This 'Guardian' report has the exact same "misreading". As have a string of reports released since the 'Times' expose of the government's initial response. In recent days, there's been a clear pattern of advisors attempting to undermine ministers. I posted a detailed thread from Anthony Costello, formerly of the W.H.O., outlining the splits, and who's been driving policy, which fits with what I've long suspected. If this interests you I can only suggest you read it. Here it is:-
As for influenza, I said weeks ago we as a society have been too lax about this, a failing I certainly apply to myself. I've also said weeks ago that the collapse of local public health (and local government in general) as been a major contributing factor to this disaster. Beyond the policial analysis, we don't appear to disagree that much.
There is a reasonable chunk of overlap between us in places, which is probably why I cant help arguing with you over some specific areas repeatedly, rather than just leaving alone.
I'm not always happy with the totality of my descriptions of things, sometimes some important aspect seems missing. Sometimes its because I am conservative with certain details I dont know, I dont like to assume, especially when there are conflicting indicators. For example, I will normally point out when someone says something noteworthy for its lack of commitment, such as Whitty and certain aspects of testing the other day. But then some time before that Whitty was also the one that made clear there were lessons to learn from Germany. I should presume that Costello actually gets to talk to certain people involved in a way that I cannot, I have no special access and can only operate in the way I do because of the stuff that comes out through journalists and these days certain parts of the web featuring individuals who have decided to be open. From that timeline I cannot tell quite how much more he knows, he is mostly relying on the same clues I have had to, but I'm wary of reading too much into them. I guess he knows more about SAGE splits than me, although some of that also seems clear only because one or two members arent afraid to voice some of their opinions in public. The rest remains a mystery to me.
Probably the reason I chose to focus so much on describing these things in terms of 'the orthodoxy', and why I take comments and even glimpses of actual opinions from officialdom with a pinch of salt, is that I expect them to be slow and plodding and stuck in their ways. Hell much of science ends up like that, which is a whole topic in itself. Science is not in reality a pure thing that can be isolated from individual and group phenomenon ranging from general ineptitude to lazy thinking to vested interests to dogma to basic human ego, pride, saving face and protecting reputations and positions. Some scientists, doctors etc retain a degree of open-mindedness and flexibility of thought, but specialisation in general does tend to invite a narrowing of mind that can have unfortunate implications.
Politicians have various orthodoxies too. But a big difference is on display at a time like this - given certain circumstances, all the political equations may change radically overnight. When that happens, politicians have to adapt and embrace the new political normal in order to survive, potentially at a speed that far outruns the orthodoxy of scientific and medical officialdom. The political orthodoxy could have been completely dumped before officialdom has even gotten round to their initial defence their own orthodox position. Thats probably part of what we see now, and yes some of awkwardness that results could be studied via old episodes of Yes Minister. But I dont have the real inside info, so I am limited in how much of this I can dissect in near-realtime. So I largely prefer not to bother, so long as it has become clear enough what the official policy really is. Because even if the non-elected-politician parts of officialdom arent really up for it, they will still end up getting dragged along for the ride, and eventually even their own dogmas will evolve or die.
As I've said before, I suppose I am acutely aware of the power of orthodoxy because its the only reason I was able to sound like I knew what would happen next in February. That side of things was all so very predictable! I do consider it a bit of a miracle that we even managed to change approach when we did, imagine how much better it would have been if done a few weeks earlier, and how much worse if done a week or so even later than it was. And I'm not even convinced that the country had all the ingredients on its own to make that miracle come about, I think we are still too stunted by the top-down petty bullshit this country is renowned for. Rather its thanks to the far more worldly realtime view of things we have these days that disaster was partially averted. Broken Britain with the wrong approach is so much harder to disguise when people are able to look at what other countries were doing, and when, and make the right noises at the right volume in the nick of time!
. its odd but when I heard that the dried poo of covid patient, if it got blown around as air born and infectious.. I wondered about this...
