Coronavirus outbreak

[roubaixtuesday]

The problem is not choice between Hitchens and Whitty but making "Is this worth it" a taboo subject. I have noticed journalists who dare raise this question have the online comments facility removed pdq as the pitchforks are raised and torches lit. There are plenty of qualified opinons out there who think the reaction might result in worse health consequences in the UK than the virus could produce, then we have the economic consequences to also consider.

I have noticed not much going on in the oncology depts lately, how did they slip down the ladder of importance?

I think that debate is absolutely fine. Indeed I've made points along those lines above.

What is NOT fine is to deliberately deceive about the real consequences of the current epidemic, which is what Hitchens was doing.

 

[Rezillo]

Although it happens all the time.....I remember one my wife's colleagues getting a letter, which started Dear Poof Yudkin.

He kept it as a badge of honour.

That takes me back. Was he the Yudkin of Yudkin and Offord?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

For psychological relief, a graph that goes down: the fall in the growth rate for the hardest-hit countries. (US figs thought unreliable because of a testing backlog.)
View attachment 511242

Is it just me or does the uk one not really go down beyond a smidgen?

 

[oldfatfool]

I knew linking the wail would lighten things 😂 however one thing is true in his article the public are being encouraged to grass up a neighbour, it is all a bit too reminiscent of the gestapo and Himmler. (yippee we have got round to the nazis and it as only taken 365 pages) 😇

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Is it just me or does the uk one not really go down beyond a smidgen?

It's too early to see the effects, if any worthy of note, of lockdown.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

...one thing is true in his article...

One more than anticipated then.

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

Oo, another graph to misinterpret.

Doesn't it indicate our infection rate was in overall decline prior to lock down?

I thought it was increasing.

It's percentages. The first case would have registered 100% and the figure descends from there.

 

[mjr]

Dr Harries for a start.

People tend not to like it when it happens to them - you once ticked me off when I mistakenly transposed letters in your username.

It does cause annoyance because the 'victim' feels the person doing it is being disrespectful.

And the correct thing to do then is for the committer to apologise and correct, while the victim moves on to the substantive question and don't carry a grudge for ages, and decent reporters report the Q&A, not the slip.

 

[Rocky]

That takes me back. Was he the Yudkin of Yudkin and Offord?

A relation of his!!

 

[marinyork]

Who cares if he fluffed a name? Not great, but what about the question?

Didn't see it but Harries is a surname that is pronounced very differently depending on who it is. I have known one lot of Harries that preferred it one way and one other family the other way.

 

[Pale Rider]

Didn't see it but Harries is a surname that is pronounced very differently depending on who it is. I have known one lot of Harries that preferred it one way and one other family the other way.

He called her Paris.

 

[Rocky]

He called her Paris.

I've been called worse but I agree, it's not good, particularly for a reporter. I seem to remember people stumbled over Jeremy Hunt's name too.

 

[marinyork]

He called her Paris.

That one's pretty bad, but it was over video. Telephone/video similar sounding letter mistakes are common.

 

[Rezillo]

A relation of his!!

Wow! Their book (and Lehninger's) was an instrument of torture to 1970s biochemistry students.

 

[Rocky]

Wow! Their book (and Lehninger's) was an instrument of torture to 1970s biochemistry students.

Absolutely - I read biochemistry at Kings, London, from 1975-78. Lehninger was my bible. I still have my copy.