Read on Twitter
"scientific committees that advised Johnson didn’t study..lockdown adopted..in China..The scientists’ reasoning [sic]: Britons..simply wouldn’t accept such restrictions."
Johnson listened to scientists--but his scientists were incapable of processing data http://nationalpost.com/wcm/cb7226c2-6cab-4609-b44b-10e6cfa20a08
Johnson listened to scientists--but his scientists were incapable of processing data http://nationalpost.com/wcm/cb7226c2-6cab-4609-b44b-10e6cfa20a08
"UK scientists were also.. mostly convinced–and many still are–that, once..virus escaped China, quarantine measures would likely not succeed."
"almost no attention was paid to preparing a program of mass testing"
"almost no attention was paid to preparing a program of mass testing"
"UK scientists were..following closely a well-laid plan to fight a flu pandemic – not this deadlier disease"
"lesson..may be that governments and scientists worldwide must increase the transparency of their planning so that their thinking and assumptions are open to challenge."
"lesson..may be that governments and scientists worldwide must increase the transparency of their planning so that their thinking and assumptions are open to challenge."
"As they watched China impose its lockdown, the British scientists [sic] assumed that such drastic actions would never be acceptable in a democracy like the UK. Among those modeling the outbreak,.. such stringent counter-measures were not, at first, examined."
"'We didn’t model it because it didn’t seem to be on the agenda. And Imperial..didn’t look at it either.' The NERVTAG committee agreed, noting in its minutes that tough measures in the short term would be pointless"
"That limited approach mirrored the UK’s longstanding pandemic flu strategy...'UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy 2011,'..stated..'working presumption will be that Government will not impose any such restrictions.'"
"flu plan..created a 'cognitive bias.'"
"'We had in our minds that COVID-19 was a nasty flu and needed to be treated as such..The implication was it was a disease that could not be stopped and that it was ultimately not that deadly.'"
"'We had in our minds that COVID-19 was a nasty flu and needed to be treated as such..The implication was it was a disease that could not be stopped and that it was ultimately not that deadly.'"
Persons who prioritized racial/cultural supremacy ("Britons...simply wouldn't accept restrictions"), false analogies ("flu"), and unsound simulations (Imperial) over the undeniable fact that lockdown in China suppressed the outbreak are not "scientists." They are ideologues.
And they must never, ever again be relied upon for "scientific" advice.
Same for their counterparts in the US, who made the same witless arguments (same racial/cultural supremacy about non-Asians not accepting restrictions, same false analogy to flu, and same unsound simulations) over the undeniable fact that lockdown in China suppressed the outbreak
