#12734
Flumpty wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 5:20 pm
From the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/52862637

It's getting closer............
I am sorry but I just do not get this at all. Football and rugby are,by implication, full on contact sports. Aside from the heightened risks to professional players returning to play, the real danger is that the public generally perceive that social distancing is now less important and thousands of park kickabouts etc resume?

Either it is ok to have full contact with other people, in whatever circumstances, or it isn't. This further relaxation really worries me and it seems to me that financial considerations led by the perennially selfish Football Premier League have driven this decision.

Why should I feel the need to use hand sanitiser on entering and leaving B and Q when I see on TV 30 rugby players engaging in what amounts to the closest physical contact you can legally have in public?!
iBozz, Yonah, Grumpy Old Shark and 1 others liked this
#12735
chris1850 wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 7:26 pm
Flumpty wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 5:20 pm
From the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/52862637

It's getting closer............
I am sorry but I just do not get this at all.
From the linked article ""The wait is over. Live British sport will shortly be back on in safe and carefully controlled environments," said the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Oliver Dowden. "

You don't have to look to closely to find people alreaday gathering in groups. Maybe its because they're special they can gather together.
Image

if / when it does crack off again, these are the type of people to thank.

Image
Last edited by Flumpty on Sat May 30, 2020 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
#12737
MikeGC wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 8:17 pm
I thought Bill Beaumont was pretty clear in his BBC interview this morning - clearly still unsafe (in his opinion)
The Government has passed it across to the individual controlling bodies to decide when they can start, so if the RFU (& BB) say not until x date, then x date it will be.

& we'll have no choice but to accept (and hopefully respect) their decision.
#12739
Not just rugby, not just sport, but life in general will have to bite this bullet sometime.

It will never be completely safe to relax restrictions absent a vaccine. The fastest a vaccine has ever been produced was four years, the recent average is about ten years and we've been waiting for an HIV vaccine since 1984. Two-thirds of searches are eventually abandoned without success.

There will inevitably be an increase in infections and deaths whenever restrictions are relaxed, but there will also be inevitable bsuffering and death as a result of extending lockdown.

I'm just thankful I'm not the one having to make the judgment call.

Oh yes, and as of yesterday, I'm now vulnerable apparently! :sad:
Flumpty, DaveAitch liked this
#12741
The clear difference is that for the Prem to restart, all the players and everyone involved at the grounds is going to be tested every week (assuming rugby follows similar procedures to football). Anyone positive won’t be playing, ergo it’s safe, or as safe as it can be, for them to be in close physical contact.

You can say that’s unfair for the general public not being able to do the same, but I reckon a large majority of the sport watching public would be happy with this approach if the players are too.
#12742
PRL reckons it'll take 4 weeks of pre-season before players are ready to play again - but sports scientists think 6 weeks - that puts us at early to mid July.

That said - I think it's mental that they're even considering playing the rest of this season, and frankly it should be binned off in favour of starting 20/21 when it's possible (either run as a regular season with a September start or, if the situation calls for it, a later start as if it were a RWC year ).
iBozz, Yonah liked this
#12745
I personally think this situation will be used as a way of moving us to a global season and next season won’t start till Jan/Feb next season so it won’t matter that this season may not finish till September or even October, World Rugby and Bill Beaumont have been chasing this for a while. That will be our new normal I predict.

Not sure how it will work with Pro14 and Top14 fitting into line as there is no way they will wait till 2021 to start again as they have already canned this season but I certainly think as of now we won’t see our normal season in the Prem again.
#12756
Van Cannonball wrote:
Sun May 31, 2020 12:53 am
Anyone positive won’t be playing, ergo it’s safe, or as safe as it can be, for them to be in close physical contact.

Have I misunderstood something?
Didn't the latest guidance say that if someone gets symptoms then tests positive, then anyone they have had close contact with should isolate for 14 days?? That would mean if a player tests positive then both teams would have to go into isolation.

That would be everyone from both teams isolating ?
#12761
The testing regime in place for football makes it one of the safest industries I can think of in terms of infection control.

I don't really understand the argument that elite sport starting again sends the wrong message. I'd have thought broadcasts of elite sport hosted at empty stadiums sends about as strong a message as you could wish for that life isn't to return to normal yet.
SimonG liked this
#12762
Flumpty wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 8:12 pm
chris1850 wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 7:26 pm
Flumpty wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 5:20 pm
From the BBC https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/52862637

It's getting closer............
I am sorry but I just do not get this at all.
From the linked article ""The wait is over. Live British sport will shortly be back on in safe and carefully controlled environments," said the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, Oliver Dowden. "

You don't have to look to closely to find people alreaday gathering in groups. Maybe its because they're special they can gather together.
Image

if / when it does crack off again, these are the type of people to thank.

Image
Generally agree with you Flumpty except that the first photo is a bit misleading. 2 helicopters needed to land on the beach which forced all those people to get very close together, that was not necessarily their choice. The idiots in that situation are the people who thought it was a good idea to go tomb-stoning AT ALL, let alone during a lockdown, forcing the need for 2 helicopters to land.

Apparently, despite a lot a media coverage and several serious injuries, people are still doing it!!
#12764
Sadly not just the populace. With the rest of Europe only just beginning to open up when their numbers are far far lower than in the UK , AFTER a long period of track and trace as well as lockdown, then it's pretty obvious we are jumping the gun.
With around half of all cases asymptomatic (and with unknown infectivity) and not actually having demonstrated any real success in track and trace then it's a huge gamble.....We don't even have an official mechanism for quick local feedback of the impact of relaxation....
iBozz liked this
#12792
The chances of achieving a vaccine giving lifelong immunity in the near future is remote. Lots of labs trying as it’s a potential goldmine. None of the other known corona viruses have life long immunity. The probability is that a vaccine with partial effectiveness will be developed which will then be modified each year as the virus mutates (cf influenza ). The best hope is that it’s infectivity drops and it disappears naturally.
The notion that testing protects you is a fallacy. It tells you what that persons status is at one moment in time. If they are coughed on 2 minutes after the test it won’t pick that up and you can only test so often.
There is now a long list of personal characteristics that increase or decrease your chance of dying from Covid 19. Young fit adults have a pretty low risk. The government strategy has always been about stopping the NHS being overwhelmed. It’s not interested in individuals. The percentage of people who have raised antibody titres is still in single figures. The best way of pushing that up to provide herd immunity would be to rigorously protect the elderly and medically vulnerable but allow the fit working population to return to normal life. Quite a few will be asymptomatic and others will have a mild illness. Most of the population will have immunity within months. A small percentage will die. Our complete unwillingness to accept death as part of life means that we risk ruining the lives of millions of people. Quality of life is as important as quantity- most cancer patients will tell you that.
Unless we grasp that nettle I cannot see an end to this anytime soon.
poyntonshark, iBozz, Yonah and 2 others liked this
#12795
H's D wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:43 pm
Sadly not just the populace. With the rest of Europe only just beginning to open up when their numbers are far far lower than in the UK , AFTER a long period of track and trace as well as lockdown, then it's pretty obvious we are jumping the gun.
With around half of all cases asymptomatic (and with unknown infectivity) and not actually having demonstrated any real success in track and trace then it's a huge gamble.....We don't even have an official mechanism for quick local feedback of the impact of relaxation....
Going a bit off topic but I'm afraid H's D that I simply don't buy the "Britain is crap, everyone else is wonderful" bollox. France has had many of the same issues as the UK and their PPE shortages were worse (not least because they incinerated almost 1.5Billion masks as the virus arrived in Europe). They also had several hospitals totally overwhelmed, which we broadly avoided over here (don't forget that they are much less densely populated that the UK). In Germany they appear to have done a very good job of keeping this at bay (although I doubt their statistics) but they are now squabbling about the lifting of the lock-down as the various states within the country have a lot of autonomy (much like our home nations doing everything slightly differently, but worse).

All in all every country has had problems and has made mistakes somewhere along the line.
Monty9, Yonah, ageinghoody liked this
#12796
WillC is spot on and HsD is an example of all the people believing what the British press are telling them about the rest of Europe and how bad the UK is.

In Spain in the last 3 days the government have announced zero Covid related deaths yet the Catalan government have announced 148 in the same 3 days (go figure), in total the Catalan government say we have had 13,000+ Covid related deaths in Catalonia yet in the official Spanish numbers reported to the world only 5,000 are included. I´m not saying either figure is right but that would suggest the 50,000+ excess deaths already recorded in Spain is closer to the actual number than the 27,000 reported. I appreciate nowhere will be perfectly right on their figures but at least in the UK you are including care home deaths but when Spain for example isn´t its impossible to compare figures. Its very political here and not in a good way.

A couple of other things, we have no track and trace of any kind, our ERTE (furlough) is a fraction of that available in the UK (about 30%) and most still haven´t received a penny even since March. We aren´t coming out of lockdown slower, bars have been open for nearly 4 weeks (2 in Barcelona). Hair salon and shops for the same length of time and we only went into lockdown 1 week before you. We just had a period of been confined to our homes.

Hospitals have been over ran, people literally found dead in care homes after the people running them just left the residents there (2 separate places this happened).

I don´t know enough about Italy or other places as I am not there and I don´t believe the media but I imagine it similar.
Yonah liked this
#12798
Chris Pennell was on BBCR4 this morning (he's a type 1 diabetic btw) and he said it takes up to 8 weeks to get match fit from restarting training. Perhaps backs a little less but that sort of period for front rows otherwise contested scrums are too dangerous.

Obviously much of what Davenport Shark wrote is bang on. What I find difficult to understand is:- The Govts say they have followed the science throughout, if they haven't then why haven't the chief scientists resigned?
W4rriorz1980 liked this
#12801
WillC wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:52 pm

Going a bit off topic but I'm afraid H's D that I simply don't buy the "Britain is crap, everyone else is wonderful" bollox.


Where on earth do get "everyone else is wonderful?" I made no such suggestion. I was just pointing out that we are jumping the gun judging by what others have done...They have waited until infection levels are much lower before releasing lockdowns.

Every country has some issues, but we appear to have almost every issue going....and I can't find any particlular metric which indicates we have done well in comparison with others in at least one respect...

As for believing what the press say: I only believe and accept those opinions which are supported by the facts, and it certainly isn't just some of the British press that are indicating we have done fairly badly in dealing with this epidemic: Foreign Governments, their press, WHO and most scientific opinion and analysis indicate that we haven't exactly done well in all of this...especially in comparison to those countries that took early decisive action (following the gold standard science of test, trace, isolate).

Moreover i would certainly not swap places with the US, Brazil or much of the third world. They appear to have done worse or seem on course for that judgement. Wgereas I would sqap places with Australia and N.Z. in how quickly and effectively they reacted.

Judgment will come far later but when government ministers indicated that anything less than 20K deaths would be considered a success in terms of their policy & strategy in dealing with Covid in mid March I certainly took note.
Last edited by H's D on Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:03 pm, edited 3 times in total.
WillC liked this
#12804
Lord Elpus wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:36 pm

Obviously much of what Davenport Shark wrote is bang on. What I find difficult to understand is:- The Govts say they have followed the science throughout, if they haven't then why haven't the chief scientists resigned?
I've found the "following the science" sound byte quite a disingenuous one from the Gvt.

Firstly I'm not sure it is possible to "follow the science" in respect of public health strategy for a novel virus given that there are valid scientific arguments in each case for pursuing or not pursuing a particular course.

Secondly, with the above in mind, Gvt's role is to make political and governmental decisions based on their own summation of the various advice taken. Gvt's role is not to outsource responsibility for governmental and political decision making to the professional advisers engaged to inform them on the technical issues.

"We are following the science" rather than taking governmental decisions based on the finest scientific advice available is similar to the strategy of avoiding if not refusing ministerial responsibility by 'proroguing' Parliament to avoid debate of a key constitutional issue based on advice given to the Head of State found by the highest court in the land to be 1. factually incorrect; and 2. procedurally incorrect even if the alleged facts did have basis.
#12806
MikeGC wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 6:49 pm
The low accuracy of the COVID test should raise concerns.
As does the official reluctance to perform multiple tests on each individual

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52906 ... um=custom7
Particularly in demanding care homes taking "recovered" Covid patients BEFORE confirming they are no longer infectious. Horrendous policy....
MikeGC liked this
#12808
I feel slightly sorry for government ministers. Ok I don’t because they have achieved what all politicians want and that is power. However most of them are arts graduates particularly Oxbridge lawyers. Having to be a mouthpiece on scientific issues and answering tricky medical questions from journalists must therefore be tricky for someone like Hancock.
The decision making however has been grossly flawed, too little too late and the government does have some blood on its hands. The role of the medical and scientific advisors is unclear but their influence must be substantial if only in a Sir Humphrey way. Every time I read the paper or watch a news bulletin yet another Professor of Virology, Epidemiology or Public Health emerges from the shadows of their labs or their modelling computers. What do all these extremely expensive animals do every day and why have they not had a contingency plan for such a virus? None of them seem to agree and every country is following a different route. You can bet your bottom dollar that Whitty will be knighted and Sir Patrick will be in the Lords by this time next year. They seem to be making it up as they go along. Ferguson has blown his chances. He was the golden boy and all his clever modelling has been no better than an educated guess from Steve Diamond.
Academic medicine is out of control in the U.K. and this pandemic shows what a phenomenal waste of time and money a lot of it is. Money that we spend to the benefit of the rest of the World. Better to actually finance properly the healthcare that we all want rather than try to develop treatments the NHS cannot afford.
DaveAitch liked this
#12811
An interesting perspective Davenport,,, why do you limit your "out of control" comment to this country. Surely it's more of a global issue....far too much concentration in the world on the fairly rare complex conditions of those that can pay for expensive treatments in the western nations, rather than ensuring a better standard of healthcare for simple common issues that kill far more impoverished people worldwide, where life expectancy is significantly less than here....
Or is there always scope for both?
I don't really agree that every other country is plotting their own route, most are only relaxing their personalised nation shutdowns when WHO's guidelines are met especially wrt infection control, so they are at least starting at around the same time. We have certainly set off far earlier (in order to keep in the race?) and have only just got into track and trace . I'm not even sure we have the same destination...We did'nt even accept 14 days isolation was more appropriate after infection than 7, which almost all countries within Europe and the rest of the world seem to follow..
What did you make of the initial decision to ignore all the commercial, research and University laboratory facilties (which all had their own internal and external quality assurance schemes) and limit our testing to the few centralised NHS (QA assured) Labs? Was that PHE or politically driven?
#12812
MikeGC wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 6:49 pm
The low accuracy of the COVID test should raise concerns.
As does the official reluctance to perform multiple tests on each individual

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52906 ... um=custom7
It's not lack of "accuracy" as such it's more a fundamental property of any medical Antigen test which then involves either culture or polymerase chain reaction multiplication is always only likely to be accurate when POSITIVE. It only means you were shedding virus at that time.
Negative results just mean "we didn't find evidence of virus on that day on that sample".

Repeated NEGATIVES are always required over a period before drawing any firm conclusions, especially with a new condition when we don't even know the reliability, onset, duration or persistent/intermittent nature of virus shedding.....
and that doesn't even include negative results due to failures in sampling technique...relevant for the home test kits and those trained to take samples in half an hour...

It's also no real surprise: it was reported early on that hospitals often took a couple of samples from severely ill Covid patients before getting positive results.
If you missed that in the press then think about the fundamentals we do know: if all patients shed virus for 10 days or more persistently then the starting point for our knowledge of Coviud "R nought" would be likely to be a lot higher than 2-3!

When we do PCR based tests for animal's respiratory viruses there is often only a short window of opportunity when one can reliably find virus ( usually at the beginning of infection). Thereafter with some diseases recovered carriers only shed virus when "stressed" .
#12813
I’m sure you are right H’sD in that medical research is out of control worldwide. The difference in the U.K. is that the academic departments may say they are funded by Universities or Pharma but research takes a substantial portion of NHS resources that are not costed. Why have loads of medical and nursing graduates doing research when the priority should be to have them on the wards, clinics and GP surgeries?
The initial testing was a fiasco and goodness knows who made those decisions. What is unclear in all this is who is saying do this or that. The government refuses to release the details of how decisions were arrived at and who recommended what. It’s to be hoped that before the knighthoods are handed out that information will be in the public domain and that the guilty are accountable for their errors.
#12814
Lord Elpus wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:36 pm
The Govts say they have followed the science throughout, if they haven't then why haven't the chief scientists resigned?
Not throughout, Lord Elpus.

Until the beginning of last week, the Government asserted that they were "following the science".

Since then they have been asserting that they are "listening to the science".

That is not the same thing by a long chalk.
#12819
H's D wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 5:53 pm
WillC wrote:
Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:52 pm

Going a bit off topic but I'm afraid H's D that I simply don't buy the "Britain is crap, everyone else is wonderful" bollox.


Where on earth do get "everyone else is wonderful?" I made no such suggestion. I was just pointing out that we are jumping the gun judging by what others have done...They have waited until infection levels are much lower before releasing lockdowns.

Every country has some issues, but we appear to have almost every issue going....and I can't find any particlular metric which indicates we have done well in comparison with others in at least one respect...

As for believing what the press say: I only believe and accept those opinions which are supported by the facts, and it certainly isn't just some of the British press that are indicating we have done fairly badly in dealing with this epidemic: Foreign Governments, their press, WHO and most scientific opinion and analysis indicate that we haven't exactly done well in all of this...especially in comparison to those countries that took early decisive action (following the gold standard science of test, trace, isolate).

Moreover i would certainly not swap places with the US, Brazil or much of the third world. They appear to have done worse or seem on course for that judgement. Wgereas I would sqap places with Australia and N.Z. in how quickly and effectively they reacted.

Judgment will come far later but when government ministers indicated that anything less than 20K deaths would be considered a success in terms of their policy & strategy in dealing with Covid in mid March I certainly took note.
Sorry H's D, not you specifically. I am just fed up (and this may be in part down to Lockdownitus) with the almost constant barrage that I hear about how crap the UK is compared to everywhere else (from the press but also friends and family). It has been going on for years but it ramped up with the Brexit referendum and seems to have increased again with Covid.

I just happen to think that overall, on balance, with all its faults, our country (or indeed our collection of nations) is pretty good and I fail to understand why "we" have to do it down so often.

In terms of the virus, this is new for everyone. All that the decisions makers can do is make decisions based on, frankly, best guesses. Those decisions can't be beta tested but you can be damned sure, no matter what the outcome, a proportion of the population will think that it was the "wrong" decision.
#12823
As far as restarting rugby is concerned, I can't see me being able to return safely for a long time yet and watching games on the TV or on-line has never really appealed to me save for the 6 Nations, but that is usually because I'm watching at a rugby club or pub where there is at least a form of game day atmosphere. Sitting at home alone and watching a game seems, to me at least, pretty pointless but as ever each to their own. I haven't watched a single minute of rugby since the last game played at Heywood Road.

OK, you can stop reading now as I'm going off topic.

I'll just throw in my take of C-19 and how it has been handled as viewed by someone on the Shielding Register.

I was informed that I was on the Register by text from an unknown mobile number which could have been from anyone. Indeed, as I didn't expect to be on the Register I assumed that it was one of my rugby or theatre colleagues having a joke. There was nothing whatsoever to indicate or prove that it was genuine.

Several days later I got the undated letter confirming that I was on the register and this was followed up by a phone call in which I learned that I was indeed on it, what it meant, that Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council would be in touch and "look after me" and that (result!) I now had a priority slot with Tesco!

Every cloud, etc. :joy:

The strong advice was that, as I was at very high risk of developing severe symptoms if I contracted C-19, I should not go out of my front door and should thus not go for a solitary walk even whilst observing social distancing, should allow no-one into the house, not even family, and that I should be totally isolated from all physical human contact until the end of June.

There the matter rested until, a fortnight ago, when I had a brief but amiable call from SMBC checking that I was "OK". That is the only contact from anyone within the NHS, Council or Government. No letters, no phone calls, no texts or no official advice though the various channels of media.

Until last weekend.

There had been a growing feeling amongst those of us on the Shielding Register (I know many through both the MS Society and my somewhat antique and doddery hypochondrial circle of friends) that we had been totally and utterly forgotten, overlooked and ignored.

Out of the blue, on Saturday night at 10:00pm BST, the Government announced (without, it seems, any consultation or discussion with the various medical authorities, experts and scientists*) that from midnight on Sunday we were henceforth allowed out of our homes provided that social distancing was observed. There was no explanation as to what was going to change so dramatically at that exact time nor any prior warning that the announcement was coming or likely to be coming.

What many of us feel is that, after a growing expression of concern that no-one in authority seemed to remember that we existed, someone in Downing Street suddenly thought "Shit, we've completely forgotten about these 2.5 million otiose Shielders, we'd better throw them a carrot and let them out - we don't care about them anyway as most of them aren't economic contributors".

Perhaps not as bald as that, but that is the overall feeling. We have had no explanation of why we couldn't even leave out front doors with social distancing at the start and we have had no explanation as to why the rules have so suddenly changed. I know that knowledge of C-19 has grown during the crisis, but why not offer an explanation?

If there had been explanations then we could weigh up the evidence, see whether or not we agreed with the rationale and made an informed decision. If we could have seen a reason then we could have accepted, or rejected, the advice.

My strict and slavish adherence to any and all rules and regulations is legendary so did I stick to the letter of the advice? You'll have to make up your own minds about that. Have I changed my behaviour since midnight on Sunday? Not one little bit, I shall carry on as before until someone gives me proper information and advice and I feel that I can start returning to "normal".




* May I highly commend a section of the always excellent Stephen Nolan's show on BBC Radio Five Live on Sunday last (9:00pm to midnight on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays? He has a regular chat with "Dr Al", an A&E Consultant at a hospital in Manchester. "Dr Al" has been keeping us informed of what is happening in his hospital with respect to C-19. This week he made some powerful points. I commend it to you, go to 2:03:20 for the relevant segment:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000jpvj
DaveAitch liked this
#12826
Is there any wonder that different countries adopted different tactics and confusion reigned? Ask any 3 epidemiologists the best course of action and you will get 4 different answers. The worlds politicians are arse covering, power hungry narcissists (there must be a few good ones, but struggling to think of any) who quickly turned this epidemic into a political football at national and international level. I don't want to go all Trumpesque, but the WHO has proven to be largely inneffective, not able to bring about a collaborative approach (possibly not in their remit, probably should be).
DaveAitch liked this
#12829
WHO's remit is to direct public health within the United Nations.

So I think the government of any nation failing to co-operate internationally, including even within the formal framework of the UN, would have difficulty in credibly blaming the WHO for the absence of international collaboration.


Bit like blaming the UN security council for the Iraq war isn't it? They said no. Bush and Blair went in anyway.
#12832
No problem WillC, it wasn't your post that was insulting and derogatory. We are all suffering lockdownitis. I also am tired of all the criticism in a difficult situation. However I'm even more frustrated with people's ability to ignore the obvious. I keep reverting to examining the facts as reported by professional bodies, in clinical papers and by proper investigative journalists. Especially in broadsheet papers normally supportive of the government.
HMG have clearly followed the advice of those Sage participants who's expert perspective fitted their agenda at the time. I found it particularly interesting that Ferguson's UCL modelling was actually done in early February and was presented to Sage well before Boris was actually paying attention and attending. Boris only followed on examining the implications of that modelling well over a month later. If you believe the investigators for "Despatches", epidemiologists weren't the loudest voices at the Sage table. Economists, Mathematical modellers and Clinical psychologists were apparently certain that until things got bad in the UK "compliance" with restrictions would be short-lived and poor. They didn't make sufficient allowance for all that coverage from China, Korea, Italy and Spain.
QED early lockdowns have been far more effective in all respects globally. I was also enlightened recently (Despatches) by the fact that our lockdown was announced only hours after the French president apparently phoned Boris to say that unless he took immediate action they were closing the channel ports!
Fundamentally though I don't accept this virus was so novel that no-one knew what to do!
Everyone keeps forgetting/ignoring that throughout all of this, and ever since their post-SARS report in 2004, the acknowledged pandemic prevention experts at WHO have always stressed exactly the same fundamental, time immemorial, measures. All countries should make preparatory provision for "future novel diseases" appearing including contingency planning for rapid increase in relevant services, and that they should periodically stress test their ability to put those plans into action (e.g. CYGNUS) and of course then they would be perfectly able to "Test, trace and Isolate" at high speed in the face of any pandemic. I strongly recommend anyone interested should skim through that report, downloadable from their website.
Furthermore Derbyshire folk don't even need to do that: they have known all about effective pandemic control for centuries. I hope we all remember Eyam!

I tend to think it part of our national nature that we are bloody-minded and that we don't need to follow established 'best practice' and always want to find our own "British"solution. Whereas those countries that simply followed WHO's lead have done relatively well. The wheel doesn't need to be reinvented just because "we now have an app for that".

Also in one sense it is the fact that WHO have been so very successfull in the past in preventing pandemics that has lead to many countries be-littling their expertise and accusing them of excessive crying of "Wolf". The very fact that SARS , MERS, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, Ebola, BSE, etc were successfully suppressed to cause minimal impact/economic damage in the West has been indirectly instrumental in reducing their influence in my opinion. In those countries where that expertise was manifest 'on the ground' in the past, their advice has been far more strictly adherred to, although reducing/stopping air travel at a very early stage may well have been the single most effective measure done 'above and beyond' their advice.

This virus though, is indeed "the perfect storm": and whilst previous challenges could be controlled fairly quickly with imperfect responses still being effective, this one really did need everyone pulling in exactly the same direction. In this increasingly nationalistic isolationist decade that has proven impossible.
#12862
Olyy wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:23 am
....what happens with contracts?

Like, is Rob Webber still a player for us? Contracts usually run out in June, I think - so is he now retired?
Does Sinckler play for Quins or Bristol? etc.
From what I've read elsewhere, yes, players like Rob Webber won't get to play again for their clubs.
Olyy liked this
#12918
The 5 Live radio programme is worth an hour of time. Dimes is very open and honest about the club situation in general and our squad in particular, with a couple of 'Dimeisms' in there to make me smile.
The further conversation about the world season which is well underway around the globe is very enlightening too, and appears quite close to fruition. Dawson in particular seems very enthused about the window of opportunity given by the current suspension in playing, to grow the popularity of the game both at club and international level. I came away much more aware of the proposed changes and pleased I had listened.
chris1850 liked this
#12958
Olyy wrote:
Fri Jun 05, 2020 10:23 am
....what happens with contracts?

Like, is Rob Webber still a player for us? Contracts usually run out in June, I think - so is he now retired?
Does Sinckler play for Quins or Bristol? etc.
There was a release put out by Bristol about the players that were leaving and the ones joining, all from 1 July. Definitely suggested to me that all the moves are happening around the same time. Makes for a very odd situations where a player might leave Exeter at the top of the table and in best position to win the league, only to end the season at a club that hasn't won the league. On indeed the other way round and end up winning the league.

It is going to make for some interesting sports quiz questions in a few years!!
Olyy liked this
Never ending word association thread

Warp

Injuries

Wow, indeed. Get well soon Rob and good luck.

Team vs Quins

Rohan the only serious possibility, isn't he? I kn[…]

The Run-In

You've made decidedly average sound positive! Whic[…]