Re: Coronavirus
 

Interesting it may be but where is the evidence that the report was included in any advice SAGE gave to the Government?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Indeed and if not, why not? Who justified it's exclusion and on what basis? Who set the remit of any reporting?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Mrs Pierre, started with a cough in Dec 2019, which ran until April 2020, it was a productive cough, ( without being too graphic) but she was coughing up white phlegm for four months. It was very bad at some points with her having trouble breathing. She had a lung cancer scan in March, she was told it might be Cop-d ( which could be anything. The scan said there was no cancer but signs of scarring due to infection. Since the scans we’ve heard sweet FA from the GP.

She is, getting better, gradually. She’s not on medication now.

Who knows what it was, but an anti-body test might help, that is what we need now.

Re: Coronavirus
 

One would assume it was either the modelling group it was submitted to or SAGE and any decision to exclude would have been by peer review.

Re: Coronavirus
 

One would assume... yes.

Would be interesting to see that confirmed. Also what were the specialist areas of the respective people on opposing positions. Who was setting agendas for any meeting and was there an overarching “steer”. One only has to set a series of working assumptions to change the outputs significantly.

One would hope not. As I say, it’d be interesting. If the process has failed then perhaps it needs redesigned for future emergencies.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I agree but the time for that is when the inevitable inquiry happens. Meanwhile the media are doing the usual and jumping to conclusions.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm no fan of the media during the response (see earlier post re: stupid questions and trying to get the Government to commit to arbitrary timings. Doing things in the right order, at the right time, is bett)er than throwing kids back into school for summer because 4 weeks ago we thought it might be possible and the media reframed it.

But it's important that we learn from the first wave as we gradually, and slowly, ease restrictions. I think the time for behavioural scientists has been and gone.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Again problems will arise between the government's national view and regional/local/personal views.

Some individuals/businesses/localities/regions will want to see restrictions eased in different ways if at all. Your view will be coloured by your experiences and expertise.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Quite true, London, Manchester, Leeds etc are in a whole different game than Tidworth, Holbeach, Ilkley, and Lanchester . . . I'd be surprised if the latter four even had a case of the virus

Re: Coronavirus
 

The next round of testing for the NHS app has been postponed as the Government considers switching to the Apple/Google solution: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52995881

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m currently in hospital and have been since Monday, following a serious complication, thats needed urgent surgical care. And a patient sharing the same bay as us tested positive for Covid-19. I now have to self isolate for 14 days from today’s date.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Very sorry to hear that, Mick. I wish you a speedy recovery.

Re: Coronavirus
 

+1

Re: Coronavirus
 

Sorry to hear this awful news, Mick - hope you keep safe, and get well soon.

Take care.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Get well soon Mick