Page 1 of 2

What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 23 Dec 2020, 16:28
by cromwell
Four days since we were told that the new "mutant" strain of covid was 50% more infectious that the old one.
The next day it grew to 70%.
Then Macron shut the borders.
And all of a sudden the new strain was just "more infectious".

In fact the government and their scientists overdid the scaremongering this time didn't they? It backfired on them big time.

Because the longer this drags on the more obvious some things become.
Namely that the aim was always lockdown until April at least. Once the policy is decided you need evidence to support it - usually most thinking organisations do it the other way round, evidence then policy, but I digress.

Exaggeration and outright lies have been the standout for me.
500,000 deaths.
Cases may double every day.
4,000 deaths a day - A graph used to justify the 4,000 figure was later admitted by the government to be inaccurate.
Figures used to justify the tiered lockdown in November were quietly revised downwards as reported by the Telegraph on 8th December.
Then we have the downright lie. Grant Shapps saying that 50% of hospital beds in London are taken by Covid patients. They aren't.

The figure of 70% more infectious comes from our old chum, Professor Neil Ferguson.
Here is a quick rundown of the Prof's record on predictions of deaths in previous crises.

Foot and mouth 2001. Prediction 150,000 deaths. Reality less than 200.
BSE 2002. Prediction 50,000 deaths. Reality 177.
Bird flu 2005. Predicted 150,000,000 deaths. Reality 282.
Swine flu 2009. Predicted deaths 65,000. Reality 457.

This is the man who also incidentally is supposed to have "resigned" from all government positions / advisory work in May after being caught out breaking his own rules.
Well he's back working for a "sub committee" of SAGE called NERVTAG.

And this to me is the never mentioned scandal of the pandemic.
A government who decide a policy and deny that they have.
Scientific advisors who knowingly give out exaggerated estimates of the death rate using dodgy graphs and inaccurate, out of date information.
Scientific advisors who resign and then get back in.
Politicians who are too weak to point this out.
Politicians who are too incompetent to do a cost / benefit analysis. Damage to the economy? Silence. Damage to the health of patients other than covid? Silence.

And when the next lie, exaggeration or proclamation from a proven incompetent comes along, they'll expect us to believe it.

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 23 Dec 2020, 17:24
by Workingman
Re the 70% thing: It is widely reported by medics / virologists unconnected to SAGE or NERVTAG that it is up to 70% more infectious, but they also go on to say that there is no evidence that it is more deadly or that the vaccine is less effective. In other words they are covering all bases. The truth is they simply do not know, and for that reason I am not against some level of caution.

As for the rest I tend to agree, especially about Ferguson's dodgy figures, his continued employment and appearances on TV news.

Some weeks ago I predicted that if things carried on we would hit 70.000 deaths by Christmas. It was viewed as as a bit of scaremongering by some. Today we had 744 deaths and the total now stands at 69,051 so my prediction looks to be coming true.

I am surprised Sky and the BBC haven't given me a ring..... I am way more accurate than Ferguson.

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 23 Dec 2020, 19:04
by TheOstrich
You wait until the talking heads get their teeth into the South African variant. "70%" will seem like child's play.

We're doomed, I tell ye, doooooooomed .......

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 23 Dec 2020, 21:58
by Workingman
Calm down. We have ordered a RSA travel ban. The talking heads are in control. :cry:

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 28 Dec 2020, 15:30
by Workingman
It's a strange old world..... at the BBC.

In the first months of the pandemic the BBC was removing posts from it HYS boards if people called it the Wuhan or China virus. Eventually so many people were using those descriptions that they gave up.

However, according to them the new strain is the English variant.

And they wonder why they are losing the support of so many of us.

Edit: There must have been a barrage of complaints because by late afternoon it became what everyone else is calling it - the UK variant.

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 28 Dec 2020, 18:20
by medsec222
As I understand it, UK expertise enabled its early identification in the UK, but it seems this virus has surfaced in other parts of the world. Where it originated from or mutated from is anyone's guess.

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 29 Dec 2020, 21:44
by Weka
I think it’s time we loan you guys Jacinda Arden and Ashley Bloomfield. But be prepared for even more extreme lockdowns country wide for it to work.

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 29 Dec 2020, 21:55
by Workingman
In many ways: Yes.

NZ has done a fantastic job, Covid wise, but NZ and the UK are not comparable in ever so many other ways ,and that makes the job so much more difficult.

However, I do like her as a person and am more in line with her politics than I am with our current bunch.

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 29 Dec 2020, 22:50
by miasmum
She is amazing in my opinion

Re: What happened to the "70%"

PostPosted: 30 Dec 2020, 13:19
by Kaz
miasmum wrote:She is amazing in my opinion


And mine.