Heading into autumn - what next?

[greyman42]

The "due to a rise in cases" in the headline is rather misleading. The article does say "following rising Covid cases on the parliamentary estate", but the headline could easily be misinterpreted as saying cases are rising nationally when they are actually falling.

The article does make it clear that the rise in cases is within parliament but i agree that, not for the first time, the BBC have used a misleading headline.

It's all just virtue signalling and a very big case of "them not us". The government clearly think that the general public are far too stupid to make their own decisions.

As far as i can see the government are letting us make our own decisions?

 

[brad465]

This may come as a surprise to some, given the media haven't given it attention, but for around 3 months the ONS have been reporting excess deaths, but we'd be in excess anyway if no deaths with covid were being reported:

Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, provisional - Office for National Statistics

Provisional counts of the number of deaths registered in England and Wales, including deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19), by age, sex and region.

www.ons.gov.uk

Relatively speaking the level of excess deaths is relatively low, but there is some real double standards at play with how both the media are reporting it and the Government and health services are responding to it (at least in terms of what's publicly visible). I'm not suggesting excess deaths are a non-issue, but if these entities are concerned about excess deaths from/with covid then they should be equally concerned with other excess deaths, and have a response proportionate to the scale of excess reported, regardless of what condition(s)'s responsible (if this makes sense).

 

[Eyersey468]

This may come as a surprise to some, given the media haven't given it attention, but for around 3 months the ONS have been reporting excess deaths, but we'd be in excess anyway if no deaths with covid were being reported:

Deaths registered weekly in England and Wales, provisional - Office for National Statistics

Provisional counts of the number of deaths registered in England and Wales, including deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19), by age, sex and region.

www.ons.gov.uk

View attachment 105091

Relatively speaking the level of excess deaths is relatively low, but there is some real double standards at play with how both the media are reporting it and the Government and health services are responding to it (at least in terms of what's publicly visible). I'm not suggesting excess deaths are a non-issue, but if these entities are concerned about excess deaths from/with covid then they should be equally concerned with other excess deaths, and have a response proportionate to the scale of excess reported, regardless of what condition(s)'s responsible (if this makes sense).

Thar makes perfect sense, one thing which has annoyed me is it has always only seemed to be Covid deaths that matter, deaths from cancer, heart disease etc etc don't seem to matter to anyone.

 

[brad465]

Sir Jeremy Farrah is stepping down from Independent SAGE, someone who has called for tougher measures on covid than currently exist:

Covid-19: Sage scientist Sir Jeremy Farrar steps down from role

He says levels of Covid transmission in the UK are "concerning" as he leaves the advisory group.

www.bbc.co.uk

A member of the group of scientists advising the government on coronavirus has stepped down from the role.
Sir Jeremy Farrar has been part of the independent Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) since the start of the pandemic.
He said he had left at the end of October so he could focus on his work as director of medical charity the Wellcome Trust.
But in a statement, he warned the crisis was "a long way from over".

Sir Jeremy also said Sage scientists had often had to work "under huge pressure" to provide "vital evidence, and independent, expert, transparent advice".
In his statement confirming he had left Sage, he said: "The Covid-19 crisis is a long way from over, with the global situation deeply troubling.
"The high levels of transmission seen in the UK remain concerning, but I stepped down as a participant of Sage knowing ministers had been provided with most of the key science advice needed over the winter months."
Sir Jeremy said his focus now had to be on Wellcome, adding: "This includes supporting the international research effort to end the pandemic, ensuring the world is better prepared for inevitable future infectious disease threats, and making the case so the full potential of science is realised to inform and drive change against all the urgent health threats we face globally."

He said it had been "an honour to have joined the hundreds of scientists who have contributed" and thanked Sir Patrick Vallance, the government's chief scientific adviser, and Chris Whitty, chief medical adviser, for their "outstanding leadership".
Labour's shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth said: "To lose a heavyweight figure like Sir Jeremy from Sage is a serious blow that reveals the level of concern about the government's mishandling of the pandemic."
Sir Jeremy expressed frustration with the government last year, writing in his book that he had considered resigning from Sage in September 2020 as cases were rising in part due to the newly-opened economy, and the government's Eat Out to Help Out scheme.
He wrote in Spike: The Virus vs The People that he felt in summer 2020 that not enough had been done to plan for the coming winter.
He also lamented the delay in introducing a further lockdown until November 2020, saying: "The absence of a decision is a decision in itself."
A government Office for Science spokesperson said: "We can confirm that Sir Jeremy has stood down from the Covid Sage activation, and thank him for his contribution from the very start of the activation. Sage continues to provide government with independent expert scientific and technical advice."

He claims he isn't resigning in protest over the current situation, but nethertheless it sounds like, bar someone else coming in with similar thinking, Independent SAGE will be less influential in pushing for restrictions from here.

 

[bramling]

Thar makes perfect sense, one thing which has annoyed me is it has always only seemed to be Covid deaths that matter, deaths from cancer, heart disease etc etc don't seem to matter to anyone.

Yes completely agree. In fact annoy is an understatement for me, it’s absolutely infuriating.

This is something we are certain to hear more about over coming years, sadly.

 

[DustyBin]

Sir Jeremy Farrah is stepping down from Independent SAGE, someone who has called for tougher measures on covid than currently exist:

Covid-19: Sage scientist Sir Jeremy Farrar steps down from role

He says levels of Covid transmission in the UK are "concerning" as he leaves the advisory group.

www.bbc.co.uk

He claims he isn't resigning in protest over the current situation, but nethertheless it sounds like, bar someone else coming in with similar thinking, Independent SAGE will be less influential in pushing for restrictions from here.

I caught it on the news earlier, good riddance I say!

 

[takno]

Sir Jeremy Farrah is stepping down from Independent SAGE, someone who has called for tougher measures on covid than currently exist:

Covid-19: Sage scientist Sir Jeremy Farrar steps down from role

He says levels of Covid transmission in the UK are "concerning" as he leaves the advisory group.

www.bbc.co.uk

He claims he isn't resigning in protest over the current situation, but nethertheless it sounds like, bar someone else coming in with similar thinking, Independent SAGE will be less influential in pushing for restrictions from here.

He stepped down from proper Sage, not independent Sage

 

[Cdd89]

That BBC article is incredibly confusing, with the detail resting on whether or not the “i” in “independent” was capitalised…

They fact they can’t properly report on this without causing confusion, shows how wrong it is that the likes of the BBC give Independent SAGE a platform.

 

[brad465]

Yes completely agree. In fact annoy is an understatement for me, it’s absolutely infuriating.

This is something we are certain to hear more about over coming years, sadly.

Over the last decade, and possibly longer, the Media have moved on from substance in favour of spectacle, which sells stories better and/or gets more clicks. Quite often spectacle means reporting on individuals with "spectacular" personalities and/or opinions, which has led to celebrities voicing their political views more and helped the likes of Trump get to where he got to.

But spectacle has also been found in a new infectious disease, both in general and many specific statistics associated. With covid the media loved the spectacle of a new virus, they loved the panic buying they cooked up, they loved giving airtime to specific scientists with their own "interesting" agendas (like Neil Ferguson) and above all, they loved reporting on "big scary numbers" that was only possible because we decided to test for covid like there was no tomorrow and run a daily "tally" like it was an actual war death toll. There has been no consistency either on data metrics to focus on, the focus is on whichever is the most spectacular. Ever since vaccines greatly improved outcomes, cases has been most dominant as that's easily the standout spectacle. This is despite hospital admissions and deaths being considerably lower than last winter, when similar case numbers translated into at least 2.5x the current number of deaths and hospital admissions.

The most likely way the media will ever take other conditions/consequences more seriously is if they are somehow made into a spectacle, which would typically mean the numbers dying form them surge to record levels, which may happen, but probably isn't present right now. Other possibilities are certain individuals sue health services, either here or abroad, for negligence by ignoring the condition of a relative/friend who died but whose life would have been saved were they not neglected, and if the media do indeed have a lot to answer for, much of the public waking up to their behaviour and protesting/rebelling/revolting in ways that they can no longer succeed.

 

[bramling]

Over the last decade, and possibly longer, the Media have moved on from substance in favour of spectacle, which sells stories better and/or gets more clicks. Quite often spectacle means reporting on individuals with "spectacular" personalities and/or opinions, which has led to celebrities voicing their political views more and helped the likes of Trump get to where he got to.

But spectacle has also been found in a new infectious disease, both in general and many specific statistics associated. With covid the media loved the spectacle of a new virus, they loved the panic buying they cooked up, they loved giving airtime to specific scientists with their own "interesting" agendas (like Neil Ferguson) and above all, they loved reporting on "big scary numbers" that was only possible because we decided to test for covid like there was no tomorrow and run a daily "tally" like it was an actual war death toll. There has been no consistency either on data metrics to focus on, the focus is on whichever is the most spectacular. Ever since vaccines greatly improved outcomes, cases has been most dominant as that's easily the standout spectacle. This is despite hospital admissions and deaths being considerably lower than last winter, when similar case numbers translated into at least 2.5x the current number of deaths and hospital admissions.

The most likely way the media will ever take other conditions/consequences more seriously is if they are somehow made into a spectacle, which would typically mean the numbers dying form them surge to record levels, which may happen, but probably isn't present right now. Other possibilities are certain individuals sue health services, either here or abroad, for negligence by ignoring the condition of a relative/friend who died but whose life would have been saved were they not neglected, and if the media do indeed have a lot to answer for, much of the public waking up to their behaviour and protesting/rebelling/revolting in ways that they can no longer succeed.

Very much agree. What bugs me is that it doesn’t really seem to be the print media driving this, but the likes of BBC and Sky, who one would think would know a bit better.

I absolutely yearn for 1990s style of TV news presented by heavyweights like Peter Sissons or Michael Buerk, when it was actually about imparting news, not point-scoring or who can whip up the biggest frenzy as is the case now.

Add to that the effect of social media where someone post something and all their cronies will respond with “I agree completely, aren’t you wonderful”. All about picking holes rather than proposing solutions to problems.

 

[brad465]

Here we go, more talking up of covid concerns this winter and claims too many people think the pandemic is over:

Covid: Hard months to come in pandemic for UK, says Van-Tam

Too many people believe the pandemic is over, England's deputy chief medical officer warns.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Very high" coronavirus rates in the UK at present mean there are hard months to come, England's deputy chief medical officer has warned.
Prof Jonathan Van-Tam told the BBC it was a concern that Covid levels were "running this hot, this early in the autumn season".
He said too many people believed the pandemic was now over.
Christmas and the winter months are "potentially going to be problematic", Prof Van-Tam warned.
The UK recorded 33,865 Covid cases on Tuesday and 293 deaths within 28 days of a positive test.

In a question and answer session with BBC Breakfast and BBC Radio 5 Live, Prof Van-Tam said that while cases appeared to have stabilised, they were very high, and above most of Europe.
He also said deaths were rising and there were signs infections were starting to "penetrate" older age groups.
The current levels of coronavirus meant caution was now needed, he said, adding that experts would be continuing to analyse the data over the next days and weeks.
How Christmas is affected out would depend on a "whole range of behaviours", he said.
Face coverings and the caution people took in interacting with others, along with the speed of vaccinations would be "a big determinant between what happens now and the darkest months of the winter".
Using a football analogy, he said: "I would say we're kind of half-time in extra time, and I think the final whistle in terms of - I can't predict it - but my personal view is that we've got a few more months to run, and I think we'll be in a much calmer set of waters by spring."
He urged people to have Covid jabs, boosters and flu vaccines, adding that scientists needed to keep an eye on any new or emerging variants of the virus.

I go back to an argument I made earlier about how many will now be more concerned about the cost of living crisis this winter than covid. Van Tam also says things will be much calmer by spring, which basically means winter will be winter when it comes to respiratory virus infections, and if we can't cope this winter it means we need more capacity in our health services, not covid measures.

 

[Bikeman78]

Here we go, more talking up of covid concerns this winter and claims too many people think the pandemic is over:

Covid: Hard months to come in pandemic for UK, says Van-Tam

Too many people believe the pandemic is over, England's deputy chief medical officer warns.

www.bbc.co.uk

I go back to an argument I made earlier about how many will now be more concerned about the cost of living crisis this winter than covid. Van Tam also says things will be much calmer by spring, which basically means winter will be winter when it comes to respiratory virus infections, and if we can't cope this winter it means we need more capacity in our health services, not covid measures.

They said "it will be better in spring" last year. For most people the pandemic is more or less over. If they've had both their vaccines, it doesn't get much better than that.

 

[MikeWM]

They said "it will be better in spring" last year.

Indeed. Are we going to have this 'bait and switch' every year?

To be fair, it *was* better in spring this year - but even so they still kept us locked-down until the end of March, shops shut until mid-April, and cinemas etc. until late May - pretty much when Spring was already over.

 

[Lampshade]

‘Early’ in the Autumn season? We’re pretty much exactly halfway through.

 

[westv]

‘Early’ in the Autumn season? We’re pretty much exactly halfway through.

Non meteorological Autumn starts on the 21/9

 

[island]

MP's are being told to wear masks in Parliament due to a rise in cases. Strange how they think that the virus will magically stop transmitting through a little piece of blue plastic - whilst all the MP's are squashed up together on their benches.

MPs told to wear masks in Parliament amid rising Covid cases

Tours of Parliament have also been cancelled as health body warns of greater risk of transmission.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sir Lindsay Hoyle has been criticised by MPs after details of the new policy were first seen in the media rather than being announced in the House.

 

[kez19]

Here we go, more talking up of covid concerns this winter and claims too many people think the pandemic is over:

Covid: Hard months to come in pandemic for UK, says Van-Tam

Too many people believe the pandemic is over, England's deputy chief medical officer warns.

www.bbc.co.uk

I go back to an argument I made earlier about how many will now be more concerned about the cost of living crisis this winter than covid. Van Tam also says things will be much calmer by spring, which basically means winter will be winter when it comes to respiratory virus infections, and if we can't cope this winter it means we need more capacity in our health services, not covid measures.

What happened to living with it? Was it not he or Whitty that said that too? Sure I heard similar in Scotland regarding to live with it, this just screams double standards and again I see no media criticism for this other than rinse/repeat. 18 months, nearly 2 years and this still comes back.

 

[Lampshade]

Non meteorological Autumn starts on the 21/9

Yep, and runs until 21/12 - 90 days, this is day 42.

 

[kez19]

Very much agree. What bugs me is that it doesn’t really seem to be the print media driving this, but the likes of BBC and Sky, who one would think would know a bit better.

I absolutely yearn for 1990s style of TV news presented by heavyweights like Peter Sissons or Michael Buerk, when it was actually about imparting news, not point-scoring or who can whip up the biggest frenzy as is the case now.

Add to that the effect of social media where someone post something and all their cronies will respond with “I agree completely, aren’t you wonderful”. All about picking holes rather than proposing solutions to problems.

That’s been my suspicion in media it’s the like of the BBC/Sky driving this but it has a reality show feel to it (ok it’s news) but the overblown reports on it’s beyond a parody.

So when are BBC going to act like grown up and ask governments for a breakdown in COVID numbers and more to the point tell us what people have died from other than COVID? The mask is slipping slowly and I still believe the media are exposing themselves in this.

 

[westv]

Yep, and runs until 21/12 - 90 days, this is day 42.

And there was me thinking that last month was September.

 

[Yew]

Non meteorological Autumn starts on the 21/9

Non meteorological? Isn’t that a bit like saying a “non seasonal season”?

 

[brad465]

I saw a tweet earlier (can't find it now), about how either the BBC or media outlets in general gave days of coverage to the death caused by Alec Baldwin's shooting accident on set, but hardly any coverage to the 293 deaths linked to covid reported yesterday. By the same logic we should be giving lots of coverage to the total number of deaths from various cancers, heart disease, strokes, etc., which would be at least comparable, if not higher. But as ever, covid brainwashing has made it all that matters to some.

 

[bramling]

I saw a tweet earlier (can't find it now), about how either the BBC or media outlets in general gave days of coverage to the death caused by Alec Baldwin's shooting accident on set, but hardly any coverage to the 293 deaths linked to covid reported yesterday. By the same logic we should be giving lots of coverage to the total number of deaths from various cancers, heart disease, strokes, etc., which would be at least comparable, if not higher. But as ever, covid brainwashing has made it all that matters to some.

Yes I'd have much more respect for the media if the devoted time to analysing excess deaths. This would, of course, likely be firmly in the "too difficult" box. Much easier to spew out a figure of Covid deaths.

 

[kez19]

I saw a tweet earlier (can't find it now), about how either the BBC or media outlets in general gave days of coverage to the death caused by Alec Baldwin's shooting accident on set, but hardly any coverage to the 293 deaths linked to covid reported yesterday. By the same logic we should be giving lots of coverage to the total number of deaths from various cancers, heart disease, strokes, etc., which would be at least comparable, if not higher. But as ever, covid brainwashing has made it all that matters to some.

That’s common sense right here!

Yes I'd have much more respect for the media if the devoted time to analysing excess deaths. This would, of course, likely be firmly in the "too difficult" box. Much easier to spew out a figure of Covid deaths.

I have more patience for RT than I do BBC or Sky that says something!

 

[MikeWM]

This may come as a surprise to some, given the media haven't given it attention, but for around 3 months the ONS have been reporting excess deaths, but we'd be in excess anyway if no deaths with covid were being reported:

This is pretty alarming, as it would seem you would expect deaths to be *below average* at this point after we've had excess death recently due to a pandemic, especially a pandemic that largely was most serious in those who were already fraile anyway.

At the very least we should be paying a *great deal* of attention as to why this is happening. Reduced access to healthcare over the last 19 months? Suicides? Other illnesses that are taking advantage of weakened immunity? Something else?

 

[bramling]

This is pretty alarming, as it would seem you would expect deaths to be *below average* at this point after we've had excess death recently due to a pandemic, especially a pandemic that largely was most serious in those who were already fraile anyway.

At the very least we should be paying a *great deal* of attention as to why this is happening. Reduced access to healthcare over the last 19 months? Suicides? Other illnesses that are taking advantage of weakened immunity? Something else?

I'd say it's pretty much guaranteed that "reduced access to healthcare over the last 19 months" will be starting to bite. So many accounts of people having difficulty accessing GP services in particular, or being fobbed off when they do.

Weakened immunity probably too. A relative of mine is currently laid up with a pretty nasty cold, pretty much the full set of Covid symptoms yet has had two negative tests (had a second as he was so sure it was Covid he didn't believe the first).

 

[MikeWM]

Non meteorological? Isn’t that a bit like saying a “non seasonal season”?

Even though I'm well aware of the technical definitions I suspect that when I started this thread I was thinking of autumn as September, October, November.

While it may be true in theory, I don't think many people think of mid-December days as 'autumn'.

 

[westv]

Non meteorological? Isn’t that a bit like saying a “non seasonal season”?

Meteorological as in the Met Office.

 

[nw1]

Non meteorological Autumn starts on the 21/9

Non-meteorlogical autumn is a bit of a meaningless season though. It suggests that December is more 'autumnal' than September, which is scarcely the truth. Perhaps in a Mediterranean climate with long extended summers, but not in the UK and the rest of northwestern Europe.

People call the 21/9-21/12 season 'astronomical autumn' but that doesn't make sense either. Astronomical autumn should surely be the three months surrounding the autumn equinox, i.e. the season of intermediate day length between summer and winter, so something like 6/8-6/11.

21/9 - 21/12, if it has a name, is merely 'the period of the year when the days are short and still getting shorter'. Mostly in autumn, yes, but the last few weeks in winter. Likewise, it's a bit depressing thinking that one has to wait until 21/3 for spring to arrive. By the time we get to that date, it's only 3 months until the nights start drawing in again!

Most people do not consider December an autumn month, I suspect, any mroe than they consider June a spring month. To me the Sep-Oct-Nov definition is the one that makes sense.

Even though I'm well aware of the technical definitions I suspect that when I started this thread I was thinking of autumn as September, October, November.

While it may be true in theory, I don't think many people think of mid-December days as 'autumn'.

That's the thing. Whereas something like September 18th would probably be considered by most as autumn. Perhaps even August 18th, knowing our current summer climate

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I saw a tweet earlier (can't find it now), about how either the BBC or media outlets in general gave days of coverage to the death caused by Alec Baldwin's shooting accident on set, but hardly any coverage to the 293 deaths linked to covid reported yesterday. By the same logic we should be giving lots of coverage to the total number of deaths from various cancers, heart disease, strokes, etc., which would be at least comparable, if not higher. But as ever, covid brainwashing has made it all that matters to some.

The 293 included several days of catching up as some areas had not been able to report because of a systems failure; the BBC did mention that on their main bulletin at 18.00. It's not a "real" 293 in one day, and a look at the "by date of death" figures on the official website supports that. There is also the consideration that the figure is "for any reason within 28 days of a positive test" and at this time of year deaths from other reasons tend to be higher. It follows that there will be more people dying within the 28 days regardless of what the virus does. That, again, is demonstrated on the official website where it gives a weekly figure where the virus has appeared on the death certificate of 974 compared to 1,141 using the blunt 28 days measure.

Note also that this is where the virus has simply been listed on the certificate; that doesn't mean it was the primary cause for the 974.