What Sage Really think.

[21C101]

I found these comments extraordinarily disturbing.

"When SAGE observed the “innovative intervention” out of China, of locking entire communities down and not permitting them to leave their homes, they initially presumed it would not be an available option in a liberal Western democracy:

"It’s a communist one party state, we said. We couldn’t get away with it in Europe, we thought… and then Italy did it. And we realised we could. "

Professor Neil Ferguson, 26th December 2020.

Source:

Neil Ferguson interview: China changed what was possible

Professor Neil Ferguson has given an extraordinary interview to Tom Whipple at The Times, in which he confirms the degree to which he believes that imitating China’s lockdown policies at the start of 2020 changed the parameters of what Western societies consider acceptable. [...]Read More...

unherd.com

 

[A Challenge]

Professor Neil Ferguson, 26th December 2020.

Not him again...

 

[yorksrob]

Reading the article, the experience of Manaus in Brazil is also worth noting. The jist is that it's a town that didn't undertake lockdown, however mortality doesn't seem to have borne out some of the worst predictions implied in the Imperial model.

 

[bramling]

Not him again...

I don’t know why anyone gives him the light of day, especially after he himself broke “the rules”.

 

[21C101]

What I find really appalling is the choice of language. It seems to me like the sort of language a conman would use when boasting about fleecing old ladies of their savings.

To my mind, it reveals far more about him and the other Sage members than he intended.

 

[duncanp]

I wouldn't mind locking Professor Ferguson Pantsdown like they did in China, preferably welding him inside his house with no food and water.

I would like to say something stronger, but for now I'll just say:-

"Why don't you give it a rest, you two faced little so-and so? If you are not prepared to observe the rules that you yourself advocate, then you have no business whatsoever telling other people what to do"

 

[DustyBin]

I found these comments extraordinarily disturbing.

"When SAGE observed the “innovative intervention” out of China, of locking entire communities down and not permitting them to leave their homes, they initially presumed it would not be an available option in a liberal Western democracy:

"It’s a communist one party state, we said. We couldn’t get away with it in Europe, we thought… and then Italy did it. And we realised we could. "

Professor Neil Ferguson, 26th December 2020.

Source:

Neil Ferguson interview: China changed what was possible

Professor Neil Ferguson has given an extraordinary interview to Tom Whipple at The Times, in which he confirms the degree to which he believes that imitating China’s lockdown policies at the start of 2020 changed the parameters of what Western societies consider acceptable. [...]Read More...

unherd.com

That’s the interview I referred to yesterday in another thread! It’s very disturbing I agree....

Edited to add: Post #324 here:

Vaccine Progress, Approval, and Deployment

They awarded a contract for design work for vaccine passports in November (have a look on contracts finder) I do despair, it's quite clearly the plan then to entertain this stupid idea without ever officially backing it then :( I can only hope then that either: a) in the usual style of most...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[21C101]

I wouldn't mind locking Professor Ferguson Pantsdown like they did in China, preferably welding him inside his house with no food and water.

I would like to say something stronger, but for now I'll just say:-

"Why don't you give it a rest, you two faced little so-and so? If you are not prepared to observe the rules that you yourself advocate, then you have no business whatsoever telling other people what to do"

It is fairly obvious to me from the language he uses that he appears to regard himself as part of a higher caste who dispenses such rules for the little people to obey, while he as an expert need only use his judgement on a case by case basis as he has wisdom that the benighted little people lack.

Unfortunately such arrogance seems to be fairly widespread in such circles, with such "experts" increasingly regarding themselves as High Priests who's word is holy writ that shalt not be questioned.

Which beyond health circles, led to the other Great Matter of the moment.

 

[Yew]

So lockdown was innovative? Surely for important matters, we should be using tried and tested techniques; rather than conducting medical experiments on a whole country.

 

[yorkie]

I have no respect for Prof Ferguson; he is a failure and he is disgraced (more so than Cummings I would argue; he really ought to have have been given at least the same amount of flak)

Also, while they thought they could get away with it, and to some extent they did, there are some flaws:

Firstly, although authoritarians in this country are very vocal in their support for lockdowns, they are a minority.

Most people would accept a lockdown if they knew it would be short and effective; people were mislead to believe this and therefore there was mass support at the start. But not now that the truth is known.

We did not lockdown in the way China did and we could never have done so; people who had symptoms that indicated they might have had the virus were forcibly removed from their homes and placed in huge halls. People could not leave their house for any reason. Food had to be delivered. No exercise, and so on.

The original D614 version which caused the epidemic in Wuhan was less transmissible than the G614 mutation which became dominant in Europe. Many reports claimed the variant which drove the high rate of infections in Italy, was up to 10 times 'more transmissible' than the original version.

This report includes a graph showing how the G614 strain came to dominate:

Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that D614G Increases Infectivity of the COVID-19 Virus

A SARS-CoV-2 variant carrying the Spike protein amino acid change D614G has become the most prevalent form in the global pandemic. Dynamic tracking of…

www.sciencedirect.com

A SARS-CoV-2 variant carrying the Spike protein amino acid change D614G has become the most prevalent form in the global pandemic. Dynamic tracking of variant frequencies revealed a recurrent pattern of G614 increase at multiple geographic levels: national, regional, and municipal.

The shift occurred even in local epidemics where the original D614 form was well established prior to introduction of the G614 variant. The consistency of this pattern was highly statistically significant, suggesting that the G614 variant may have a fitness advantage. We found that the G614 variant grows to a higher titer as pseudotyped virions.

In infected individuals, G614 is associated with lower RT-PCR cycle thresholds, suggestive of higher upper respiratory tract viral loads, but not with increased disease severity. These findings illuminate changes important for a mechanistic understanding of the virus and support continuing surveillance of Spike mutations to aid with development of immunological interventions.

So, at the time European countries were imposing lockdowns, they were never going to work because:

• the lockdowns could never be anywhere near as strict as the Wuhan lockdown; and
• the new strain was far more transmissible and could not so easily be eliminated by lockdowns.

Someone at my workplace still goes round telling people that if we locked down long enough and hard enough we would have eliminated it; apart from a hard lockdown being impossible in the UK, this ignores the fact that European countries had a very different strain to deal with compared to the original strain from Wuhan. But pro-lockdown authoritarians do not want to do this level of research as it does not suit their authoritarian agenda.

I wish Prof Ferguson and all pro-lockdown authoritarians would emigrate to China, or South Koera, where they can indulge in authoritarianism and leave the rest of us in peace.

 

[Kite159]

I wish Prof Ferguson and all pro-lockdown authoritarians would emigrate to China, or South Koera, where they can indulge in authoritarianism and leave the rest of us in peace.

I disagree, they should emigrate to North Korea to enjoy the authoritarianism

 

[Spamcan81]

So lockdown was innovative? Surely for important matters, we should be using tried and tested techniques; rather than conducting medical experiments on a whole country.

And what would these "tried and tested techniques" be regarding combating a novel virus?

 

[Yew]

And what would these "tried and tested techniques" be regarding combating a novel virus?

The plan we were going for up until the 15th, shield the vulnerable and build up immunity.

 

[SS4]

We'll never know what SAGE think. We might know what one person thinks and we know what SAGE say but we don't know what they think

 

[bramling]

I have no respect for Prof Ferguson; he is a failure and he is disgraced (more so than Cummings I would argue; he really ought to have have been given at least the same amount of flak)

Also, while they thought they could get away with it, and to some extent they did, there are some flaws:

Firstly, although authoritarians in this country are very vocal in their support for lockdowns, they are a minority.

Most people would accept a lockdown if they knew it would be short and effective; people were mislead to believe this and therefore there was mass support at the start. But not now that the truth is known.

We did not lockdown in the way China did and we could never have done so; people who had symptoms that indicated they might have had the virus were forcibly removed from their homes and placed in huge halls. People could not leave their house for any reason. Food had to be delivered. No exercise, and so on.

The original D614 strain which caused the epidemic in Wuhan was less transmissible than the G614 strain which became dominant in Europe. Many reports claimed the D614 strain, which is the strain that drove the high rate of infections in Italy, was up to 10 times more transmissible than the original strain.

This report includes a graph showing how the G614 strain came to dominate:

Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that D614G Increases Infectivity of the COVID-19 Virus

A SARS-CoV-2 variant carrying the Spike protein amino acid change D614G has become the most prevalent form in the global pandemic. Dynamic tracking of…

www.sciencedirect.com

View attachment 87897


So, at the time European countries were imposing lockdowns, they were never going to work because:

• the lockdowns could never be anywhere near as strict as the Wuhan lockdown; and
• the new strain was far more transmissible and could not so easily be eliminated by lockdowns.

Someone at my workplace still goes round telling people that if we locked down long enough and hard enough we would have eliminated it; apart from a hard lockdown being impossible in the UK, this ignores the fact that European countries had a very different strain to deal with compared to the original strain from Wuhan. But pro-lockdown authoritarians do not want to do this level of research as it does not suit their authoritarian agenda.

I wish Prof Ferguson and all pro-lockdown authoritarians would emigrate to China, or South Koera, where they can indulge in authoritarianism and leave the rest of us in peace.

Have to say that's a very well written and convincing post.

 

[DustyBin]

And what would these "tried and tested techniques" be regarding combating a novel virus?

Basically the same approach Sweden took which far from being brave or different simply followed standard epidemiological practice. China invented (for want of a better word) the lockdown approach and other countries followed. It was sheep syndrome, nothing more. How successful China’s approach was domestically is open to debate as they can’t be trusted to tell the truth, however what is clear is that the European version has failed miserably, if it hasn’t why are we now staring down the barrel of lockdown 3?

 

[HSTEd]

And what would these "tried and tested techniques" be regarding combating a novel virus?

Coldly put, order more coffins

ie. the traditional response used throughout most of human history.

 

[david1212]

I have no respect for Prof Ferguson; he is a failure and he is disgraced (more so than Cummings I would argue; he really ought to have have been given at least the same amount of flak)

Also, while they thought they could get away with it, and to some extent they did, there are some flaws:

Firstly, although authoritarians in this country are very vocal in their support for lockdowns, they are a minority.

Most people would accept a lockdown if they knew it would be short and effective; people were mislead to believe this and therefore there was mass support at the start. But not now that the truth is known.

We did not lockdown in the way China did and we could never have done so; people who had symptoms that indicated they might have had the virus were forcibly removed from their homes and placed in huge halls. People could not leave their house for any reason. Food had to be delivered. No exercise, and so on.

The original D614 strain which caused the epidemic in Wuhan was less transmissible than the G614 strain which became dominant in Europe. Many reports claimed the D614 strain, which is the strain that drove the high rate of infections in Italy, was up to 10 times more transmissible than the original strain.

This report includes a graph showing how the G614 strain came to dominate:

Tracking Changes in SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Evidence that D614G Increases Infectivity of the COVID-19 Virus

A SARS-CoV-2 variant carrying the Spike protein amino acid change D614G has become the most prevalent form in the global pandemic. Dynamic tracking of…

www.sciencedirect.com

View attachment 87897


So, at the time European countries were imposing lockdowns, they were never going to work because:

• the lockdowns could never be anywhere near as strict as the Wuhan lockdown; and
• the new strain was far more transmissible and could not so easily be eliminated by lockdowns.

Someone at my workplace still goes round telling people that if we locked down long enough and hard enough we would have eliminated it; apart from a hard lockdown being impossible in the UK, this ignores the fact that European countries had a very different strain to deal with compared to the original strain from Wuhan. But pro-lockdown authoritarians do not want to do this level of research as it does not suit their authoritarian agenda.

I wish Prof Ferguson and all pro-lockdown authoritarians would emigrate to China, or South Koera, where they can indulge in authoritarianism and leave the rest of us in peace.

Yorkie,

A very well researched and written post concentrating on the facts rather than opinions.

 

[bb21]

Don't feed the troll, as they say. He does not represent the whole SAGE team.

I really cannot understand why anyone wishes to draw parallels between the UK and China in approaches to dealing with the virus - different cultures, different prevailing mentality, different governing styles, etc. What works in China isn't necessarily going to work in the UK. We also knew a while ago it was a different strain too. It is not new information. The west cannot simply copy what they did.

We don't have a pragmatic government. We have a bunch of out of depth opportunists who are only interested in headlines and propaganda. Half-hearted lockdowns as we have seen in this country are just about the worst you can do, most of the problems of a full lockdown, with very little benefit of the latter being realised.

That reminds me of an old Chinese saying, which loosely translates to "ugly woman trying to imitate famous beauty", who copies everything the latter does, but fools no one as she lacks substance of the latter. That is exactly how I feel about our politicians right now.

 

[bb21]

Basically the same approach Sweden took which far from being brave or different simply followed standard epidemiological practice. China invented (for want of a better word) the lockdown approach and other countries followed. It was sheep syndrome, nothing more. How successful China’s approach was domestically is open to debate as they can’t be trusted to tell the truth, however what is clear is that the European version has failed miserably, if it hasn’t why are we now staring down the barrel of lockdown 3?

I think you are letting your prejudice cloud your judgement. They have been successful in containing the virus and limiting its damage, even if just in relative terms to what happened in the west. That much is clear. Even if you multiply everything by 10, they still have been successful.

The problem is that what they did hold very little relevance to our own circumstance and we cannot simply copy what they did. The Chinese economy may be able to weather much bigger storm than ours, and British people are much less obedient compared to any of the Asian cultures, for a whole host of reasons. I am not going to pass judgement on which culture is better. Large parts of Europe have failed despite being far more advanced in many respects because we have been slow to act and failed to find a suitable approach tailored to our own circumstances. This has become a bit of a vicious circle. We are nine months into the pandemic. The longer this drags on, the less credibility the authorities have, and the less effective any future measures will be, even if heaven forbid we found the magic bullet.

 

[JamesT]

We'll never know what SAGE think. We might know what one person thinks and we know what SAGE say but we don't know what they think

There are the published minutes of the SAGE meetings, which give a bit more detail on some of the underlying stuff behind their advice. Which when I read the early ones tallied with Ferguson’s claim that they didn’t think they could implement draconian measures and they were also concerned with waning compliance so didn’t want to lockdown too early.

 

[sjpowermac]

Coldly put, order more coffins

ie. the traditional response used throughout most of human history.

Whilst I don’t agree with you, I do greatly admire your honesty, it’s something that is in short supply amongst many posters.

 

[DustyBin]

I think you are letting your prejudice cloud your judgement. They have been successful in containing the virus and limiting its damage, even if just in relative terms to what happened in the west. That much is clear. Even if you multiply everything by 10, they still have been successful.

The problem is that what they did hold very little relevance to our own circumstance and we cannot simply copy what they did. The Chinese economy may be able to weather much bigger storm than ours, and British people are much less obedient compared to any of the Asian cultures, for a whole host of reasons. I am not going to pass judgement on which culture is better. Large parts of Europe have failed despite being far more advanced in many respects because we have been slow to act and failed to find a suitable approach tailored to our own circumstances. This has become a bit of a vicious circle. We are nine months into the pandemic. The longer this drags on, the less credibility the authorities have, and the less effective any future measures will be, even if heaven forbid we found the magic bullet.

You may well have a point about my prejudice (for want of a better word) as I don’t trust the CCP and I treat anything they say with suspicion. However, there are plenty of articles out there which question how truthful they have been. The point is we don’t know, and probably never will. Regardless, it’s clear we agree on one thing i.e. European attempts to emulate them haven’t worked, for the reasons you’ve identified.

 

[duncanp]

And I see another "SAGE expert" is reported today as warning that a "total national lockdown" is "inevitable" by the end of January.

Will these people never give up?

No-one can say with any certainty now what the situation is going to be in a months time.

Given that most of England is in Tier 4, and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have similar levels of restriction, we are effectively in a national lockdown anyway.

So why not just give the current rules time to work?

What difference will it make putting the few remaining areas that are currently in tier 3 into tier 4?

Or do the "SAGE experts" think that putting the Scilly Isles into tier 4 from tier 1 is going to have a significant effect on the "R" rate?

Boris Johnson has said that he expects a significant level of normality by Easter.

Yes I know he has said that before, but if we are still all in tier 4 by the end of March he will be toast, even more so than he currently is.

It could also happen that there are moves to replace him around that time, as happened with Mrs Thatcher after the poll tax was introduced, in order to limit the damage to the Conservative party.

 

[21C101]

To be honest, neither Novembers lockdown, nor the new year measures are anything remotely resembling what we did in April.

Behind the claims of lockdowns and other authoritarian noises to save face, what is happening in England is pretty close to what Sweden did in April.

You might call it "Sweden+Masks"

I suspect Ferguson did the interview partly out of disgruntlement at no longer being listened to the same extent by the govt.

 

[yorkie]

To be honest, neither Novembers lockdown, nor the new year measures are anything remotely resembling what we did in April.

Behind the claims of lockdowns and other authoritarian noises to save face, what is happening in England is pretty close to what Sweden did in April.

You might call it "Sweden+Masks"

I suspect Ferguson did the interview partly out of disgruntlement at no longer being listened to the same extent by the govt.

Having been to Sweden this year, this simply isn't true. But we have had threads in that subject and there is no need to repeat the same things here.

 

[DustyBin]

Coldly put, order more coffins

ie. the traditional response used throughout most of human history.

That’s what would happen in the early stages certainly and I can understand why it’s unpalatable for some (to be clear I’m not exactly enthusiastic about letting thousands of people die). However, what isn’t so clear is how the number of excess deaths over say a twelve month period would compare. But then again, it was all meant to be over within a few months. I think this all needs taking into consideration when assessing our response (that’s not to defend it).

 

[greyman42]

And I see another "SAGE expert" is reported today as warning that a "total national lockdown" is "inevitable" by the end of January.

Will these people never give up?

Are these awful people answerable to anyone? Comments like this do nothing regarding moral and peoples views on sticking to the current regulations. If we are getting locked down in February then we might as well make the most of January will be the attitude?

 

[43096]

Whilst I don’t agree with you, I do greatly admire your honesty, it’s something that is in short supply amongst many posters.

Let's be honest, the whole premise of the last 9 months has been to extend the life of vulnerable people (mostly older) at the expense of the young, and in particular their education, mental health, employment prospects and future prosperity (we'll be paying the £0.3 trillion borrowing back for decades). As an "investment" it is utterly nuts, as a way of treating that generation it is immoral.

Yet there are plenty who are wedded to this lockdown is the only route. Debate is shut down. Those who disagree are shouted down, belittled and bullied. There is a thoroughly nasty streak visible from people getting on their moral high horse and lecturing others about not following the "rules". I'll bet those superior beings aren't entirely following the rules themselves - exhibit A being "Shagger" Ferguson himself.

The whole messaging around the pandemic has been shocking. It is purely negative - don't do this, don't do that. Unsurprisingly people don't take too well to that, particularly when those doing the messaging ignore their own rules. How much better would it have been if it was "We really need your help...".

 

[sjpowermac]

Let's be honest, the whole premise of the last 9 months has been to extend the life of vulnerable people (mostly older) at the expense of the young, and in particular their education, mental health, employment prospects and future prosperity (we'll be paying the £0.3 trillion borrowing back for decades). As an "investment" it is utterly nuts, as a way of treating that generation it is immoral.

Yet you and plenty of others are wedded to this lockdown is the only route. Debate is shut down. Those who disagree are shouted down, belittled and bullied. There is a thoroughly nasty streak visible from people getting on their moral high horse and lecturing others about not following the "rules". I'll bet those superior beings aren't entirely following the rules themselves - exhibit A being "Shagger" Ferguson himself.

The whole messaging around the pandemic has been shocking. It is purely negative - don't do this, don't do that. Unsurprisingly people don't take too well to that, particularly when those doing the messaging ignore their own rules. How much better would it have been if it was "We really need your help...".

Err, you couldn’t be more wrong.
I’ve been very honest in saying that I’ve changed my mind on lockdowns. I don’t care one way or the other if people follow the rules, I’m too busy getting on with my own life as best I can.

I think you will find on these threads that it’s rather the opposite of what you claim. Anyone who doesn’t support ‘old lives don’t matter’ are the ones who are shouted down.

I’m greatly honoured that you pay so much attention to my posts that you have replied to two in two days.

Perhaps you would care to apologise for your rant?