That doesn't help with what Noel said, that article just states she has a different point of view, it doesn't bring into question her academic credentials.
How would you rate the UK's handling of this pandemic?
- Thread starter Spectric
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
That doesn't help with what Noel said, that article just states she has a different point of view, it doesn't bring into question her academic credentials.
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
Yes it was a different point of view but as things turned out she was hopelessly wrong.
Scientists with "academic credentials" can make errors of judgement too.
They certainly can, just look at Neill Ferguson.
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
He admitted it and resigned.
She stayed on banging the same old drum and getting it wrong.
Here she is getting it all wrong again
https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/18991503.bbc-fire-anti-lockdown-oxford-academic-interview/
Last edited:
I was referring to his models, I am not fussed about his personal activities.
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
It was work in progress, for better or worse, and was duly corrected/processed/amended. He wasn't banging his own drum. Non of them are infallible. Critiqued coronavirus simulation gets thumbs up from code-checking efforts
Never heard of this guy, but it looks like he should've stuck to his guns. He had covid months prior, recovered and is essentially unlikely to get a significant case again. As the evidence stacks up that reinfections are minor and almost entirely asymptomatic, we'll probably find out that the spread from such folks (not just asymptomatic, but asymptomatic second or third cases for an individual) is nil.
I guess her comments about antibody testing aren't well received?
She's right. T cell reactivity is probably a better measure (I see her conclusion is just to ignore testing outcomes). Whether she's right overall is questionable (gupta, that is), but antibody testing isn't a very good measure of immunity. The better indicator by far is gauging the outcome of reinfection, and that shows very uncommon cases worse than asymptomatic or very mild.
Interesting though that you can have one model, and people will praise it. Provide a model with a differing opinion and then the narrative isn't the reasonability of the model, it's that the person advocating it is a hate monger.
That's very european, but that kind of attitude has been spreading over here for decades, too.
She's right. T cell reactivity is probably a better measure (I see her conclusion is just to ignore testing outcomes). Whether she's right overall is questionable (gupta, that is), but antibody testing isn't a very good measure of immunity. The better indicator by far is gauging the outcome of reinfection, and that shows very uncommon cases worse than asymptomatic or very mild.
Interesting though that you can have one model, and people will praise it. Provide a model with a differing opinion and then the narrative isn't the reasonability of the model, it's that the person advocating it is a hate monger.
That's very european, but that kind of attitude has been spreading over here for decades, too.
Bob
I didn't say they were.
I said
"A lot of elderly people were relied on to administer the injections"
Which retired nurses doctors etc returning to help out have done.
To which Selwyn replied about the age of 82.....
If he wants to interpret what was written as something he just concocted to support his argument it's pointless continuing the conversation.
Never the less if he wanted clarification of what I had written he could have asked? Been civil.
But thats what happens when folk have a fixed picture in their minds.
From the start covid has been a moving target.
My original answer to the initial post was that Boris and the government have done a sterling job. Edging on the side of caution. Trying to strike a balance between work, education and the NHS admissions and keeping every sector of the UK population as safe and out of hospital as possible and saving lives.
It could quite easily have overwhelmed the population had they not contained it at every stage.
I think irrational views about the elderly from certain age groups would have been totally different if the younger population were the ones on ventilators dying.
The same people who were in outrage when Germany had it under control and our government were doing nothing. the calling. The complaining. Wanting an instant cure NOW.
Where are they now Germany are in total disarray?
And what about the shortages of vaccine for European countries and the inability of the EU to order and approve vaccines for so long? Stumbling at every step.
Nothing. Not a single word of support for our governments handling of ordering vaccines from multiple sources and approval.
All they can moan about today is removing the lockdown because it hinders their own personal lives.
Selfish people.
Absolutely it would be completely different if this were killing young children for instance. I have no problem in admitting that I put greater value on the life of young people than very old people. It's not just me though, the NHS does and the government, they have guidelines and equations that not only put a moral value on life, but a financial value as well (I think it's 20k per year).
Deadeye
Established Member
Gupta is being widely ridiculed by my fellow virologists. Objections are bring raised with Oxford about the legitimacy of using that designation in the pronouncements (they fall miles short of the usual standards expected for publication).
But, hey, as I say I'm not going to change minds just provide info. The website is authored by a consortium of well regarded virologists and epidemiologists. It's as close to expert consensus as is available.
But tin hatters will always tin hat
Deadeye
Established Member
I think the elderly vs young debate is just a small part of "how has the Government handled the crisis?". Overall, not the worst, but not great either - and the difference is tens of thousands of lives.
RobinBHM
Established Member
Flawed research is flawed research, Stanford or Bangor.
Great Barrington declaration is flawed......it makes zero serious attempt at backing up its claims with data nor does it drill down on its "focused protection" solution.
Gupta is discredited.......fodder for Daily Mail readers.
Here's a tip: try doing some deeper research rather than feeding your bias.
RobinBHM
Established Member
Please could you back your claim with some evidence of where and why.
Perhaps you might like to share your source of information.
RobinBHM
Established Member
It is still a pandemic.
It will become endemic
That is correct, we won't get rid of Covid. Nobody said we would.
The purpose of lockdowns are not to stop Covid, they are to reduce infection rate....which is what they do.
RobinBHM
Established Member
No they don't.
RobinBHM
Established Member
Untrue.
- Status
