LOCKDOWN

Does anyone think that the scientists have covered themselves in glory?

They don't know if you can't catch it twice. Why not? Can't they find anyone in the entire world who has already had it, been exposed again and caught it or not caught it a second time? Yes they do - there have been plenty of cases of people being re-infected.

They can't say if children can pass it to other children. Why not? Like the example above you can't prove a negative (unless you expose every single child in the world to every other child) but they should have enough information by now. We're hardly talking about something so rare that they can't find candidates for testing. As far as I am aware, they've said that there is a risk, albeit a much smaller one. 

The initial advice was to wash your hands for 20 seconds and everything will be OK. Remember those celebrity YouTube videos as they sing Happy Birthday? Maybe they got this a little wrong. Suggesting this was the only advice given is patently false. I'd be delighted for you to source one single scientist who said, as you quote 'wash your hands for twenty seconds AND EVERYTHING WILL BE OKAY". Secondly, this advice is still in place and still thought to be very effective. 

Masks - are they beneficial or not? It appears that the jury's still out on that one. Why? This is clearly up for debate in the scientific community. 

They ran a pandemic simulation in the UK in 2016 and from what I can see they learned nothing. The results of this exercise stated: "that the pandemic would cause the country's health system to collapse from a lack of resources, with Sally Davies, the Chief Medical Officer at the time, stating that a lack of medical ventilators and the logistics of disposal of dead bodies were serious problems." Whose responsibility was it to provide enough funding to ensure that this risk could be mitigated? The governments. And they cut it to the bone instead. And then just in December, most of England went out and voted for the people who made all of the cuts. Out of all of your claims, blaming this on the 'scientific community' is the most absurd out of the lot.

It's OK to blame the government, but why didn't our hospitals and PCTs have their own plans? As above, they did have their own plans. They didn't have the resources to carry those plans out. 

Can you catch it from a passing cyclist? They can't confirm either way. Yes you can - they've already said there is an increased risk from cycling or running behind people and that you need to ensure there is extra distance between people cycling or running. 

Why did hospitals kick people out to care homes without testing them? The government didn't tell them to do this and it is possibly the most catastrophic mistake made so far. Again, government advice stated that it was 'very unlikely' that people in care homes would catch the virus. Further to this government advice also urged care homes to accept patients from hospitals if they were asymptomatic, WITHOUT A TEST. 

I understand that they're being guarded and don't want to talk in absolutes, but some of it is beyond absurd now. There's enough information to say that children are safe but they won't stick their necks out and say it (again because you can't prove it, and never will be able to). Pretty much all of your complaints are having a go at them for not talking in absolutes. They're scientists, not mathematicians - it's rare for science to be absolute. 

Yes the government has a lot to answer for. But also the scientific and medical communities are big boys and should be capable of taking the initiative without being told by governments. Did you vote Tory? Seems to me like this whole post was a guilt-ridden attempt to pass the blame onto people you didn't vote for.

Thank you for that. But I see the word estimated again. From past experience estimates are never very accurate. I have seen them go either way. With all the facts and figures we in construction called them guesstimates.

Of course they are described as estimates because it is impossible to arrive at an exact figure. But the same is true of all the other countries we are being compared to.
So to misuse a football phrase, it all evens out over a season. To use another rather morbid one, only Peru are above us in the global league of additional deaths.
I really don't see how anyone can not regard this as indefensible and incompetent governance.

He answered all of your other points though.

Let's take that as a given yes. But do opinions have to have fictitious information in them.

This would represent an average of 54,000 new infections per week for people living in private-residential households in the community in England since the study began, which was early April I believe.


This does not mean there were 54000 last week but averaged over every week .




Don't just pick one line from a report to suit what you are saying

Obviously, the basis of why the lockdown is being eased is mainly financial this virus has pushed the country's debt to £2trillion which will no doubt lead to austerity and probably a big recession which of course Labour will then blame the government for not easing lockdown sooner you are damned if you do you are damned if you don't. 

i dont doubt it's early but you do realise greece is made up of more than 6000 islands the population is pretty well spread out