Johnson under fire over handling of coronavirus crisis

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, smedly said:

Yes they are regulated but that does not remove their responsibility for their employees - residents - procurement and standards, that is all them - not the government - not the NHS, they are responsible

Having been proven wrong you changed your argument and hoped nobody noticed:

 

21 hours ago, smedly said:

....

 

So if they have (deleted) up with their safety procedures and not maintained standards  it has nothing to do with the Government or the NHS, it is all down to them - they are private companies

As I said earlier wrong, and trying to get away with changing  your argument doesn’t help you out of wrong.

[Forethat]

47 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Okay, well, if you take the numbers and restrict them to infected people who have the surname O'Malley obviously Ireland would be the worst affected.

 

Obviously the rather clear issue with your statistics is that you have skewed the numbers with population and population density on top. Very obviously that way the UK will always have an advantage over countries with lower populations and lower pop density.

 

Well, I didn't restrict the numbers to people with the name O'Malley, did I? I used the population data published by the World Bank. No matter how you slice it, the population density is very much relevant for the infection rate. 

 

It's not my data, and in what way is it skewed? I'm simply using data collected by someone else (I've included the name of the source). In terms of distribution and infection rate I think you're spot on: population and population density is the main factor. Why do you think they introduce social distancing (actually, it's physical distancing).

 

You're obviously free to attach any diagram you want, but if number of fatalities is the method of measuring success in this matter, even you understand that countries like the Vatican, Tuvalu and Palau are going to be at the top. 

 

Unfortunately, the most important parameter is still unknown (the number of infections across the entire population). Without that parameter the statistical significance isn't exactly high.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Forethat

[Forethat]

39 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Neither of those links direct to the image you have posted and are using as the basis of arguments you are making.

 

Please provide a link to the image you have posted and are using as the basis of your arguments.

 

Links to websites in which the image might or might not be buried are not links to the image.

Here's the link to image:

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1160915-johnson-under-fire-over-handling-of-coronavirus-crisis/page/8/?tab=comments#comment-15330259

[Forethat]

42 minutes ago, Logosone said:

If the UK is doing so great, how come European WHO officials are panicking about the UK's poor performance in stemming new cases?:

 

 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8227031/Britains-coronavirus-infection-rate-frightening-European-policymakers-Austria-warns.html

You're referring to data that shows the rate of spread at a certain period in time. Most likely, every country would have topped that league at one point in time. If you want to debate this further I can provide diagrams for any period. Just let me know.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Forethat

[smedly]

37 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Having been proven wrong you changed your argument and hoped nobody noticed:

proven wrong how exactly - the majority are privately owned 

 

The public are regulated by the police that doesn't mean the police are at fault when they do something wrong or break the law 

 

honestly you are talking the biggest pile

[Forethat]

9 minutes ago, smedly said:

proven wrong how exactly - the majority are privately owned 

 

The public are regulated by the police that doesn't mean the police are at fault when they do something wrong or break the law 

 

honestly you are talking the biggest pile

Indeed.

[Chomper Higgot]

16 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Here's the link to image:

https://forum.thaivisa.com/topic/1160915-johnson-under-fire-over-handling-of-coronavirus-crisis/page/8/?tab=comments#comment-15330259

Another one of your circular arguments.

 

To summarize, you post an image that might be a graph, fail to provide a link to the source of the image and fail to address the fact that the UK’s data has just been revised up by 41% (while there is no indication of any such ‘up-kick’ in the image you have posted).

 

When asked for a link you circle back to your own post.

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, smedly said:

proven wrong how exactly - the majority are privately owned 

 

The public are regulated by the police that doesn't mean the police are at fault when they do something wrong or break the law 

 

honestly you are talking the biggest pile

You don’t do analogies do you you?!

[Forethat]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Another one of your circular arguments.

 

To summarize, you post an image that might be a graph, fail to provide a link to the source of the image and fail to address the fact that the UK’s data has just been revised up by 41% (while there is no indication of any such ‘up-kick’ in the image you have posted).

 

When asked for a link you circle back to your own post.

 

I've given you exactly what you ask for. You asked for the source data and I provided (apart from the fact that it's stated on the diagram itself).

 

And I have given you a link to the source of the image. I did that here:

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

8 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Very few countries around the planet decided on a policy of herd immunity. The UK did.

No, the UK didn't decide on a policy of herd immunity. I don't know why the anti-Boris brigade keep wheeling out this lie. 

[kingdong]

7 hours ago, stevenl said:

Read your question again please. 

????? 

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, Forethat said:

 

I've given you exactly what you ask for. You asked for the source data and I provided (apart from the fact that it's stated on the diagram itself).

 

And I have given you a link to the source of the image. I did that here:

 

 

No, you linked to a website, where the image might be amongst thousands  of pages and then back to to your own post.

 

A perfectly circular argument.

 

And all the while the image you have posted shows no indication of including the 41% upward correction in UK data.

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

No, the UK didn't decide on a policy of herd immunity. I don't know why the anti-Boris brigade keep wheeling out this lie. 

Righty-O

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/coronavirus-latest-covid19-herd-immunity-patrick-vallance-a4386476.html

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/documents-contradict-uk-government-stance-on-covid-19-herd-immunity

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/04/real-reason-uk-government-pursued-herd-immunity-and-why-it-was-abandoned

Edited April 23, 2020 by Chomper Higgot

[dunroaming]

This is not the time for finger pointing over the badly handled response to the virus.  There are questions to be answered but as yet we don't have all the facts.  Plenty of time for the inevitable ducking and diving  from the usual suspects.  The UK didn't respond well but nor did many other countries.

 

Right now we all need to stand together against this despicable virus and the chaos it is causing.

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, dunroaming said:

This is not the time for finger pointing over the badly handled response to the virus.  There are questions to be answered but as yet we don't have all the facts.  Plenty of time for the inevitable ducking and diving  from the usual suspects.  The UK didn't respond well but nor did many other countries.

 

Right now we all need to stand together against this despicable virus and the chaos it is causing.

Except for direct criticism of the Government is forcing it to act rather than continue with failed policies and playing down the concerns of the Doctors, Nurses and Health Professionals who are putting their lives at risk fighting this disease.

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

20 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Righty-O

 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/coronavirus-latest-covid19-herd-immunity-patrick-vallance-a4386476.html

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/documents-contradict-uk-government-stance-on-covid-19-herd-immunity

 

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2020/04/real-reason-uk-government-pursued-herd-immunity-and-why-it-was-abandoned

So you think that because herd immunity was discussed and explained, that confirms that herd immunity was government policy? I don't know where you're from, but in the UK government policy is not implemented by the newspapers. 

[Logosone]

51 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Well, I didn't restrict the numbers to people with the name O'Malley, did I? I used the population data published by the World Bank. No matter how you slice it, the population density is very much relevant for the infection rate. 

 

It's not my data, and in what way is it skewed? I'm simply using data collected by someone else (I've included the name of the source). In terms of distribution and infection rate I think you're spot on: population and population density is the main factor. Why do you think they introduce social distancing (actually, it's physical distancing).

 

You're obviously free to attach any diagram you want, but if number of fatalities is the method of measuring success in this matter, even you understand that countries like the Vatican, Tuvalu and Palau are going to be at the top. 

 

Unfortunately, the most important parameter is still unknown (the number of infections across the entire population). Without that parameter the statistical significance isn't exactly high.

You restricted your statistics to include parametres like population figure and population density.

 

It is not at all certain that population density is a key factor. That's just a theory.

 

In Italy the area of Liguria had 6918 cases per 100,000 inhabitants, with a population density of 290 per km2. Rome, with a population density of 2232 people per km2 had 4257 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. This despite the fact that Rome is a tourism and travel hub, whereas Liguria is not.

https://www.citypopulation.de/en/italy/covid/

 

In Germany the worst affected area by far was Bavaria, which has a population density of 184.2 inhabitants per km2, it has 39395 cases as of today.  Hessia's population density is significantly higher, with 288 people per km2, but it only has 7593 cases. This despite the fact that Frankfurt is Germany's Heathrow and main travel hub.

 

https://www.citypopulation.de/en/germany/covid/

 

In some places highly population dense areas were strongly affected, but in many other places it was not the places with the highest population density that were most affected.

 

We don't have perfect figures yet, no, but we are getting a clearer picture of the real number of cases, are we not?

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

So you think that because herd immunity was discussed and explained, that confirms that herd immunity was government policy? I don't know where you're from, but in the UK government policy is not implemented by the newspapers. 

No, but it is certainly reported by the newspapers and attested to by the Chief Medical Officer.

 

Where I am from is neither any of your business nor a topic of discussion.

[Forethat]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

You restricted your statistics to include parametres like population figure and population density.

I'd say expanded rather than restricted.

 

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

In Germany the worst affected area by far was Bavaria, which has a population density of 184.2 inhabitants per km2, it has 39395 cases as of today.  Hessia's population density is significantly higher, with 288 people per km2, but it only has 7593 cases. This despite the fact that Frankfurt is Germany's Heathrow and main travel hub.

Correct. Germany is, in my opinion, where the pandemic has been managed best. For reasons I won't go in to. But, so far, they are the champions. IMO.

 

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

We don't have perfect figures yet, no, but we are getting a clearer picture of the real number of cases, are we not?

No, we don't. Give it two months and we'll be wiser, I think.

[Logosone]

4 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

So you think that because herd immunity was discussed and explained, that confirms that herd immunity was government policy? I don't know where you're from, but in the UK government policy is not implemented by the newspapers. 

Come on, it's on public record:

 

"Sir Patrick Vallance, England’s chief scientific adviser, has defended the government’s approach to tackling the coronavirus, saying it could have the benefit of creating “herd immunity” across the population.

 

However, Vallance said the government’s approach was aimed at broadening the peak of the epidemic, and allowing immunity to build up among the population.

 

“Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease..."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/coronavirus-science-chief-defends-uk-measures-criticism-herd-immunity

 

Why do you think Boris Johnson announced that so many people would die? Because he was initially geared for a herd immunity approach. Until his experts had a rethink and Neil Ferguson got cold feet looking at Italy and seeing the hospitals overwhelmed, he thought the same would happen in the UK and that changed the whole policy.

[Forethat]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No, you linked to a website, where the image might be amongst thousands  of pages and then back to to your own post.

 

A perfectly circular argument.

 

And all the while the image you have posted shows no indication of including the 41% upward correction in UK data.

If you have ANY remarks or arguments relating to the accuracy of the data, please feel free to get in contact with John Hopkins University who have published the data.  

https://www.jhu.edu/

 

I hope (well...) you realise that John Hopkins won't adjust their data according to tabloid speculations?

[Surelynot]

14 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

So you think that because herd immunity was discussed and explained, that confirms that herd immunity was government policy? I don't know where you're from, but in the UK government policy is not implemented by the newspapers. 

It does beg the question, if it were not under consideration why allow the large scale events, football, horse racing, why no immediate lock down, no isolation? In fact very little action of any kind for two weeks.

[Surelynot]

Just now, Surelynot said:

It does beg the question, if it were not under consideration why allow the large scale events, football, horse racing, why no immediate lock down, no isolation? In fact very little action of any kind for two weeks.

I think they went down that path, saw the outcome re: number of deaths, panicked and went back to lockdown scenario.

[Logosone]

22 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Correct. Germany is, in my opinion, where the pandemic has been managed best. For reasons I won't go in to. But, so far, they are the champions. IMO.

 

It is something the UK easily have done as well. Germany had no test kits when the virus struck. German companies started producing them when the genome became known.

 

In the UK too biotech companies that make tests were offering Public Health England their tests, but PHE refused because they were concerned about accuracy, but did not provide accuracy targets to be met. When Matt Hancock tried to buy tests from South Korea PHE said they'd have to test if the test kits worked, but they took so long the deal fell apart.

 

Neil Ferguson was just told by PHE there would not be enough test kits on time, and he took that as gospel rather than engaging with biotech companies to produce tests, something he should have been aware of. This was obviously not Boris' failure, this was a failure of his advisers. They should not just have accepted PHE's word as gospel, but like in Germany and South Korea should have produced test kits on a grand scale using private companies.

 

That was the difference.

Edited April 23, 2020 by Logosone

[CG1 Blue]

11 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Come on, it's on public record:

 

"Sir Patrick Vallance, England’s chief scientific adviser, has defended the government’s approach to tackling the coronavirus, saying it could have the benefit of creating “herd immunity” across the population.

 

However, Vallance said the government’s approach was aimed at broadening the peak of the epidemic, and allowing immunity to build up among the population.

 

“Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely; also, because the vast majority of people get a mild illness, to build up some kind of herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease..."

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/13/coronavirus-science-chief-defends-uk-measures-criticism-herd-immunity

 

Why do you think Boris Johnson announced that so many people would die? Because he was initially geared for a herd immunity approach. Until his experts had a rethink and Neil Ferguson got cold feet looking at Italy and seeing the hospitals overwhelmed, he thought the same would happen in the UK and that changed the whole policy.

What Vallance was saying is that our strategy for broadening the peak should also result in some kind of herd immunity. Herd immunity was a secondary outcome; a bi-product of the main strategy. A bonus if you like. 

[Yinn]

20 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

Dear oh dear. Johnson and his apologists keep claiming they listened  to experts.

Now I would like someone to ask the question "Which experts?"

Because from what I can gather he listened to the ones he liked the sound of and ignored all the others.

He is Prime Minister. It was HIS call.

He got it wrong.

After 30,000 they NOW think it good idea wear the mask. 

 

The public should wear homemade masks when they venture outdoors to help reduce the spread of coronavirus, according to scientists who claim Britain’s masks policy does too little to prevent infections.

 

Link

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/21/scientists-join-calls-for-uk-public-to-wear-homemade-face-masks-outdoors

[CG1 Blue]

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

No, but it is certainly reported by the newspapers and attested to by the Chief Medical Officer.

 

Where I am from is neither any of your business nor a topic of discussion.

I'm not interested in where you're from. But it seems you come from a country where newspaper opinions form government policy. 

[Chomper Higgot]

13 minutes ago, Forethat said:

If you have ANY remarks or arguments relating to the accuracy of the data, please feel free to get in contact with John Hopkins University who have published the data.  

https://www.jhu.edu/

 

I hope (well...) you realise that John Hopkins won't adjust their data according to tabloid speculations?

Sorry, it doesn’t work like that.

 

You posted the ‘data’, it clearly does not include the UK’s 41% upward correction of the death count and you used this ‘data’ to argue the UK government is ‘doing a good job’.

 

The issue is, the ‘data’ is clearly out of date  and does not support your argument.

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, CG1 Blue said:

I'm not interested in where you're from. But it seems you come from a country where newspaper opinions form government policy. 

No, I provided you newspaper reports from the UK that report UK Government policy, one of the reports includes statements from the UK Chief Medical Officer.

 

When you accuse people of lying, you need to provide the evidence, not those you accuse.

[Logosone]

7 minutes ago, Yinn said:

After 30,000 they NOW think it good idea wear the mask. 

 

The public should wear homemade masks when they venture outdoors to help reduce the spread of coronavirus, according to scientists who claim Britain’s masks policy does too little to prevent infections.

 

Link

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/apr/21/scientists-join-calls-for-uk-public-to-wear-homemade-face-masks-outdoors

Maybe read your own link:

 

"The government’s scientific advisory group for emergencies (Sage) met on Tuesday to review the evidence on wearing face masks. The Guardian understands that the group is split on the best policy to adopt because the evidence is so weak."