockdowns and keeping records of people who died with the virus - is not an achievement. It's like seeing a fire and celebrating how you correctly predicted the arrival of a fire engine.
And when extra measures like vaccine mandates have only been raised because of anti-vax loons, that's a strange thing to claim victory on. Let's throw some fuel on that fire to help it spread and then claim we were right for predicting a second fire engine...
I seem to recall a covid thread that tried to recount the early days of the pandemic.
From what I recall, there was some genuine fear by staff who had to both visit the public at home, deal with people face to face, and travel to work on public transport (London)
The virus was real, and was killing people.
Faced with any work related risk to their members, then of course a union is going to be shouting from the roof about managing this risk.
There seems to be a lot of hindsight here, and squeezing events to fit a particular viewpoint retrospectively.
From what I recall, there was some genuine fear by staff who had to both visit the public at home, deal with people face to face, and travel to work on public transport (London)
The virus was real, and was killing people.
Faced with any work related risk to their members, then of course a union is going to be shouting from the roof about managing this risk.
There seems to be a lot of hindsight here, and squeezing events to fit a particular viewpoint retrospectively.
JagLover said:
Yep
and someone mentioned the unions but some cabinet ministers, such as Gove, were pushing misinformation from the start. Apparently he stated in a meeting early on, paraphrasing, "the virus doesn't discriminate and everyone is at risk", talking about a virus that has a 10,000 difference in risk level by age.
Is that misinformation or pedantry?and someone mentioned the unions but some cabinet ministers, such as Gove, were pushing misinformation from the start. Apparently he stated in a meeting early on, paraphrasing, "the virus doesn't discriminate and everyone is at risk", talking about a virus that has a 10,000 difference in risk level by age.
Everybody IS at risk and the virus DOES’NT discriminate. The level of risk varies.
Lotusgone said:
I've just been reading an essay by Dr. Ben Irvine on the Daily Sceptic website. The principal point being made is that pressure from the unions created the government's change in policy from herd immunity, to lockdowns and regulations.
A couple of times, I thought that some of the reasoning sounded a bit thin (my cat has four legs, my desk has four legs therefore my cat is a desk), with the occasional dash of what comes across as faked-moon-landing conspiracy.
But it is interesting to follow the doctor's timeline of communication and policy. You could question the unions' motivation, possibly to arrive at the point that they want their members to be paid for not working or to engender a greater level of state control (both of which have worked).
See what you think.
On the face of it I wouldn't say so. A couple of times, I thought that some of the reasoning sounded a bit thin (my cat has four legs, my desk has four legs therefore my cat is a desk), with the occasional dash of what comes across as faked-moon-landing conspiracy.
But it is interesting to follow the doctor's timeline of communication and policy. You could question the unions' motivation, possibly to arrive at the point that they want their members to be paid for not working or to engender a greater level of state control (both of which have worked).
See what you think.
We've had no payrise for a couple of years and despite inflation going nuts are in a weaker position to demand one now than in 2019.
Labour will get in at the next election so we're in for interesting times.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff