You won't see this on the BBC

These things are impossible for even the best of us to predict, answers were demanded, so best guesses were made. No one has a working crystal ball and can predict the future with certainty.
Accepted.
But when one decides the policy of a nation based on such poorly predictable events, one must take a degree of responsibility for the consequences that develop.
For instance: the failure to lockdown over the Xmas/New Year period.
 
Sponsored Links
Politics have had the same problem with covid in several areas. Usually it can take a long time for the effects of their actions to show and for one reason or another they often don't achieve what they have set out to do one way or another. Do something in the covid area and results become apparent much sooner. The increase in testing capacity for instance especially early on. They seem to be realising lately that in some areas they can't work in the way they usually do. Lockdowns is one. ;) Old habits die hard but need to mention that some things aren't certain as that is going to become rather clear pretty quickly.

Next can't do might be the vaccination schedule - why might that happen - supply. They have mentioned that. They also need to set up facilities to achieve it. That would be their problem if they don't provide them or they are delayed. Supply - my feeling is that they should be fully aware of what that means other than batches turning out to be faulty but one company chooses to reduce supply for a while to enable them to boost it.

When this wave is over just like the last one some one will probably look to see what earlier action would have achieved. We are being told now that way more people than they thought were carrying the virus. Earlier on we were told that the spread was in the younger age groups and spreading out to the rest. A lot of smoking guns to deal with. Given the nature of the problem there are bound to be some.
 
Funny, I have always been totally supportive of the BBC (still am) and considered them balanced, but only the other day somebody being interviewed (I honestly cannot remember the details, so sorry!) started saying something that was not supportive of the government, it was either covid decision making or brexit, and they were very quickly cut off with the old "sorry we've run out of time". They were making a really good point - I would not have noticed if they weren't!

But, the BBC will always be better than all the tabloid rags that are only written for one purpose - to prompt an emotional response from the reader so they engage with the content. They are all there to make money and nothing else, and naturally, they all support the political party that allow them to operate with minimal regulation. Tabloids can still write complete lies about people, about policies etc and get away with it. This is a big problem in the UK.

I've always liked C4 News when I want something a bit more balanced.
 
Earlier on we were told that the spread was in the younger age groups and spreading out to the rest.
It was known and reported, on the outbreak in Vo, Italy, in June 2020, that the majority of the virus was spread by the asymptomatic carriers.
The symptomatic carriers would self-isolate. But the asymptomatic carriers would continue to circulate in society, thereby spreading the virus.
That is the scientific argument for supporting strict lockdown.
Whereas in UK, at one time, and for a prolonged period, only symptomatic sufferers were allowed to be tested. Asymptomatic people were precluded from testing, in clear and direct opposition to the known science.
 
Sponsored Links
Whereas in UK, at one time, and for a prolonged period, only symptomatic sufferers were allowed to be tested. Asymptomatic people were precluded from testing, in clear and direct opposition to the known science.

More correctly they couldn't test enough people and even had to resort to only testing people with classical symptoms. It was also pretty clear what was needed to get people into hospital to be even tested in the first place for some time - the stage past just having the classical symptoms. No choice on both counts and the UK is by no means the only country that had these problems. We have always had a disease monitoring system and track and trace but it couldn't cope. Not the only ones again. We also live in a country where it's relatively easy for people to buzz around between population centres and they do.

Asymptotic spread. My feelings early on where that this must be happening as given warnings I couldn't see it being purely down to coughs and sneezes. Those in control - pass but what could they do about it. I suspect if this sort of thing happens again it will be dealt with in a different way and if asymptomatic figure it's going to be tricky. There is also the problem of spread before symptoms crop up. Now we may have a problem when peoples immune system can cope - viral loads that could mean they can infect others,
 
More correctly they couldn't test enough people and even had to resort to only testing people with classical symptoms.
Due to the system designed and set up, i.e. centralised. It wasn't the only option, and other countries had developed a de-centralised system.
 
Yeah, and way back in March 2020, Johnson said that the UK will beat this virus within a few weeks. He kept repeating the mantra throughout the summer that it would all be over in a few weeks.
He finished by saying the rules would be looked at again in three weeks - when they might be relaxed if they had worked.
https://www.conservatives.com/news/coronavirus-five-tests-speech

Michael Gove told broadcasters that the situation would be reviewed on 2 December, and when asked whether this meant the initial four-week lockdown might be extended, he gave a short, three-letter answer: “Yes.”
We do not wish to preempt that review, and No 10 has since insisted that the new measures will end on time, but it should be taken into account that when Boris Johnson announced the previous lockdown in March, he made it very clear it was only supposed to last for three weeks. It lasted 12.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...p-trust-lockdown-test-and-trace-b1506868.html
WTF has what politicians say got to do with the way the BBC reports news?
 
WTF has what politicians say got to do with the way the BBC reports news?
You appear to have failed to recognise that my comment was in response to another's reference to what a politician had said.
Now, let me check who it was that made the initial comment about what a politician had said:
... at yesterday's news conference (live streamed on the BBC and live updates on the BBC site with the key points) Hancock was asked by a reporter about the WHO's comments regarding being "on the brink of a moral catastrophic failure” for its unequal sharing of COVID-19 vaccinations.
:rolleyes:
 
Due to the system designed and set up, i.e. centralised. It wasn't the only option, and other countries had developed a de-centralised system.

It was as it was. So spilt milk. Incorrect anyway as most hospitals can test for all sorts of things. It's all pretty simple really, The country didn't have the testing capacity that would be needed to test as they do now and that has taken time to build up as has the supply of the stuff that is needed.
 
I am not the one making the accusation, the onus is on Vinty, are you his glove puppet?
 

The ones that exist only in some peoples imagination or contradict what they found on youtube etc

Reality - that's what they usually report. A good bit more reliably than others as well. The other decent source is C4 also state owned but aiming to be mischievous as they put it themselves.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top