RugbyRebels

South Korea, Taiwan etc showed the world how to deal with Covid-19 over 6 months ago. The UK government failed to get on top of the epidemic at the start, but has now had 6 months to replicate successful systems and strategies, primarily an effective test, trace and isolate system.

It's incredible (but, somehow, not totally surprising) that they've failed to do this. Their incompetence has caused great human and economic harm and is about to do so again, in predicted second wave.

One model being increasingly looked at across Europe is Sweden's

Digby wrote:One model being increasingly looked at across Europe is Sweden's

Irony?

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:One model being increasingly looked at across Europe is Sweden's

Irony?

Nope.

Those worried not just about Covid but the impacts elsewhere and thinking some of those impacts the more serious are looking at Sweden and wondering if they can't replicate some of their positives. I'm making no claim about whether those concerns are well placed or not, but I would note Sweden has gotten where they have by a consistency of model and messaging, I certainly don't understand why Cummings and Johnson think they can lurch into copying some of what Sweden's done for maybe a couple of weeks before they change tack again and gain some of the perceived advantages.

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:One model being increasingly looked at across Europe is Sweden's

Irony?

Nope.

Those worried not just about Covid but the impacts elsewhere and thinking some of those impacts the more serious are looking at Sweden and wondering if they can't replicate some of their positives. I'm making no claim about whether those concerns are well placed or not, but I would note Sweden has gotten where they have by a consistency of model and messaging, I certainly don't understand why Cummings and Johnson think they can lurch into copying some of what Sweden's done for maybe a couple of weeks before they change tack again and gain some of the perceived advantages.

That would please the readership of the Telegraph. Sweden is a bit of an outlier in many ways, but it has some unique differences to us which shouldn’t be ignored and they have higher death rates than other Scandinavian countries.

The longer this goes on the louder the voices will get just to allow the virus to run its course .

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: Irony?

Nope.

Those worried not just about Covid but the impacts elsewhere and thinking some of those impacts the more serious are looking at Sweden and wondering if they can't replicate some of their positives. I'm making no claim about whether those concerns are well placed or not, but I would note Sweden has gotten where they have by a consistency of model and messaging, I certainly don't understand why Cummings and Johnson think they can lurch into copying some of what Sweden's done for maybe a couple of weeks before they change tack again and gain some of the perceived advantages.

That would please the readership of the Telegraph. Sweden is a bit of an outlier in many ways, but it has some unique differences to us which shouldn’t be ignored and they have higher death rates than other Scandinavian countries.

The longer this goes on the louder the voices will get just to allow the virus to run its course .

Certainly voices to allow people to manage their own risk, with the proviso we have certain systems in place to protect high or maybe higher risk groups.

I think we're some ways off being able to replicate what Sweden have done and are doing, even if one wanted to which is also questionable, I'm not sure we're that far off claiming we're going to use them as the example to follow. Which also to me suggests we're falling into a classic management mistake of thinking good things will follow a decision being made, because how could a decision be other than good when made by management. Essentially our current plan will fail, an attempt to ape Sweden would fail, and then we'd change again

Which Tyler wrote:

The UK are deservedly at the bottom of that bunch, although the polls are too generous to Italy and Sweden.

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:
Nope.

Those worried not just about Covid but the impacts elsewhere and thinking some of those impacts the more serious are looking at Sweden and wondering if they can't replicate some of their positives. I'm making no claim about whether those concerns are well placed or not, but I would note Sweden has gotten where they have by a consistency of model and messaging, I certainly don't understand why Cummings and Johnson think they can lurch into copying some of what Sweden's done for maybe a couple of weeks before they change tack again and gain some of the perceived advantages.

That would please the readership of the Telegraph. Sweden is a bit of an outlier in many ways, but it has some unique differences to us which shouldn’t be ignored and they have higher death rates than other Scandinavian countries.

The longer this goes on the louder the voices will get just to allow the virus to run its course .

Certainly voices to allow people to manage their own risk, with the proviso we have certain systems in place to protect high or maybe higher risk groups.

I think we're some ways off being able to replicate what Sweden have done and are doing, even if one wanted to which is also questionable, I'm not sure we're that far off claiming we're going to use them as the example to follow. Which also to me suggests we're falling into a classic management mistake of thinking good things will follow a decision being made, because how could a decision be other than good when made by management. Essentially our current plan will fail, an attempt to ape Sweden would fail, and then we'd change again

If we wanted to follow the science we'd look at the countries that have done the best (eg South Korea*) and replicate their strategies. Anyone looking to one of the worst performers in the world in Sweden must have already chosen their strategy and is trying to justify it.

* or Norway if we are confined to European countries (which we are not).

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: That would please the readership of the Telegraph. Sweden is a bit of an outlier in many ways, but it has some unique differences to us which shouldn’t be ignored and they have higher death rates than other Scandinavian countries.

The longer this goes on the louder the voices will get just to allow the virus to run its course .

Certainly voices to allow people to manage their own risk, with the proviso we have certain systems in place to protect high or maybe higher risk groups.

I think we're some ways off being able to replicate what Sweden have done and are doing, even if one wanted to which is also questionable, I'm not sure we're that far off claiming we're going to use them as the example to follow. Which also to me suggests we're falling into a classic management mistake of thinking good things will follow a decision being made, because how could a decision be other than good when made by management. Essentially our current plan will fail, an attempt to ape Sweden would fail, and then we'd change again

If we wanted to follow the science we'd look at the countries that have done the best (eg South Korea*) and replicate their strategies. Anyone looking to one of the worst performers in the world in Sweden must have already chosen their strategy and is trying to justify it.

* or Norway if we are confined to European countries (which we are not).

I'm not going to defend the view, or argue against it. I'm just noting where the discussion is going. I think the thing with South Korea is we'd have a rather different take on behaviour across society. We can't even manage to have people travel around correctly wearing masks and not close windows on trains and buses as a for instance.

It's be worth noting a fair chunk of the government's take on social behaviour is their own thinking rather than what they're hearing from behavioural scientists. Yes we get the claim decisions are based on the science, but...

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote: That would please the readership of the Telegraph. Sweden is a bit of an outlier in many ways, but it has some unique differences to us which shouldn’t be ignored and they have higher death rates than other Scandinavian countries.

The longer this goes on the louder the voices will get just to allow the virus to run its course .

Certainly voices to allow people to manage their own risk, with the proviso we have certain systems in place to protect high or maybe higher risk groups.

I think we're some ways off being able to replicate what Sweden have done and are doing, even if one wanted to which is also questionable, I'm not sure we're that far off claiming we're going to use them as the example to follow. Which also to me suggests we're falling into a classic management mistake of thinking good things will follow a decision being made, because how could a decision be other than good when made by management. Essentially our current plan will fail, an attempt to ape Sweden would fail, and then we'd change again

If we wanted to follow the science we'd look at the countries that have done the best (eg South Korea*) and replicate their strategies. Anyone looking to one of the worst performers in the world in Sweden must have already chosen their strategy and is trying to justify it.

* or Norway if we are confined to European countries (which we are not).

Given that they’re looking like they may be spared a second wave, they mostly kept their kids in school, they have had to borrow relatively little money for the likes of furlough, that their GDP hit hasn’t been as bad as most (despite having an economy heavily reliant on exports into lockdown economies) and that they won’t saddle the younger generations* with billions in debt you could argue Sweden have done pretty well.
Yes, they had plenty on their side: relatively little international travel, low pop density, high % of single occupancy homes (highest in Europe) and a relatively low reliance on public transport but, counter to that, they have large nursing/care homes that sadly lead to uncontrollable outbreaks once in an institution, leading to nursing/care home deaths accounting for an almost world leading/losing % of total deaths.

That said, it’s too early to tell. If they don’t avoid a second wave and/or someone proves and widely distributes a vaccine before winter then they’ll almost certainly be in the wrong.
We really won’t know who has done best (in Europe admittedly) until this is all over and done with.
To be honest, if you’re deciding at this point - and given you’d decided by May, I’m certain you have - that Sweden definitely, without question have the worst response despite being, seemingly at best, half way through this pandemic then I’d argue you’ve chosen your preferred strategy and are just trying to justify it.

For the purposes of clarity, I don’t think we should have gone down Sweden’s route, other than keeping primary schools open (which is mostly case of hindsight bring a wonderful thing). I’m just bored of this argument that one response fits all and it’s solely about how many die in a 6 month period.

I’d also like to clarify that I wish we’d responded like S Korea but there are a myriad of reasons, discussed as nauseum on here, for why that wasn’t 100%, and in crucial areas, possible. Not that I think U.K. govt response has been anywhere near good enough.

*they're now going to have pay off the bill for the credit crunch, leaving the EU and covid. The first of which was not their fault, the second of which they explicitly wanted to avoid and the third of which gives 99% of them no more than a light cough. Given the youngest of them have also been deprived of six months of their education.....

Digby wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Digby wrote:
Certainly voices to allow people to manage their own risk, with the proviso we have certain systems in place to protect high or maybe higher risk groups.

I think we're some ways off being able to replicate what Sweden have done and are doing, even if one wanted to which is also questionable, I'm not sure we're that far off claiming we're going to use them as the example to follow. Which also to me suggests we're falling into a classic management mistake of thinking good things will follow a decision being made, because how could a decision be other than good when made by management. Essentially our current plan will fail, an attempt to ape Sweden would fail, and then we'd change again

If we wanted to follow the science we'd look at the countries that have done the best (eg South Korea*) and replicate their strategies. Anyone looking to one of the worst performers in the world in Sweden must have already chosen their strategy and is trying to justify it.

* or Norway if we are confined to European countries (which we are not).

I'm not going to defend the view, or argue against it. I'm just noting where the discussion is going. I think the thing with South Korea is we'd have a rather different take on behaviour across society. We can't even manage to have people travel around correctly wearing masks and not close windows on trains and buses as a for instance.

It's be worth noting a fair chunk of the government's take on social behaviour is their own thinking rather than what they're hearing from behavioural scientists. Yes we get the claim decisions are based on the science, but...

Indeed, setting behavioural rules is totally against the instincts of these guys. Also they know if they outlaw some behaviour, the clock is ticking on which minister or special advisor breaks it first.

Still now how Agent Cummings and Goings wasn't fired in disgrace remains a disgrace, it's another wtf are doing and wtf do you think this even could work moment

So after weeks of trying to shame office workers to go back to the office in order to save Pret, the advice is now to work from home where possible. It was fucking obvious that masses of office workers commuting on cramped trains would be a recipe for disaster.

Hopefully, the realisation that work from home is a good thing to keep the infection rates low might prompt a rethink on the future nature of work in the UK and ways to move towards a 21st century approach involving grater flexibility.

Sandydragon wrote:So after weeks of trying to shame office workers to go back to the office in order to save Pret, the advice is now to work from home where possible. It was fucking obvious that masses of office workers commuting on cramped trains would be a recipe for disaster.

Hopefully, the realisation that work from home is a good thing to keep the infection rates low might prompt a rethink on the future nature of work in the UK and ways to move towards a 21st century approach involving grater flexibility.

A flexible grater would be almost impossible to use.

Coming in with this step now to last through to spring might well see Parliament telling the government it's time to act as it will is over in all this. To steal a line I've seen better organised riots

Jaysus, what a shambles.

I'll give Boris this, he's accidentally shat all over any coverage the Labour Party conference might have garnered. Sadly it wouldn't surprise me if that were part of the reason the announcement came today

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:So after weeks of trying to shame office workers to go back to the office in order to save Pret, the advice is now to work from home where possible. It was fucking obvious that masses of office workers commuting on cramped trains would be a recipe for disaster.

Hopefully, the realisation that work from home is a good thing to keep the infection rates low might prompt a rethink on the future nature of work in the UK and ways to move towards a 21st century approach involving grater flexibility.

A flexible grater would be almost impossible to use.

You can get those now, pretty useful actually

Another Grate British invention, surely.

'Lives vs. Livelihoods' - scientists appear a tadge exasperated by the lack of urgency; no chance of controlling the virus if you can't control the masses...It appears some have swallowed the 'just carry on' line a bit too literally.

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:So after weeks of trying to shame office workers to go back to the office in order to save Pret, the advice is now to work from home where possible. It was fucking obvious that masses of office workers commuting on cramped trains would be a recipe for disaster.

Hopefully, the realisation that work from home is a good thing to keep the infection rates low might prompt a rethink on the future nature of work in the UK and ways to move towards a 21st century approach involving grater flexibility.

A flexible grater would be almost impossible to use.

You can get those now, pretty useful actually

You do grate

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: A flexible grater would be almost impossible to use.

You can get those now, pretty useful actually

You do grate

I try and be helpful and this is the thanks, you ingrate

It seems I have failed to ingratiate myself

Mellsblue wrote:It seems I have failed to ingratiate myself

Your credibility has rather been shredded.