Schools to open or not?

[The liquidator]

Might aswell say it  there are some families with 3 generation all living together and BAME are the biggest victims in this covid 19 .....its not rocket science is it ......plus the terrible situation with the care homes it's a awful  situation.

[JOK]

I don’t need to read an article by Katie Price on Nuclear Physics to know it will be full of sh*t science.

So you haven't read them - particularly the article by Luke Johnson Chair of the Insitute of Cancer Research.

---

Welll, No I haven’t read an article by Luke Johnson and to be honest I can’t see where you recommend such an article in the post I responded to.

Even had I done so, I’m not sure a baker, Fast Food outlet entrepreneur and another, ‘pull a fast one’ Risk Capital shark’, non executive w banker, retro sweet shop running, pub landlord wanna be and oh, a failed medical student , who just happens to be Chairman of the Institute for Cancer research, a position he has held for six years and whose nick name is Cool Hand Luke, is a bloke who’s expertise I would turn to first.
I wonder when the last time he put a white coat on and went worked in a lab was.
The Queen is Colonel Chief of the Armed forces but I doubt they ask her for her tactical views before a battle.

Just continually recommending articles by non scientific experts doesn’t add weight to your argument by dint of sheer weight of numbers.

[Derek Hardballs]

Dishonest how? I never said that article was the one to rule them all, just that it matched my views. The central point of the article remains: children are not super-spreaders. Therefore, if adults can go back to work, children should be able to go back to school.

The Olivers and Graces of the parents on this bored may be absolutely fine at home, but lots of children will be suffering at home.

I cannot see the logic until waiting until September to send all children back to school together, particularly as September is closer to winter and therefore flu season. It's far better to have a staggered return, which my children will hopefully be participating in, as both are eager to go back to school.

Sounds a touch like the politics of envy there.

The Beyoncé s and Jaydons of the knucklehead parents will still be struggling when they get back to school. Because their parents take very little interest in their offspring’s education. Then are quite happy to blame the school when poor little Skywalker and Preshuss don’t do well. (The later a genuine name I encountered. Presumably intended to be Precious)
Don’t be discriminatory or sneeringly dismissive against some parents because they invest time and effort on their children. A commodity all parents have available at present. And schools are sending out lesson plans for all pupils irrespective level or background, it is irrelevant to the school. If some parents choose to spend 2 or more hours extra per day, compared to others, trying to educate their children, good on them. 
Perhaps all parents will now appreciate the worth of teachers. Not such a cushy number after all.

As far as not being “Super Spreaders”. Within weeks of the autumn term starting a good quarter of staff will have come down with some lurgy or other the kids have bought in

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52701850

Thinking of the welfare of vulnerable children is not "the politics of envy". And no, not all schools are providing the same level of educational activity. Keeping schools closed will worsen disadvantage.

As I've said previously, we are not all in this together and the social and economic costs of lockdown are not being borne equally  

It is not possible to keep all children away from school until there is a vaccine. Therefore a return to school is inevitable. (So no, it is not like talking about the earth being flat). The discussion is then when is the best time for that to happen.

I don't see a nationwide starting point of September as feasible, particularly as it marks the consent of the winter cold and flu season. It makes far more sense to have staggered reintegration. I've had contact from the head and the council and schools in our area should be accepting pupils from next month.

For anyone asking why we have such a high death rate, the Munro review stats showing the high levels of inequality in the UK are a big clue. Life expectancy has recently plateaued. Educational attainment is a key factor in perpetuating inequality, but apparently stating this makes you both a government lackey and speaking politics of envy.

I commend your concern for the disadvantaged but let’s be honest this is more about getting their parents back to work for those making the decisions. Forgive my cynicism but what evidence is there that this has been the concern of the Conservative party for the past decade or so? Or the media that props them up?

We have only just got a tentative grip on the virus and yet we are making teachers go back to work without any protection or even a working and experienced track and trace model to point to to say it works. The lockdown has eased to the point people are just ignoring it by design or lack of clear message so there is a very real prospect of a second spike. We are rushing to ease lockdown after dragging our feet to do so in the first place. 

An example from the radio today... gentlemen from Lichfield rings Shiela Fogarty to tell her that he was on route home to self isolate as his wife who has carried on working at a local school teaching key workers kids has had to be quarantined due to one of the pupils testing positive for Covid. The school is now shut, one teacher has flu like symptoms and I presume the families will have to be tested or self isolated or both. This will happen up and down the country, until we have a handful and f cases that can be properly traced and tracked and you would think time will enable us to get better at this. It’s just my opinion but I don’t see how June is a sensible time to go back. 

Time will tell who is right and who isn’t. Hopefully you are as I don’t want my kids missing school.

[JOK]

---

Why is the UK death rate the worst in Europe?

It isn’t!    It is actually the seventh worst  ‘Death Rate” in Europe! And in a country with the highest population density.

Again, not dismissing your post as a lie but pointing out your assertion is inaccurate, again.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/1110...y-country/

[Borin' Baggie]

---

Why is the UK death rate the worst in Europe?

It isn’t!    It is actually the seventh worst  ‘Death Rate” in Europe! And in a country with the highest population density.

Again, not dismissing your post as a lie but pointing out your assertion is inaccurate, again.


https://www.statista.com/statistics/1110...y-country/

We don't have the highest population density; Belgium and Austria are higher. Even if you take just England, we still don't have the highest population density as the Netherlands or micronations like Monaco, Luxembourg and Lichtenstein.

[Protheroe]

I don’t need to read an article by Katie Price on Nuclear Physics to know it will be full of sh*t science.

So you haven't read them - particularly the article by Luke Johnson Chair of the Insitute of Cancer Research.

---

Welll, No I haven’t read an article by Luke Johnson and to be honest I can’t see where you recommend such an article in the post I responded to.

Even had I done so, I’m not sure a baker, Fast Food outlet entrepreneur and another, ‘pull a fast one’ Risk Capital shark’, non executive w banker, retro sweet shop running, pub landlord wanna be and oh, a failed medical student , who just happens to be Chairman of the Institute for Cancer research, a position he has held for six years and whose nick name is Cool Hand Luke, is a bloke who’s expertise I would turn to first.
I wonder when the last time he put a white coat on and went worked in a lab was.
The Queen is Colonel Chief of the Armed forces but I doubt they ask her for her tactical views before a battle.

Just continually recommending articles by non scientific experts doesn’t add weight to your argument by dint of sheer weight of numbers.

I referred to it in the OP. Rather than being so casually dismissive you should really look at the numbers. Johnson deals in risk - the risk is miniscule compared to the cost of the lockdown.

You don't have to be a scientist to be a decent statistician. Unfortunately Imperial College scientists don't appear to be decent statisticians.

[Babel]

Actually you do need to be a scientist to be a decent, qualified statistician--and that's a 103% fact!

[JOK]

---

Why is the UK death rate the worst in Europe?

It isn’t!    It is actually the seventh worst  ‘Death Rate” in Europe! And in a country with the highest population density.
Again, not dismissing your post as a lie but pointing out your assertion is inaccurate, again.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1110...y-country/

We don't have the highest population density; Belgium and Austria are higher. Even if you take just England, we still don't have the highest population density as the Netherlands or micronations like Monaco, Luxembourg and Lichtenstein.

I stand corrected.
However, the U.K. has a higher urban density than Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Austria only has 57% of people living in highly populated areas.
But Belgium and The Netherlands do have a higher proportion of urbanites.
Luxembourg and San Marino as micro states are a different matter.
I was correct about the Death Rate though.

[Shabby Russian]

I don’t need to read an article by Katie Price on Nuclear Physics to know it will be full of sh*t science.

So you haven't read them - particularly the article by Luke Johnson Chair of the Insitute of Cancer Research.

---

Welll, No I haven’t read an article by Luke Johnson and to be honest I can’t see where you recommend such an article in the post I responded to.

Even had I done so, I’m not sure a baker, Fast Food outlet entrepreneur and another, ‘pull a fast one’ Risk Capital shark’, non executive w banker, retro sweet shop running, pub landlord wanna be and oh, a failed medical student , who just happens to be Chairman of the Institute for Cancer research, a position he has held for six years and whose nick name is Cool Hand Luke, is a bloke who’s expertise I would turn to first.
I wonder when the last time he put a white coat on and went worked in a lab was.
The Queen is Colonel Chief of the Armed forces but I doubt they ask her for her tactical views before a battle.

Just continually recommending articles by non scientific experts doesn’t add weight to your argument by dint of sheer weight of numbers.

I referred to it in the OP. Rather than being so casually dismissive you should really look at the numbers. Johnson deals in risk - the risk is miniscule compared to the cost of the lockdown.

You don't have to be a scientist to be a decent statistician. Unfortunately Imperial College scientists don't appear to be decent statisticians.

What do you think the risk of no lockdown was.

Given there has been at least 35k deaths with a lockdown policy, what do you think the death rate would be without one.

Or put this another way. How many deaths, from the same cause, in a 2 month period would be acceptable to you.

And finally if there had been no lockdown, what affect would that have had the economy. Before the lockdown many people were clearly avoiding many types of economic activity. That reluctance to engage in economic activity would have only increased as the rate of infection increased. What protection would there have been for those businesses, employees and communities hit hardest by that loss of economic activity.

[Protheroe]

What do you think the risk of no lockdown was.

I believe Lockdown was a result of the mismanagement of containment. Lockdown was also based on flawed modelling, there's not one sane person on Earth who believes Imperial College's discredited model predicting 500,000 deaths to be robust in any way whatsoever.
Given that the risk of serious illness to the vast majority of people is miniscule then lockdown should have / should be limited to at risk groups and individuals.
It's clear that Lockdown has 'saved' the NHS at the cost of care homes, patients with other acute illnesses and the economy.
We're all capable of judging the risk to ourselves (whether our response is cavalier or conservative) and we didn't / don't need an overbearing state terrifying us into accepting the closure of society. There are unbelievable levels of anxiety and it's the neurotic minority driving and distorting the debate.