Media Coverage of COVID -19

[Domh245]

I think this is catch up after the well publicised issues with the testing system.

Doesn't seem to be the case comparing it to the last couple of weeks. 75% of the cases (England at least) are from samples within 3 days, and around 50% of them (2631) were from Monday

 

[GrahamD83]

Horribly misleading headline and article on the BBC

Covid-19: Daily reported UK cases rise by a quarter

There have been 6,178 cases in the UK in the last 24 hours, up 1,252 cases since Tuesday.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Cases increased by a quarter". Goes on to say 6 thousand and something new cases "in the last 24 hours"

Errr. No. If you go to the government data by sample date there isn't a day over 5,000. I think this is catch up after the well publicised issues with the testing system.

I wish they would stop this ritual of reporting the cases and deaths every teatime, especially when it's not a true representation of the past 24 hours. Just a weekly figure would be better in my opinion.

 

[adc82140]

The local cases rundown still shows this to be a localised northern and Midlands thing, not south east, south west or London.

 

[yorksrob]

France 24 is your outlet of choice for all things French, in the English language.

France has gone very light touch. OK so they may be mask enthusiasts, but they are dialling back a bit on that, only insisting on masks in crowded outdoor places.

There is a rule of 1000 on outdoor gatherings in local restriction areas, 5000 elsewhere (yes, really)

Table service only in bars, but this is the norm in a lot of establishments anyway.

No big parties. Rule of 10 indoors in high risk areas, can't see any restrictions elsewhere.

No funfairs, antique fairs etc where social distancing cannot be maintained.

Fingers crossed things level off, then it will help the argument.

I can't imagine heavy crowds at an antiques fare (unless Lovejoy himself was there).

 

[brad465]

The Daily Mail are certainly continuing their anti-approach to the plans of the next 6 months with this front page tomorrow (the other papers are mostly just reporting on the furlough alterations set to be announced tomorrow):

 

[kez19]

The Daily Mail are certainly continuing their anti-approach to the plans of the next 6 months with this front page tomorrow (the other papers are mostly just reporting on the furlough alterations set to be announced tomorrow):


View attachment 83868

I'm guessing as much as people hate the Daily Mail (as such) its maybe one of those occasions where the public will side more with the paper(s)?, I wouldn't be surprised if not weeks maybe coming months that all media start turning on governments.

I admit I might read my local but even to an extent at times it seems public opinion is slowly turning... when I say slowly, just say progressing slowly..

 

[brad465]

I'm guessing as much as people hate the Daily Mail (as such) its maybe one of those occasions where the public will side more with the paper(s)?, I wouldn't be surprised if not weeks maybe coming months that all media start turning on governments.

I admit I might read my local but even to an extent at times it seems public opinion is slowly turning... when I say slowly, just say progressing slowly..

Many others on here have suggested this, but the most likely occasions to see this shift are the end of the furlough scheme (I don't think any successor to this will do enough to mask economic problems and job losses) and the build-up to Christmas before the holiday itself.

 

[adc82140]

Whilst the Telegraph are not running the big headlines, they are reporting on the increasing dissent within the Conservative Party.

 

[Bantamzen]

The Mirror is also having a go now albeit with a slightly different angle, so you have two of the big tabloids from either side of the political spectrum turning on BoJo.

 

[DustyBin]

Many others on here have suggested this, but the most likely occasions to see this shift are the end of the furlough scheme (I don't think any successor to this will do enough to mask economic problems and job losses) and the build-up to Christmas before the holiday itself.

Agreed. The original scheme was very generous and my employer was able to make up my pay to 80% of the actual full amount so in truth being off work for 3 months was no hardship. I suspect neither the government nor the company I work for will be able to repeat that though. Whilst the new scheme may save jobs, I expect many recepients will have to accept a reduction in pay and living standards to varying degrees. I certainly have colleagues who, if for example, were asked to work a three day week for commensurate renumeration, would have to make quite drastic changes to their way of life. Whilst some people may have little sympathy for those facing ‘first world problems’, it’s not very nice seeing things unravel and having to lose what you’ve worked hard for through no fault of your own.

We’ll see what’s announced but I expect a sticking plaster as that’s all we can now afford....

 

[bramling]

Agreed. The original scheme was very generous and my employer was able to make up my pay to 80% of the actual full amount so in truth being off work for 3 months was no hardship. I suspect neither the government nor the company I work for will be able to repeat that though. Whilst the new scheme may save jobs, I expect many recepients will have to accept a reduction in pay and living standards to varying degrees. I certainly have colleagues who, if for example, were asked to work a three day week for commensurate renumeration, would have to make quite drastic changes to their way of life. Whilst some people may have little sympathy for those facing ‘first world problems’, it’s not very nice seeing things unravel and having to lose what you’ve worked hard for through no fault of your own.

We’ll see what’s announced but I expect a sticking plaster as that’s all we can now afford....

Whatever we see it clearly seems to have been a rush job, which doesn’t bode well. They’ve only had six months to prepare.

 

[DustyBin]

Whatever we see it clearly seems to have been a rush job, which doesn’t bode well. They’ve only had six months to prepare.

Foresight and preparation aren’t this government’s strong points, I think it’s safe to say!

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Foresight and preparation aren’t this government’s strong points, I think it’s safe to say!

It's the old cliché... if you fail to prepare, then you prepare to fail!

 

[trebor79]

Whatever we see it clearly seems to have been a rush job, which doesn’t bode well. They’ve only had six months to prepare.

Quite.
The nightmare scenario is a collapsed economy, broke public finances, our debt rating in junk territory and no money to fund the NHS and other essential services let alone nice things like museums and libraries.
I think we're heading in that direction. I can see all these nonsensical restrictions being maintained until there is some kind of general collapse at which point people will have far bigger things to worry about than catching a non fatal (for the vast majority) virus that makes them feel grotty for a few weeks.

 

[DustyBin]

Quite.
The nightmare scenario is a collapsed economy, broke public finances, our debt rating in junk territory and no money to find the NHS and other essential services let alone nice things like museums and libraries.
I think we're heading in that direction. I can see all these nonsensical restrictions being maintained until there is some kind of general collapse at which point people will have far bigger things to worry about than catching a non fatal (for the vast majority) virus that makes them feel grotty for a few weeks.

This is exactly where we are heading in my opinion and it worries me greatly....

 

[Darandio]

Revealed: Sir Patrick Vallance has £600,000 shareholding in firm contracted to develop vaccines

Government denies claims of potential conflict of interest, maintaining he is not involved in commercial decisions on coronavirus vaccines

www.telegraph.co.uk

The article is behind a paywall so I cannot quote the whole thing, here is the part I can grab.

Revealed: Sir Patrick Vallance has £600,000 shareholding in firm contracted to develop vaccines

Government denies claims of potential conflict of interest, maintaining he is not involved in commercial decisions on coronavirus vaccines.

The UK’s chief scientific adviser has a £600,000 shareholding in a drugs giant contracted to develop a Covid-19 vaccine for the Government, prompting claims of a potential conflict of interest....

From what i'm seeing in reaction to it on Twitter is a defence of it, as he was involved with GSK in the past at a high level it's entirely normal for him to have a shareholding.

But here we have a bloke trying to spread fear about how bad things are potentially going to be in the coming months and with claims that we may be close to a vaccine. A vaccine that he then quite clearly has a vested interest in should this company be successful. Surely i'm not the only one uncomfortable with that considering his constant frontline position to the public?

 

[Domh245]

The article is behind a paywall so I cannot quote the whole thing, here is the part I can grab.

The article is here:

The UK’s chief scientific adviser has a £600,000 shareholding in a drugs giant contracted to develop a Covid-19 vaccine for the Government, prompting claims of a potential conflict of interest.

Sir Patrick Vallance, who also chairs the Government’s expert advisory panel on vaccines, holds a deferred bonus of 43,111 shares in GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) worth £600,000 from his time as president of the multinational drug company, The Telegraph can reveal.

He has already cashed in more than £5 million worth of shares he received from the company during his tenure from 2012 until March 2018, when he became the Government’s chief scientific officer.

Accounts show he held 404,201 GSK shares when he left, worth £6.1 million at current values.

In July, GSK and drugs multinational Sanofi agreed a deal with the UK Government to supply it with up to 60 million doses of Covid-19 vaccine, subject to final contract.

It has a similar deal with the US Government for an initial 100 million doses as part of Donald Trump’s Operation Warp Speed.

Earlier this week at the televised briefing heralding the latest Covid-19 crackdown (see video below), Sir Patrick predicted the first few doses of an effective Covid-19 vaccine might be available before the end of this year, but said it was far more likely any breakthrough will happen during the first six months of 2021.

A senior Tory MP and former Cabinet minister said Sir Patrick should have disclosed his interest.

“The policy of this Government is to try to suppress Covid-19 at every opportunity until we get a vaccine,” said the MP.

“That makes it more likely that a vaccine will be prioritised by the Government and he happens to be holding shares in one of the leading companies that are developing it. It is a potential conflict of interest.

“If he is making decisions on vaccines and advising the Government on them, then he either needs to divest himself of the shares or make a declaration every time he touches on the subject.

"In the Commons, every time MPs raise an issue in which there is a registered interest, they have to declare it. Every time he is talking about vaccines or on TV, he should put it on the table."

GSK is one of more than 20 drug firms racing to develop a Covid-19 vaccine. The successful companies stand to make millions. The US Government has already provided £1.65 billion to GSK-Sanofi to support the development of its vaccine, including clinical trials.

GSK’s share price rose by nearly two per cent after it announced its partnership with Sanofi to manufacture hundreds of millions of doses, if human clinical trials due to begin shortly go to plan.

A Government spokesman confirmed Sir Patrick held a deferred share bonus which would mature in April 2021 but refused to reveal the number of shares or disclose their value.

He said he had sold his other GSK shares before starting his Government role or after a mandatory holding period.

"Upon his appointment, appropriate steps were taken to manage the Government chief scientific adviser’s (GCSA) interests in line with advice provided at the time,” said the spokesman.

Sir Patrick is “closely involved” in the operations of the Government’s vaccines taskforce as well as chairing the expert advisory panel on vaccines, according to Whitehall sources.

However, the spokesman said: “The GCSA has no input into contractual and commercial decisions on vaccine procurement which are taken by ministers following a robust cross-Government approvals regime.”

On the council for science and technology register, his personal and business interests state: “GSK shareholdings (mandatory holding period for deferred bonus)."

 

[MikeWM]

But here we have a bloke trying to spread fear about how bad things are potentially going to be in the coming months and with claims that we may be close to a vaccine. A vaccine that he then quite clearly has a vested interest in should this company be successful. Surely i'm not the only one uncomfortable with that considering his constant frontline position to the public?

It seems very wrong to me. Even discounting the current situation for a moment, having a major financial interest in *one* company in a sector for which he is a senior 'advisor' to government, would seem remarkably unfair on the other companies in that sector.

 

[brad465]

From what i'm seeing in reaction to it on Twitter is a defence of it, as he was involved with GSK in the past at a high level it's entirely normal for him to have a shareholding.

But here we have a bloke trying to spread fear about how bad things are potentially going to be in the coming months and with claims that we may be close to a vaccine. A vaccine that he then quite clearly has a vested interest in should this company be successful. Surely i'm not the only one uncomfortable with that considering his constant frontline position to the public?

It seems very wrong to me. Even discounting the current situation for a moment, having a major financial interest in *one* company in a sector for which he is a senior 'advisor' to government, would seem remarkably unfair on the other companies in that sector.

I agree, so wonder perhaps how much he wants the current restrictions to exist so a hypothetically successful vaccine can show off huge potential, get distributed more widely if less of the population have immunity, so there's more money in it for him (I assume this maybe stating the obvious).

 

[DustyBin]

If true this is frankly shocking.... I'm not by any means making allegations, but this is a clear conflict of interest.

I'm not familiar with the ethics or professional codes/standards of the Royal College of Physicians, but I'd be very suprised if they tolerate a conflict of interest of this nature. Certainly if I was to encounter a conflict of interest of any type at work I would be expected to declare it immediately and almost certainly end my involvement in the activity through which the conflict had arose.

Anybody defending this clearly doesn't understand the concept of conflict of interest or why professional bodies have strict rules around how to act should one arise. The rules are there to protect the individual concerned from allegations of wrong doing and to protect the reputation of the profession and professional body generally.

Even if the conflict was declared and deemed acceptable, I consider it inappropriate and the allegations being made in the various comments sections would very much support this view; he simply shouldn't be in this position. Maybe a classic case of 'do as I say not as I do'?....

 

[Bantamzen]

The article is here:

A dodgy scientific adviser for an even dodgier government. Who would have guessed? Anyone still up for a lockdown until vaccine strategy.....?

 

[DustyBin]

A dodgy scientific adviser for an even dodgier government. Who would have guessed? Anyone still up for a lockdown until vaccine strategy.....?

Rather damning here:

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

Reading the transcript of Whitty/Vallance lecture yesterday. I quote: “so about eight per cent, so 3 million or so people, may have been infected and have antibodies. It means that the vast majority of us are not protected in any way and are susceptible to this disease”.

Now had he said this on the floor of the House, he would have been guilty of misleading the House & made to come back, apologise profusely & set the record straight. But he wasn’t & also didn’t take any questions. I have to tell you that it’s not a matter of opinion. He’s LYING.

We know from the shape of the daily deaths vs time curve in U.K. & elsewhere that there is a force which caused the rapidly expanding pandemic in March to slow down & then to continue spreading at an ever decreasing rate, having already begun to decline before lockdown. This is..

...crucial. As it wasn’t lockdown which terminated the rapid expansion, alternative candidates for that force, which we are certain exists by inspection of the graph, are required. There is ONLY ONE candidate for that force. It is reducing remaining population susceptibility.

As that fell continuously, R was soon below 1 & stayed like that for 16 weeks straight. That our curve is the same shape as that in multiple other countries, including Sweden, ignoring our puny efforts to influence transmission of this respiratory virus, tells us with 100%...

...confidence that a substantial proportion of the U.K. population has already been infected & most have survived. Crucially it’s been demonstrated by at least 4 “Oxbridge quality” labs in several countries around the world, than in all cases, 20-50% of people had T-cell immune..

..recognition of SARS-COV-2 BEFORE the new virus was even identified. Add those newly infected to those already resistan

 

[greyman42]

I am surprised that the media do not seem to have picked up on Rishi Sunak's comment towards the end of his conference which was "we must learn to live with it and live without fear", referring to Covid 19. It sounds like good advice to me and contradicts Johnsons doom and gloom.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

I am surprised that the media do not seem to have picked up on Rishi Sunak's comment towards the end of his conference which was "we must learn to live with it and live without fear", referring to Covid 19. It sounds like good advice to me and contradicts Johnsons doom and gloom.

I think the Daily Mail has that on it's front page today.

 

[DB]

I think the Daily Mail has that on it's front page today.

Well, if the DM is pushing that message on its front page there is at least hope that things might change, given how strong an influencer it is on public opinion.

 

[Freightmaster]

I think the Daily Mail has that on it's front page today.

 

[bramling]

I think the Daily Mail has that on it's front page today.

Sunak is positioning.

The furlough, whilst a popular measure for those who enjoyed it, was used in ways which weren’t really envisaged, which resulted in the cost running away. Then came Eat Out To Spread Virus, another half billion. He’s now twigged that paying this off is all going to emerge as a salient issue just at the time Boris replacement is likely to be happening, which I think most people suspect is quite possibly going to be next summer.

So now is the time to turn off the tap. He’s raised his profile, and remember he only has to worry about winning a Conservative leadership contest, not a general election for four more years.

 

[yorkie]

Just a gentle reminder to all that if you are referring to any external source in any forum post (such as making reference to an article, headline etc) we do ask that you please include:

• a quote of some relevant text (if that is not possible then a summary/description) in quote tags (or spoiler tags where appropriate)
• details of the source (a hyperlink if at all possible)
• a comment of your own

Please bear in mind blind people cannot see images and do rely on text alternatives being provided. It is also difficult for them to navigate to external sites, go through all the menus to find the relevant text and navigate back to the forum.

Many thanks in advance

Rather damning here:

Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!

Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads

threadreaderapp.com

I agree; anyone who claims that only people who have detectable antibodies were infected/exposed to the virus are either:

• lacking in knowledge; and/or
• lying

For someone in his position to be unaware of the role of T-cells would be extremely incompetent; therefore I would expect this can be ruled out, and he is indeed lying.

 

[DustyBin]

Just a gentle reminder to all that if you are referring to any external source in any forum post (such as making reference to an article, headline etc) we do ask that you please include:

• a quote of some relevant text (if that is not possible then a summary/description) in quote tags (or spoiler tags where appropriate)
• details of the source (a hyperlink if at all possible)
• a comment of your own

Please bear in mind blind people cannot see images and do rely on text alternatives being provided. It is also difficult for them to navigate to external sites, go through all the menus to find the relevant text and navigate back to the forum.

Many thanks in advance

I agree; anyone who claims that only people who have detectable antibodies were infected/exposed to the virus are either:

• lacking in knowledge; and/or
• lying

For someone in his position to be unaware of the role of T-cells would be extremely incompetent; therefore I would expect this can be ruled out, and he is indeed lying.

No problem!

I see Sky News (on the TV) are reporting that the ONS now estimate there were 9,600 new 'cases' per day in England alone last week.... I've no idea how they arrived at this figure. It's a great way to cause further panic though!

 

[Jamesrob637]

I am surprised that the media do not seem to have picked up on Rishi Sunak's comment towards the end of his conference which was "we must learn to live with it and live without fear", referring to Covid 19. It sounds like good advice to me and contradicts Johnsons doom and gloom.

I'd happily listen to Rishi Sunak over Boris Johnson. The man speaks sense. Thanks to Rishi I have been able to keep afloat since March.