Why do some people argue a point without ANY basis to back it up?

[grahamg]

Here is a link to an as yet unpublished UK government report, or an article in a newspaper describing some of its supposed findings:

"The Government should publish the findings of a pandemic drill which forecast how the UK would be quickly overwhelmed by a major outbreak, Jeremy Hunt says today.

The comments will put pressure on ministers who have refused Freedom of Information requests from The Telegraph for the findings to be published to protect "information relating to the formulation and development of Government policy". The Telegraph is appealing this decision.
The exercise is understood to have baked a 'herd immunity' strategy into Britain's official pandemic plans which assumed that a virus could not be contained.
In an interview for The Telegraph's Chopper's Politics podcast, which you can listen to on the player above, Mr Hunt who was Health secretary at the time of the Cygnus exercise said: "I don't have a problem with it being published...."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...-no-problem-governments-2016-pandemic-report/

 

[Liberty]

Think some folks just argue because "their lips are moving"...they are probably attempting to get rid of energy, gain attention and need to seek an audience to do so. Got a tee shirt for that lack of isolation disorder:

 

[grahamg]

The argument being put forward this morning according to a BBC describing the actions of governments across the world, as they seek to relax shutdown regulations in order to permit more businesses to get back to work etc. was that the "RO number", was the thing everyone was trying to focus upon, (the RO number being a measure of how many people each person already infected with the virus passes it to on average).

It was stated over and over that these decisions, deciding which businesses or other organisation could reopen is " not a perfect science"(hence contains an element of guesswork).

The objective was stated as avoiding health services being overwhelmed by a second or subsequent peak of infection, and as far as I could assess, not the elimination of the virus altogether, (but I could be wrong on that one, you'll have to make your own mind up from however many sources of information you feel necessary and/or can trust). .

Our UK government slogan has changed btw to: Stay alert, "Control the virus", Save lives! (Not "stay at home", as previously)

 

[Ronni]

The argument being put forward this morning according to a BBC describing the actions of governments across the world, as they seek to relax shutdown regulations in order to permit more businesses to get back to work etc. was that the "RO number", was the thing everyone was trying to focus upon, (the RO number being a measure of how many people each person already infected with the virus passes it to on average).

It was stated over and over that these decisions, deciding which businesses or other organisation could reopen is " not a perfect science"(hence contains an element of guesswork).

The objective was stated as avoiding health services being overwhelmed by a second or subsequent peak of infection, and as far as I could assess, not the elimination of the virus altogether, (but I could be wrong on that one, you'll have to make your own mind up from however many sources of information you feel necessary and/or can trust). .

Our UK government slogan has changed btw to: Stay alert, "Control the virus", Save lives! (Not "stay at home", as previously)

The US has a similar response in terms of mitigating the effects of the virus so that hospitals don't become overwhelmed, rather than the elimination of it all together.

And no, the decisions facing our government about what to reopen and when to do that is a VERY imperfect science because we are currently ill-equipped to monitor the metrics required to make those decisions. Limited testing kids to determine who is infected combined with not enough manpower (in spite of the millions unemployed! ) or organization necessary to do the contact tracing that would determine who got infected by whom, means that information is limited. Without the necessary metrics, the decisions about reopening the economy have an element of guesswork, even if it's educated guesswork.

 

[StarSong]

The US has a similar response in terms of mitigating the effects of the virus so that hospitals don't become overwhelmed, rather than the elimination of it all together.

And no, the decisions facing our government about what to reopen and when to do that is a VERY imperfect science because we are currently ill-equipped to monitor the metrics required to make those decisions. Limited testing kids to determine who is infected combined with not enough manpower (in spite of the millions unemployed! ) or organization necessary to do the contact tracing that would determine who got infected by whom, means that information is limited. Without the necessary metrics, the decisions about reopening the economy have an element of guesswork, even if it's educated guesswork.

I think many, including me, will continue to stay at home for the next several weeks to see how this spins out. Italy, Spain, and several American states have offered themselves up as canaries in the coal mine. Let's see how they're feeling by June 15.

I've forgone a haircut this long, I can certainly manage for another month or two. Same with very close physical contact with my children (who are also wary of returning to a full range of previous activity).