Decisions need to be solidly based & not premature. We don’t yet know what will be possible & when. @scotgov will set out asap the factors that will guide decisions, but as/when we lift restrictions, we must be able to suppress virus in different ways eg test, trace, isolate. https://t.co/LnyeF5Y3JR
— Nicola Sturgeon (@NicolaSturgeon) April 18, 2020
Further to my last tweet, these decisions must be based on evidence and careful judgment, not on the demands of the Sunday newspaper briefing cycle. https://t.co/qyM5krvWlQ
— Nicola Sturgeon (@NicolaSturgeon) April 18, 2020
Nothing better illustrates what a terrible start Keir Starmer has made as Labour leader than the Mail on Sunday praying him in aid of their bloodthirsty campaign to end lockdown before the virus is under control.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
“To get this under control we needed to move quicker and more firmly, and now we’re having to play catch up”
Former Chief Medical Officer for Scotland Sir Harry Burns tells @SophyRidgeSky he thinks the government was slow to react to the #coronavirus pandemic. pic.twitter.com/rrBSyLEwCj
— SkyNews (@SkyNews) April 17, 2020
Former Chief Medical Officer for Scotland, @HarryBurns16 so the question would be, what advice would he have given @NicolaSturgeon had he still been CMO #followthescience https://t.co/5egSBnw2qC
— mandy rhodes (@holyroodmandy) April 17, 2020
No mystery, Mandy. Test, test, test. Trace the contacts and isolate them.
— Harry Burns (@HarryBurns16) April 18, 2020
Advice from Scotland’s best ever Chief Medical Officer https://t.co/FBQBblzCeq
— Malcolm Chisholm (@MalcolmChishol1) April 18, 2020
Why was the data weak? We still are not testing enough so we have no idea of the prevalence of the virus, we don’t trace contacts so we don’t know who to isolate.
— Harry Burns (@HarryBurns16) April 18, 2020
Sorry, not buying that. Their concern is about accuracy of antibody testing to assess who has developed immunity. Testing for presence of virus has been the basis of successful strategies in S Korea and New Zealand
— Harry Burns (@HarryBurns16) April 18, 2020
So, @mark_mclaughlin , remember our chat a couple of weeks ago about your bizarre unsupported claim that Sir Harry Burns “agreed” with Graham Medley that the virus should be allowed to spread freely? Here’s the proof that the complete opposite is true – https://t.co/LMNwU0xcs1
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
Source please – where did I say that?
— Mark McLaughlin (@mark_mclaughlin) April 18, 2020
Here you go. The screenshot you were saying is in agreement with Harry Burns’ views states: “Britain must consider allowing people to catch the virus in the least deadly way possible”.https://t.co/ayjyAmDfuH
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
I’ve heard this phrase used before, what does it mean, how do you catch a virus in the least deadly way?
— GillianB (@BrittonGillian) April 18, 2020
By having a well provisioned and functioning health care system, lots of ventilators and hopefully sometime soon new treatments to suppress lung inflammation
— Mark McLaughlin (@mark_mclaughlin) April 18, 2020
In other words, build up health care capacity and make sure people get sick as soon as a hospital bed or ICU is ready for them. For some reason ‘prevention is better than cure’ went out of fashion in February and March, but fingers crossed it might be making a comeback.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
I’m sorry, Mark, but you’re flogging a dead horse here. He’s posted a number of tweets only today that leave no room for doubt that he favours a South Korean-style suppression strategy, ie. not allowing the virus to spread freely. Here’s another one –https://t.co/yZbD9RjDyn
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
Seriously, Mark, you’re totally and utterly wrong about this, although I’m willing to believe it’s an honest mistake. ‘Test, trace, isolate’ and herd immunity are *opposite* strategies. The former keeps the numbers persistently low and holds out for a vaccine.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
What if a vaccine never emerges?
— Mark McLaughlin (@mark_mclaughlin) April 18, 2020
The chances of that are remote. But South Korea have got the numbers down to a few dozen per day, so I must admit I haven’t yet worked out how many decades it would take them to achieve herd immunity at the current rate. Have you?
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
OK, I’m now in a position to solve the mystery. Having got the number of new cases down to around 20 per day, a rough calculation suggests it would take around *4000 years* for South Korea to achieve herd immunity! I must admit that was a touch higher than I expected…
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
Oh, and even that assumes the population is immortal and that nobody else is born. As neither of those things are true, herd immunity is essentially *unachievable* if South Korea continue their successful suppression of the virus.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) April 18, 2020
Herd immunity is *never* achievable by letting a wild-type virus run through the population. Otherwise we’d never have needed vaccines for things like measles and polio.
— Morag (@DrMoragKerr) April 18, 2020
