MY friends and relations know when I am angry. I go into a shell, quietly fuming, and if nothing else happens, I explode! On Friday I did just that. I got fed up with hearing every government spokesperson saying “we listened to scientific advice”.
Ministers and advisers were well briefed and took every chance to deflect criticism away from the government, but we know that listening to scientists is not enough. You can’t just listen and then ignore all the advice and information you are given which does not agree with your political point of view.
It seems clear from the information we have been given about the reports from Cobra that avoiding damage to the economy received greater priority than protecting peoples’ health and saving lives. The make-up of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), 10 scientists and 13 political advisers, ensured that unbiased scientific opinion took a back seat to political expediency.
READ MORE: Scientists set up independent Sage group after Cummings revelations
The true application of science is about measuring all of the evidence and drawing conclusions, some of which you may not agree with. If you ignore conclusions that are based on impartial assessment of the evidence, you cannot claim that you have science on your side.
The result of not taking account all of the science resulted in delays in testing and isolating. The policies adopted by the most successful countries in dealing with the pandemic were all similar. Test at borders. Test anyone with symptoms. Test contacts of anyone tested positive. Isolate all who test positive. Minimise social contact. These were all actions that resulted from looking at best practice and taking scientific advice.
Our government failed to take similar advice until it was too late, and as a result a large pool of infection spread around our nation. We are paying for that delay now, with lost lives. Isn’t it time that “true science” not “faux science” should be at the heart of our policy-making?
Pete Rowberry
Duns
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel