Jump to content

Coronavirus


robf

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

 

How much of it can be attributed to the media lies about the whole Cummings affair do you think?

 

Do you think it would be as big of an issue if they had reported factually and honestly?

 

 

So just to clarify, the article does actually state what iron curtain said it did? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

"There had already been a gradual decrease in public adherence to guidelines before the publicity about Cummings' actions on May 22, but the difference in this decline between England and Wales and Scotland grew in the 3 weeks following (May 22–June 11, 2020; "

 

What are the stats for compliance today?

 

I wonder why the downward trend started before Cummings?

Because people are not sheep?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Iron Curtain said:

RB

The honest fact is that Durham Dom sat in the Rose garden and told the nation that he tested his eye site by driving his wife and child to a beauty spot on his birthday. Shifting blame is a “nice trick” to use one of your phrases.

If anyone on the Boris defence league had said “that was wrong but I believe he has more value In his job so I would keep him” then it would have been a fair discussion... the blind defence was the start of the defending for defending sake.

The likeness of the Boris Defence league to Boris himself just got worse and worse from that point.

1. Confusing messages that no one gets and therefore no one listens too.

2. Shifting the blame to someone else... easiest solution would be for Durham Dom not to lie about what he was doing. Even you don’t belive he was TESTING HIS EYESIGHT 😂😂😂😂 (Sorry it’s just such a hilariously stupid lie)... but no, it’s the press’ fault apparently. When the press back something big you support you are ok with that... but it’s their fault now. Laughable.

3. Ignoring the findings of reports or twisting their findings. See above.

4. Refusing to acknowledge when you have things wrong.


The fact is RB, if this was a Labour Government you would be all over them like a cheap suit... and so would I because I’m angry at the actions that are occurring.
 

That tells me all I need to know.

Honestly RB, I know you are Pro Boris and will defend him to the death. But you used to at least present a reasonable view on why and what you were supporting... since the Barnard castle omnishambles your level of bias was making your post hard to read... the Ian Smith view of “its a U Turn, they happen” indicates that your are not even trying anymore, it feels like people have stopped responding you your posts And engaging in debate... I can see why unfortunately, I like a debate more than anyone... just having someone lie and say whatever they want to defend someone based on party lines is a little dull.

 

 

Very little truth in your post again.

 

Look at your first line and tell me that you are not biased? You can't even bring yourself to even comprehend Cummings' story can you? Unlike myself who, from my very first post on the subject was trying to be objective, anticipating what would happen if it turned out to be a flagrant abuse of his position/flouting of the rules. It simply was not the case. It was a laughable exercise of bitter losers who saw an opportunity to damage Johnson's Government and remove Cummings who they will not forgive due to brexit.

I posted this at the time. If it was ANYONE else, it wouldn't have even been a full page discussion on here.

 

There were about 3 people in that debate who were at least trying to be objective. You were not one of them.

 

You ignore/twist the police findings. So lets stop throwing stones in your glass house.

 

Refusing to admit when I am wrong? you are seriously deluded. have you EVER done this? I've admitted I have got things wrong mulitple times, you know I have. Once again I believe that you are making things up to attack me personally rather than stick to the content of my posts. It has been a common theme with you since you for a few months now.

 

You need to put whatever issue you have with me aside, it's getting pretty boring now. Please stick to the content of my posts moving forwards and I'll do likewise with you.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

Not playing this game any more.

 

When you answer my questions, I will answer yours.

 

13 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

 

How much of it can be attributed to the media lies about the whole Cummings affair do you think?

 

Do you think it would be as big of an issue if they had reported factually and honestly?

 

 

Very little of it. Everyone saw the ridiculous reasoning in Cummings own words.

Yes.

Over to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

You need to put whatever issue you have with me aside, it's getting pretty boring now. Please stick to the content of my posts moving forwards and I'll do likewise with you.

 

I have no issue with you personally (over inflated sense of importance much?).

I do have an issue with the fact that you will Defend something to the death due to party lines.

ok let’s stick to content.

Simple question: if the Labour Patty had done all the things Boris has done, would you have been as supportive? Would you accept that they have done a “brilliant job” as Boris says?

I wouldn’t... I would happily say it’s been very poorly managed.

Over to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Iron Curtain said:

I have no issue with you personally (over inflated sense of importance much?).

I do have an issue with the fact that you will Defend something to the death due to party lines.

ok let’s stick to content.

Simple question: if the Labour Patty had done all the things Boris has done, would you have been as supportive? Would you accept that they have done a “brilliant job” as Boris says?

I wouldn’t... I would happily say it’s been very poorly managed.

Over to you.

I would probably be biased and I'd certainly have been quicker to criticise, but I don't think I'd be to the level of a couple of posters on here. I also am fairly sure that we'd be sitting round talking about how well we're doing if nothing had changed but for a labour Government.

 

That being said, I've not been particularly happy with the way Boris has handled Coronavirus in hindsight, he spoke a good game at first but since around the time of his return to work from hospital, he seems to have bottled it.

 

I simply do not defend things to the death due to party lines. I'm not even a fully paid up conservative, shows how much you know about me. You keep repeating this accusation yet in conversations with you I have criticised Boris' Government over some things.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Andyregs said:

No surprises there. You’ve reached the point where your trying to make out an article doesn’t say something that everyone can clearly see printed in black and white. Must get tiring. 

Just because I really want something to be true, doesn't make it true.

 

Why did the downward trend of compliance start 3 weeks before Cummings-gate? To what extent did Cummings/Boris behaviour affect compliance and to what extent did media lies affect it? It's an objective fact that many of the headlines were not true. How much outraged was drummed up by that? You are happy to dismiss it obviously because it's not convenient to take it into account.

 

We were told on this website that Cummings trip will cause thousands of deaths, in reality, can we be sure he has caused even 1?

 

To this day, you people still cannot admit the truth about what happened. It's why you cling on to the eyesight test, it's why you refuse to repeat the police findings, it's why you don't want to talk about the media lies of second trips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Regal Beagle said:

Just because I really want something to be true, doesn't make it true.

 

Why did the downward trend of compliance start 3 weeks before Cummings-gate? To what extent did Cummings/Boris behaviour affect compliance and to what extent did media lies affect it? It's an objective fact that many of the headlines were not true. How much outraged was drummed up by that? You are happy to dismiss it obviously because it's not convenient to take it into account.

 

We were told on this website that Cummings trip will cause thousands of deaths, in reality, can we be sure he has caused even 1?

 

To this day, you people still cannot admit the truth about what happened. It's why you cling on to the eyesight test, it's why you refuse to repeat the police findings, it's why you don't want to talk about the media lies of second trips.

I’d hazard a guess the downward trend started because we have the worst Covid response in the whole of Europe. 
 

you keep saying we refuse to admit the truth when the topic in hand right now is you trying to discount a report by arguing completely in bad faith and possibly not even reading it. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Cummings was a railway porter no one would have given a rat's ass what he did..... but he isn't.

He is part of the group who made the restrictions on travel....... what he did was open the door to dissatisfaction of the lockdown rules that affected everyone else.... but not him.

Their wasn't a hope in hell everyone would comply, but as long as the vast majority played along it was acceptable and most would follow..... he openly did what people were told they couldn't do, came up with the lamest excuse I've ever heard and Boris said it's ok...... once it was ok for him it became ok for everyone...... he normalised breaking lockdown...... once that happens you lose the confidence of the people you are trying to control.... they do what you do.... not what you want them to do.

It wasn't the only thing going wrong but it was possibly the straw that broke the camel's back. 

Trying to convince the public you were driving your family around to test your eyesight?........ really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is an interesting report just out about school children. A big study from the USA.

https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP and CHA - Children and COVID-19 State Data Report 7.30.20 FINAL.pdf

On balance it does appear that children, younger ones especially, are far less at risk than adults but older ones might well carry the same virus load. It's then a question of community transition because I think there were "only" (not the best word to use, apologies) 89 deaths among children nationwide but how many times they passed it on to adults is debatable/unknown.The big worry are asymptomatic people.

The evidence is still a bit hit and miss as most schools have been shut for some time so the research is necessarily limited, with a wide number of variables that can skew the results. In Israel and Chile schools were closed because the infection spread to adults and children. An Australian report stated that children didn't appear to cause huge problems, as in parts of Denmark. But not all children went to school and class sizes were small, with social distancing as far as possible. So the research isn't conclusive or comprehensive yet. The US study is the biggest.

Having a top notch test and trace system seems key. But we also need to think about school buses, class sizes, who lives at home, etc. Opening schools is clearly the way to go now but I'm unsure as to how much detailed planning we've put into this in the last 5 months, other than telling schools they should open. We have some of the biggest class sizes in Europe and many of the oldest, smallest classrooms.

The level of community transmission is another big factor in the US study. If it's very low then T&T done well can stamp it out rapidly. But if the numbers are already high then a school outbreak can escalate quickly. Let's hope in the next three weeks the numbers decline and it becomes 100% doable and safe. 

Good luck all those getting A level results this Thursday. I hope your dreams come true!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if it's been mentioned but a study conducted in the Lancet, analysing 220,755 surveys from 40,597 individuals across the UK, shows that the Cummings affair 'undermined confidence in the government to handle the pandemic'

(source: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31690-1/fulltext)

The people were asked to rate their confidence in the government's handling on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 7 (completely).

There was a clear decrease in confidence from May 22, and this continued for a number of days. Google searches of Cummings' name peaked 3 days later, when he gave his televised statement. This peak in searches happens to coincide with the sharpest decline in confidence.

However, maybe this is just correlation, and not causation? This proves nothing!

Alas; the people in England were asked about the central government, whilst Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland were asked about their devolved government (as health is in their hands). Unfortunately, there was no similar decrease in confidence for the devolved governments as there was for the central government in the aftermath of Cummings.

Well, maybe people lost confidence in the NHS! 

Unfortunately no; people's confidence remained the exact same regarding the health services ability to cope with the pandemic, and also remained the same for people's confidence in the ability to access essentials such as food and medication.

The only thing that people lost confidence in was the government; a massive decrease right at the time of the Cummings affair, without a loss of confidence in the devolved governments, and with the health service and the supply chains retaining the confidence of the public.

Confidence even stabilised and rose after the first lockdown measures were lifted on May 10, before falling again after Cummings, so this wasn't a long-term trend Cummings happened to occur as part of.

Finally, although there has been a gradual decrease in public adherence to government guidelines for a while before the Cummings affair, the difference in decline in adherence between England and Scotland AFTER Cummings is much larger in England (so there was a greater decline in adherence in England than Scotland).

I hope you all have a nice day and enjoy this nice weather, in a safe manner!

EDIT: After typing all this out I see it has already been raised. What a wally

Edited by Joe B
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Andyregs said:

I’d hazard a guess the downward trend started because we have the worst Covid response in the whole of Europe. 
 

you keep saying we refuse to admit the truth when the topic in hand right now is you trying to discount a report by arguing completely in bad faith and possibly not even reading it. 

I'm not discounting anything.

 

I know the whole affair was badly damaging to the Government, I admitted it at the time and I admit it now. It's my belief that the whole thing was blown completely out of proportion and I've based that decision on the amount of demonstrable lies published about it and the hypocrisy when it came to other people who might have committed small breaches of lockdown.

 

The report doesn't prove that Boris or Cummings were at fault though, it's an analysis of the public reaction in the wake of the whole incident. It doesn't show cause and effect any more specifically than that. We know that the incident that kicked it off was Cummings travel to/in Durham, and we know the end result was a loss of confidence in the Government. The report doesn't really show anything in between. It obviously takes into account the media lies because we can't account for or exclude them (because they happened). So to not acknowledge them is bad faith, in my view.

 

Joe has just posted above, I think there's a bit of tongue in cheek but at least he has even thought about the criticisms of the report - It's correlational. I've not got an issue if you say that as a result of the study you believe it is evidence of XYZ and therefore any other conclusion to your own is incorrect.

 

have you read it out of interest?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Regal Beagle said:

have you read it out of interest?

Yes, I quoted half of it in my reply to you.

My point wasnt about the article so much as your reponse to it though ('the article doesnt say what i think it does').

Edited by Andyregs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Reporting Posts and Ignoring Users

    Admin don't read everything. Don't assume we'll spot rule breaking. Please report posts and we'll act on ASAP. If you're logged in use the orange report post button. If you're not logged in, please use the contact form

    If you can't get on with another user you can "ignore" them. Follow the link, type in their username and save - Click here

    Check with admin if you wish to sell/auction any items. We're happy to support good causes but check first - Contact us here

  • Friends of OVF




×
×
  • Create New...