No. Because the best case scenario is what? That the race gets annulled? In which case Max Verstappen is world champion anyway having won one more race than Hamilton despite being tied on points.
The race is flagged at lap 57, lap 58 is voided.
And my best case scenario is that I win the lottery tomorrow, but that's not going to happen either. No F1 court will dare upset the result of a completed world championship. The money involved for a start...
Mercedes had the faster car for most of the season, and they have the chance to develop it further. Their best riposte would be to come back and drive into the far distance leaving RB gasping.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
No. Because the best case scenario is what? That the race gets annulled? In which case Max Verstappen is world champion anyway having won one more race than Hamilton despite being tied on points.
The race is flagged at lap 57, lap 58 is voided.
And my best case scenario is that I win the lottery tomorrow, but that's not going to happen either. No F1 court will dare upset the result of a completed world championship. The money involved for a start...
Mercedes had the faster car for most of the season, and they have the chance to develop it further. Their best riposte would be to come back and drive into the far distance leaving RB gasping.
Mercedes may do it just to get the rule clarification, it completely changes the strategy calculations. If this is now a possibility then Lewis would have been pitted under the second SC lap.
No. Because the best case scenario is what? That the race gets annulled? In which case Max Verstappen is world champion anyway having won one more race than Hamilton despite being tied on points.
The race is flagged at lap 57, lap 58 is voided.
On what grounds? Because Toto disagrees with the call made by the Race Director? Mercedes just won their 8th consecutive manufacturers championship. And the only competitor who has got anywhere near challenging them has departed the sport with this race...
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
No. Because the best case scenario is what? That the race gets annulled? In which case Max Verstappen is world champion anyway having won one more race than Hamilton despite being tied on points.
The race is flagged at lap 57, lap 58 is voided.
And my best case scenario is that I win the lottery tomorrow, but that's not going to happen either. No F1 court will dare upset the result of a completed world championship. The money involved for a start...
Mercedes had the faster car for most of the season, and they have the chance to develop it further. Their best riposte would be to come back and drive into the far distance leaving RB gasping.
Mercedes may do it just to get the rule clarification, it completely changes the strategy calculations. If this is now a possibility then Lewis would have been pitted under the second SC lap.
regulation 4.12.12: "If the clerk of the course considers it safe to do so, and the message "LAPPED CARS MAY NOW OVERTAKE" has been sent to all teams via the official messaging system, any cars that have been lapped by the leader will be required to pass the cars on the lead lap and the safety car."
The regulations also state the safety car will pit at the end of the lap FOLLOWING the lap on which lapped cars overtook.
Masi completely broke the rules to engineer the result.
No. Because the best case scenario is what? That the race gets annulled? In which case Max Verstappen is world champion anyway having won one more race than Hamilton despite being tied on points.
The race is flagged at lap 57, lap 58 is voided.
On what grounds? Because Toto disagrees with the call made by the Race Director? Mercedes just won their 8th consecutive manufacturers championship. And the only competitor who has got anywhere near challenging them has departed the sport with this race...
Because there is no specific regulation that covers some lapped cars being let through and then not being allowed to catch up. That regulation needs clarification and if it was broken then who knows how it works. Right now the race director has made up a new rule to let some but not all cars through, had Mercedes known that was possible then it changes their own strategy calculations.
No. Because the best case scenario is what? That the race gets annulled? In which case Max Verstappen is world champion anyway having won one more race than Hamilton despite being tied on points.
The race is flagged at lap 57, lap 58 is voided.
On what grounds? Because Toto disagrees with the call made by the Race Director? Mercedes just won their 8th consecutive manufacturers championship. And the only competitor who has got anywhere near challenging them has departed the sport with this race...
Yes, the loss of Honda isn't exactly a benefit for RBR.
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
UK health agency on Omicron: "This is a big wave, it's coming straight at us, and if we see even half the severity that we saw with Delta, then we're facing a very large number of hospitalizations and potential deaths" - BBC
UK health agency says a number of people with Omicron have now been hospitalized - BBC
Lockdown incoming on Saturday. Just to add to this afternoon's prevailing mood of jollity after the car racing spat.
My reading of the tea leaves is the government scientific advisers are pushing for such, driving a media narrative to this conclusion.
What Boris does is a different matter. As I said previous days, I can absolutely see Jan / Feb under stricter restrictions, not called a lockdown, but many of the usual parts of it.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
UK health agency on Omicron: "This is a big wave, it's coming straight at us, and if we see even half the severity that we saw with Delta, then we're facing a very large number of hospitalizations and potential deaths" - BBC
UK health agency says a number of people with Omicron have now been hospitalized - BBC
Lockdown incoming on Saturday. Just to add to this afternoon's prevailing mood of jollity after the car racing spat.
My reading of the tea leaves is the government scientific advisers are pushing for such, driving a media narrative to this conclusion.
Yep, may come down to how credible a threat to Boris is, because he's clearly not taking his party with him on this, he's only getting wimpy plan B with Labour vote so going lockdown on top without a vote is a real nuclear step.
As usual the forces of lockdown appear to be in a headlong race against data proving them wrong. They were beaten by half term last time. Fingers crossed the RSA data continues as is and shows their folly this time before they bully the trolly in to something daft.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
'Sadly there is a bullshit idea that has been spread that "your mask protects others"'
'If mask mandates had efficacy, we should surely have studies demonstrating that by now. Where are they?'
You, just in the last few days. I remember older stuff too, but I'm not doing your homework for you a third time. You've been trying to get people to think masks don't work for several weeks. It would be better if you used honest means to push your agenda. Philip, you've lied repeatedly.
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
Yup, a red flag would have been preferable, we saw Lewis go from second to first, it can be done.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
On that subject, I love Nadhim Zahawi so much:
There was even a video of education secretary Nadhim Zahawi that actually seemed to be a defence of why the government wasn't recommending the reintroduction of face masks in secondary and college classrooms - even though this is now the norm in schools in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
"Additional mask-wearing can - and I have had reports from a number of MPs - impede or hinder the communication in a classroom," he said.
There are epidemiological benefits but they are sufficiently damaging in other ways that if we can't keep schools open without them we shouldn't have schools open at all.
It seems pretty clear that the race director's decision was ultra vires. There is no reasonable interpretation of rule 48.12 which gives authority to instruct some but not all lapped cars to pass.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
Good!
Educate those who are bothered wear a properly fitted FFP2 or better mask.
For everyone else, let them get their natural immunity booster if that's what they'd prefer.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
Shit, I missed this...
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
Yup, those that were let through were able to do so before the start of the final lap, if Mick Schumacher had to come through the safety car would have gone past the start line and that's the end of the race.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
Shit, I missed this...
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
Yup, those that were let through were able to do so before the start of the final lap, if Mick Schumacher had to come through the safety car would have gone past the start line and that's the end of the race.
That's a slightly different point. Even with the illegal selective unlapping, it was also against the rules for the safety car to pit that same lap.
Once the penultimate lap started with no unlapping, it was impossible to allow unlapping and a restart within the rules.
However we then got the Horner phone call sounding like a disappointed manager talking to a subordinate, and Masi started the cheating.
Mercedes have submitted an appeal according to the BBC?
Yes, protest lodged. It makes sense from their perspective, they definitely need clarity over which specific regulation allows some but not all lapped cars to pass the leader before the restart.
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
Yup, a red flag would have been preferable, we saw Lewis go from second to first, it can be done.
Indeed. To my inexpert eye, Lewis was rendered a sitting duck in the scenario that unfolded.
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
Yup, a red flag would have been preferable, we saw Lewis go from second to first, it can be done.
Can you restart a race after a red flag once 75% has been completed?
I'm asking because I don't know.
If not, Red Bull would now be protesting...
It's been a thoroughly ill-tempered season. And far too bloody long. But you can't say it's been dull.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
Good!
Educate those who are bothered wear a properly fitted FFP2 or better mask.
For everyone else, let them get their natural immunity booster if that's what they'd prefer.
Free choice.
We know. You want other people's wives and daughters to die so that you and your wife and daughter can have "liberty".
UK health agency on Omicron: "This is a big wave, it's coming straight at us, and if we see even half the severity that we saw with Delta, then we're facing a very large number of hospitalizations and potential deaths" - BBC
UK health agency says a number of people with Omicron have now been hospitalized - BBC
Lockdown incoming on Saturday. Just to add to this afternoon's prevailing mood of jollity after the car racing spat.
My reading of the tea leaves is the government scientific advisers are pushing for such, driving a media narrative to this conclusion.
What Boris does is a different matter. As I said previous days, I can absolutely see Jan / Feb under stricter restrictions, not called a lockdown, but many of the usual parts of it.
Boris has gone native. He needs to be sacked.
We need a new leader who is willing to say that we have had enough of experts from organisations with acronyms who constantly get things wrong.
Who can that leader be though when Gove has become the experts biggest advocate?
Mr. Charles, no, I believe the Belgian farce was because only two or so laps now are needed for it to count as 'half-distance' (I think previously it was a third of race distance). This means half points are awarded and, more importantly, the sport won't refund tickets.
If Lewis had been in the points they wouldn’t have run them & would have refunded tickets
Every marginal decision this season has favoured Max. That’s the issue.
For those who know. How do they know how many omicron cases there are? AIUI only 1 in 10 are sampled and sequenced. Is this just an extrapolation from a statistical sample?
Providing that the sampling is random, and that they adjust estimates appropriately to account for the characteristics of the sampled population, then it ought to be possible to estimate the prevelence accurately.
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
Yup, a red flag would have been preferable, we saw Lewis go from second to first, it can be done.
Can you restart a race after a red flag once 75% has been completed?
I'm asking because I don't know.
If not, Red Bull would now be protesting...
It's been a thoroughly ill-tempered season. And far too bloody long. But you can't say it's been dull.
I think you can, it's on the discretion of the race director. A three lap sprint race with all cars on scrubbed soft tyres would have been an incredible ending, a little unfair to Lewis who held an 11s lead before but much fairer than what transpired.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
On that subject, I love Nadhim Zahawi so much:
There was even a video of education secretary Nadhim Zahawi that actually seemed to be a defence of why the government wasn't recommending the reintroduction of face masks in secondary and college classrooms - even though this is now the norm in schools in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
"Additional mask-wearing can - and I have had reports from a number of MPs - impede or hinder the communication in a classroom," he said.
There are epidemiological benefits but they are sufficiently damaging in other ways that if we can't keep schools open without them we shouldn't have schools open at all.
(For the avoidance of doubt they should be open.)
But if only we'd kept English schoolchildren firmly gagged this Autumn, case rates would be vastly lower here like they are in the rest of the UK!
UK health agency on Omicron: "This is a big wave, it's coming straight at us, and if we see even half the severity that we saw with Delta, then we're facing a very large number of hospitalizations and potential deaths" - BBC
UK health agency says a number of people with Omicron have now been hospitalized - BBC
Lockdown incoming on Saturday. Just to add to this afternoon's prevailing mood of jollity after the car racing spat.
My reading of the tea leaves is the government scientific advisers are pushing for such, driving a media narrative to this conclusion.
What Boris does is a different matter. As I said previous days, I can absolutely see Jan / Feb under stricter restrictions, not called a lockdown, but many of the usual parts of it.
Boris has gone native. He needs to be sacked.
We need a new leader who is willing to say that we have had enough of experts from organisations with acronyms who constantly get things wrong.
Who can that leader be though when Gove has become the experts biggest advocate?
Mark Harper, and I promise that not just my 150/1 shot talking!
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
Nah, disagree. A certain percentage of cases end up in hospital. If cases are too high then you start having capacity issues. Cases at 40-50k is a great level, at 150k not so much.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
'Sadly there is a bullshit idea that has been spread that "your mask protects others"'
'If mask mandates had efficacy, we should surely have studies demonstrating that by now. Where are they?'
You, just in the last few days. I remember older stuff too, but I'm not doing your homework for you a third time. You've been trying to get people to think masks don't work for several weeks. It would be better if you used honest means to push your agenda. Philip, you've lied repeatedly.
Mask mandates. Mask mandates not masks. 🤦♂️
"If mask mandates had efficacy"
They don't. Mask mandates don't work because they suppress the virus for everyone but the virus is still endemic. It doesn't ensure those capable of defeating the virus get immunity. It doesn't suppress the virus away from those vulnerable, since the virus remains endemic.
Mandates don't work. Name any state or nation with mask mandates that has better immunity now than we do?
UK health agency on Omicron: "This is a big wave, it's coming straight at us, and if we see even half the severity that we saw with Delta, then we're facing a very large number of hospitalizations and potential deaths" - BBC
UK health agency says a number of people with Omicron have now been hospitalized - BBC
Lockdown incoming on Saturday. Just to add to this afternoon's prevailing mood of jollity after the car racing spat.
My reading of the tea leaves is the government scientific advisers are pushing for such, driving a media narrative to this conclusion.
What Boris does is a different matter. As I said previous days, I can absolutely see Jan / Feb under stricter restrictions, not called a lockdown, but many of the usual parts of it.
Boris has gone native. He needs to be sacked.
We need a new leader who is willing to say that we have had enough of experts from organisations with acronyms who constantly get things wrong.
Who can that leader be though when Gove has become the experts biggest advocate?
Mark Harper, and I promise that not just my 150/1 shot talking!
Mark Harper used to be my MP.
I like him as a person but he isn't a possible PM. No way is he up to it.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
Shit, I missed this...
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
Yup, those that were let through were able to do so before the start of the final lap, if Mick Schumacher had to come through the safety car would have gone past the start line and that's the end of the race.
Masi was screwed whatever he did. Red flag the race and people complain that he's stuck Max up Lewis's arse and HE'LL TRY AND CRASH. Don't red flag and hope they shift the car so we get some racing. They go slow and ah shit we may finish behind the SC. Then "we're done", snap decision, bunch them up and 1 lap shootout.
I don't think Masi is the best race director F1 has ever had...
Au contraire. At the race when Bottas-Russell crashed, Hamilton was massively aided by a safety car followed by red flag. At Silverstone, Hamilton punted off his title rival to a DNF and got himself a 10s time penalty only. The penalty in Brazil (back of grid) being applied to Hamilton's sprint race and not the actual race grid was hugely beneficial.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
Nah, disagree. A certain percentage of cases end up in hospital. If cases are too high then you start having capacity issues. Cases at 40-50k is a great level, at 150k not so much.
Depends on the severity really. 150k cases of Omicron per day may only present the same number of severe cases in a largely immunised population as 20-30k Delta cases per day, a least that's what the SA Delta to Omicron comparison indicates.
If the Tories do hold on on Thursday then Boris is safe, probably until the local elections given the LDs are favourites.
If the LDs win North Shropshire there will probably be a VONC before the New Year, though I would still expect Boris to narrowly win it for now
I'd be astonished if the Tories win NS, but I don't believe there will be a VoNC and, even if there is, Johnson will win it pretty comfortably. Playing for the 0/3 competition here!
I don't think they will but they absolutely should. The letting lapped cars through bit definitely needs clarification because it completely changes the calculation.
It doesn't need clarifying. There's already a clear rule and it was not followed.
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
Yup, a red flag would have been preferable, we saw Lewis go from second to first, it can be done.
Can you restart a race after a red flag once 75% has been completed?
I'm asking because I don't know.
If not, Red Bull would now be protesting...
It's been a thoroughly ill-tempered season. And far too bloody long. But you can't say it's been dull.
I think you can, it's on the discretion of the race director. A three lap sprint race with all cars on scrubbed soft tyres would have been an incredible ending, a little unfair to Lewis who held an 11s lead before but much fairer than what transpired.
It would certainly have been entertaining. But equally, the default is to try and keep the race going particularly that near the end.
One thing I am confident about is that Masi will shortly tire of being the parental style referee between two squabbling toddlers race director and head off for something more peaceful and straightforward, like milking alligators.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
Good!
Educate those who are bothered wear a properly fitted FFP2 or better mask.
For everyone else, let them get their natural immunity booster if that's what they'd prefer.
Free choice.
I'm not sure it matters how many studies people can come up with on efficacy of masks in lab settings. We just had a live study in the British isles with England being the control group, and it's not obvious that mask mandates moved the dial one way or the other in any meaningful way.
Since they're not cost free from very many perspectives, it is ergo not a worthwhile measure. And would be better replaced by prescribing FFP3 masks to vulnerable category patients, as I suggested to my mp in the summer.
But we've long ago left the station of trying to actively manage this in the most efficient way. It's all just about doing something anything to avoid criticism at the enquiry and using it as a new battle front in the culture wars.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
'Sadly there is a bullshit idea that has been spread that "your mask protects others"'
'If mask mandates had efficacy, we should surely have studies demonstrating that by now. Where are they?'
You, just in the last few days. I remember older stuff too, but I'm not doing your homework for you a third time. You've been trying to get people to think masks don't work for several weeks. It would be better if you used honest means to push your agenda. Philip, you've lied repeatedly.
Mask mandates. Mask mandates not masks. 🤦♂️
"If mask mandates had efficacy"
They don't. Mask mandates don't work because they suppress the virus for everyone but the virus is still endemic. It doesn't ensure those capable of defeating the virus get immunity. It doesn't suppress the virus away from those vulnerable, since the virus remains endemic.
Mandates don't work. Name any state or nation with mask mandates that has better immunity now than we do?
Mask mandates do work. It's right there in one of the studies I sent you earlier that you claim to have read. Jesus fucking Christ, how is it possible you cram so much stupid into just one head? You're like a fucking goldfish.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
Shit, I missed this...
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
Yup, those that were let through were able to do so before the start of the final lap, if Mick Schumacher had to come through the safety car would have gone past the start line and that's the end of the race.
Masi was screwed whatever he did. Red flag the race and people complain that he's stuck Max up Lewis's arse and HE'LL TRY AND CRASH. Don't red flag and hope they shift the car so we get some racing. They go slow and ah shit we may finish behind the SC. Then "we're done", snap decision, bunch them up and 1 lap shootout.
I don't think Masi is the best race director F1 has ever had...
You stick to the rules and regs and tell the bitching parties about the rules and regs. It's really that simple, that's why they exist in the first place. Making it up has just created a ridiculous situation and I wouldn't be surprised if Mercedes take this to CAS and win with the race flagged at lap 57.
For those who know. How do they know how many omicron cases there are? AIUI only 1 in 10 are sampled and sequenced. Is this just an extrapolation from a statistical sample?
Providing that the sampling is random, and that they adjust estimates appropriately to account for the characteristics of the sampled population, then it ought to be possible to estimate the prevelence accurately.
Thanks. That's what I had assumed. Was just confused by a figure accurate to 4 places. I presume they don't say "estimated" to avoid confusion then.
If the Tories do hold on on Thursday then Boris is safe, probably until the local elections given the LDs are favourites.
If the LDs win North Shropshire there will probably be a VONC before the New Year, though I would still expect Boris to narrowly win it for now
The clown is already badly tarnished goods in the county, but it will take Tory politicians closer to him some time before they come to the same conclusion.
The ending was completely outside the rules. Starting to think Merc should have ordered bottas to park up in the middle of the track before the restart - might as well start the court case holding the ball if you're just going to be robbed blind otherwise.
I just finished watching Brockmire (comedy about a washed up alcoholic baseball announcer, played by Hank Azaria, trying to make a comeback) on Amazon Prime and thoroughly enjoyed it. Has anyone else seen it?
I'm not sure it matters how many studies people can come up with on efficacy of masks in lab settings. We just had a live study in the British Isles with England being the control group, and it's not obvious that mask mandates moved the dial one way or the other in any meaningful way.
Which is what I've been trying to communicate on several previous occasions on here, but I lack your brevity. Many thanks.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
Good!
Educate those who are bothered wear a properly fitted FFP2 or better mask.
For everyone else, let them get their natural immunity booster if that's what they'd prefer.
Free choice.
I'm not sure it matters how many studies people can come up with on efficacy of masks in lab settings. We just had a live study in the British isles with England being the control group, and it's not obvious that mask mandates moved the dial one way or the other in any meaningful way.
Since they're not cost free from very many perspectives, it is ergo not a worthwhile measure. And would be better replaced by prescribing FFP3 masks to vulnerable category patients, as I suggested to my mp in the summer.
But we've long ago left the station of trying to actively manage this in the most efficient way. It's all just about doing something anything to avoid criticism at the enquiry and using it as a new battle front in the culture wars.
The studies linked to earlier were real-world, not lab studies.
Ironically enough, there was a lab study done which seemed to indicate cloth masks INCREASE the amount large particles detected when participants talked/coughed into a tube that was designed to measure droplets etc. The confounding effect was the machine was apparently picking up small fibres which are obviously harmless from a Covid point of view. I didn't include that link because it's been deliberately misused by anti-science jerks to try to show that masks make Covid transmission more likely.
To reiterate, the studies I linked to show real world transmission reductions.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
Nah, disagree. A certain percentage of cases end up in hospital. If cases are too high then you start having capacity issues. Cases at 40-50k is a great level, at 150k not so much.
If we put more effort into convincing the vulnerable to wear a mask that works well like an FFP2 mask or better, and less into mandating cloth masks on everyone, then a lower proportion would end in hospital.
I write this without prejudice and as a pro-European.
However, any sporting organisation (especially motorsport) run by the French (which seems to be most of them) is institutionally corrupt and it is the plucky Brit that normally takes the spanking.
I learned this lesson as a 4 year old in 1966 when the winning Mini Coopers were disqualified from the Monte Carlo Rally on a lighting infringement. The French scrutineers decided the Minis had the wrong bulbs in the headlights- like that would have any effect on performance! Anyway several other teams were also disqualified over lighting issues before the 1966 Monte Carlo Rally win could be awarded to the Citroen team.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
Shit, I missed this...
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
Yup, those that were let through were able to do so before the start of the final lap, if Mick Schumacher had to come through the safety car would have gone past the start line and that's the end of the race.
Masi was screwed whatever he did. Red flag the race and people complain that he's stuck Max up Lewis's arse and HE'LL TRY AND CRASH. Don't red flag and hope they shift the car so we get some racing. They go slow and ah shit we may finish behind the SC. Then "we're done", snap decision, bunch them up and 1 lap shootout.
I don't think Masi is the best race director F1 has ever had...
You stick to the rules and regs and tell the bitching parties about the rules and regs. It's really that simple, that's why they exist in the first place. Making it up has just created a ridiculous situation and I wouldn't be surprised if Mercedes take this to CAS and win with the race flagged at lap 57.
Which would replace silly with silly. Mercedes have a better shot at Verstappen alongside and momentarily ahead of Hamilton behind the safety car. Wasn't an overtake though as the regulations talk about...
Cases up a little on last week, but growth rate on front page has actually fallen as it's a smaller rise than last week. If Omicron is as widespread as Sage keep saying, surely cases should be growing faster than tests by now.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
Nah, disagree. A certain percentage of cases end up in hospital. If cases are too high then you start having capacity issues. Cases at 40-50k is a great level, at 150k not so much.
Depends on the severity really. 150k cases of Omicron per day may only present the same number of severe cases in a largely immunised population as 20-30k Delta cases per day, a least that's what the SA Delta to Omicron comparison indicates.
Fingers crossed.....although the modellers think a million new cases a day ;-)
Quite incredible that it doesn't seem like Javid has challenged this assumption.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
'Sadly there is a bullshit idea that has been spread that "your mask protects others"'
'If mask mandates had efficacy, we should surely have studies demonstrating that by now. Where are they?'
You, just in the last few days. I remember older stuff too, but I'm not doing your homework for you a third time. You've been trying to get people to think masks don't work for several weeks. It would be better if you used honest means to push your agenda. Philip, you've lied repeatedly.
Mask mandates. Mask mandates not masks. 🤦♂️
"If mask mandates had efficacy"
They don't. Mask mandates don't work because they suppress the virus for everyone but the virus is still endemic. It doesn't ensure those capable of defeating the virus get immunity. It doesn't suppress the virus away from those vulnerable, since the virus remains endemic.
Mandates don't work. Name any state or nation with mask mandates that has better immunity now than we do?
Mask mandates do work. It's right there in one of the studies I sent you earlier that you claim to have read. Jesus fucking Christ, how is it possible you cram so much stupid into just one head? You're like a fucking goldfish.
Mask mandates do not work,
At best they delay but do not stop COVID speeding.
But if we assume that masks themselves do slow the spared a bit, which I think is credible, then by having people chose whether or not they where one, then people are able to chose make a chose as to how much risk they face. as a result people who are at risk because of age or pre-existing condition can mask up while those of us who are not can chose to not mask.
As a result we still keep on having infections till we reach heard immunity, but we the people who have court it are disproportionately those who where happy with the risk, and therefor less vonrable people have caught it, and slightly less hospitalisation and death.
Which is good.
That this is only a very small effect, is simply because masks are not that effective in the big scheme of things.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
Nah, disagree. A certain percentage of cases end up in hospital. If cases are too high then you start having capacity issues. Cases at 40-50k is a great level, at 150k not so much.
Depends on the severity really. 150k cases of Omicron per day may only present the same number of severe cases in a largely immunised population as 20-30k Delta cases per day, a least that's what the SA Delta to Omicron comparison indicates.
Fingers crossed.....although the modellers think a million cases a day ;-)
How many cases did they think when they projected 7000 hospital admissions a day in mid October? They were out by a factor of 10. Are the inputs to this model more sensible? Track record doubtful.
I write this without prejudice and as a pro-European.
However, any sporting organisation (especially motorsport) run by the French (which seems to be most of them) is institutionally corrupt and it is the plucky Brit that normally takes the spanking.
I learned this lesson as a 4 year old in 1966 when the winning Mini Coopers were disqualified from the Monte Carlo Rally on a lighting infringement. The French scrutineers decided the Minis had the wrong bulbs in the headlights- like that would have any effect on performance! Anyway several other teams were also disqualified over lighting issues before the 1966 Monte Carlo Rally win could be awarded to the Citroen team.
A lesson learned well, and early. Sorry Lewis.
Flashbacks to Jean-Marie Ballestre running FISA and declaring that his decision is always the right decision...
Cases up a little on last week, but growth rate on front page has actually fallen as it's a smaller rise than last week. If Omicron is as widespread as Sage keep saying, surely cases should be growing faster than tests by now.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
Nah, disagree. A certain percentage of cases end up in hospital. If cases are too high then you start having capacity issues. Cases at 40-50k is a great level, at 150k not so much.
Depends on the severity really. 150k cases of Omicron per day may only present the same number of severe cases in a largely immunised population as 20-30k Delta cases per day, a least that's what the SA Delta to Omicron comparison indicates.
Fingers crossed.....although the modellers think a million cases a day ;-)
How many cases did they think when they projected 7000 hospital admissions a day in mid October? They were out by a factor of 10. Are the inputs to this model more sensible? Track record doubtful.
I am more concerned Javid appears to have taken this at face value. It is such a stand out figure, I think I would want to see their working, have it triple checked etc, before thinking about rattling it out in the HoC.
Under the scandal of party-gate, it seems to have got lost in the noise.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
Shit, I missed this...
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
Yup, those that were let through were able to do so before the start of the final lap, if Mick Schumacher had to come through the safety car would have gone past the start line and that's the end of the race.
Masi was screwed whatever he did. Red flag the race and people complain that he's stuck Max up Lewis's arse and HE'LL TRY AND CRASH. Don't red flag and hope they shift the car so we get some racing. They go slow and ah shit we may finish behind the SC. Then "we're done", snap decision, bunch them up and 1 lap shootout.
I don't think Masi is the best race director F1 has ever had...
You stick to the rules and regs and tell the bitching parties about the rules and regs. It's really that simple, that's why they exist in the first place. Making it up has just created a ridiculous situation and I wouldn't be surprised if Mercedes take this to CAS and win with the race flagged at lap 57.
Which would replace silly with silly. Mercedes have a better shot at Verstappen alongside and momentarily ahead of Hamilton behind the safety car. Wasn't an overtake though as the regulations talk about...
Why is it silly? Those are regulations? It's the rulebook. Red Bull could have bitched a lot about a SC finish but the rule book is the rule book. This way Mercedes might actually have grounds to have the last lap voided because the restart rules weren't properly followed.
@Farooq your problem is you seem to be, like Rochdale, incapable of seeing past "cases = BAD".
For me, as many cases as happen naturally occur is a GOOD thing. Especially if those who are bothered about the virus are protected by wearing a quality FFP2 etc mask while those who aren't, are not wearing one.
That segments the risk so that the right people are getting immunity more, which raises the herd immunity levels for the benefit of everyone including those having to wear a mask because they're afraid.
I don't accept the premise that preventing "cases" is a good thing. It may have been early on in the pandemic pre vaccines but it isn't anymore. I don't want cases reduced by NPIs, so them being reduced by NPIs isn't a benefit.
The BMJ article says how states (and nations) with mask mandates have had lower case rates. That is an argument AGAINST mask mandates for me. Those states have failed to get immunity.
No, you're just attacking straw men now. The only point I'm trying to make is that masks work. This is in response to your repeated false assertions that they do not. At no point have I said masks should be mandated, I'm just trying to bring some truth in to usurp your lies.
You seem on the verge in the above post of saying that NPIs do, in fact, work. Alongside a separate argument which is saying that, to paraphrase, "they are bad BECAUSE they work".
Well, it's progress, I guess. I hope you'll stop with your anti-science premises now. I won't even attempt to tackle your argument that it's good to let this spread, not now at least.
No shit Sherlock that masks work. That's why I advocated for them last year.
I dispute that mask mandates work post vaccines because inhibiting those who are not bothered about catching Covid and putting them on the same footing as those who are bothered is a terrible idea.
The only way out of this is immunity. The best way to get immunity is vaccines, we've done that.
The second best way to get immunity is for those who don't care if they get infected, to naturally get infected before those who do care if they do.
Inhibiting the spread of the virus post vaccines is stupid. The sane solution is those who are bothered wear masks to protect themselves and nobody else does.
So you've gone on journey from being right about the facts of masks to being wrong about them. What do you want, part credit? Most people prefer to go the other way but horses for courses I guess.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
I never said masks have no efficacy.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
Because without a mandate people in England won't wear one.
Good!
Educate those who are bothered wear a properly fitted FFP2 or better mask.
For everyone else, let them get their natural immunity booster if that's what they'd prefer.
Free choice.
I'm not sure it matters how many studies people can come up with on efficacy of masks in lab settings. We just had a live study in the British isles with England being the control group, and it's not obvious that mask mandates moved the dial one way or the other in any meaningful way.
Since they're not cost free from very many perspectives, it is ergo not a worthwhile measure. And would be better replaced by prescribing FFP3 masks to vulnerable category patients, as I suggested to my mp in the summer.
But we've long ago left the station of trying to actively manage this in the most efficient way. It's all just about doing something anything to avoid criticism at the enquiry and using it as a new battle front in the culture wars.
The studies linked to earlier were real-world, not lab studies.
Ironically enough, there was a lab study done which seemed to indicate cloth masks INCREASE the amount large particles detected when participants talked/coughed into a tube that was designed to measure droplets etc. The confounding effect was the machine was apparently picking up small fibres which are obviously harmless from a Covid point of view. I didn't include that link because it's been deliberately misused by anti-science jerks to try to show that masks make Covid transmission more likely.
To reiterate, the studies I linked to show real world transmission reductions.
What do you make of the live experiment we've just had in the UK? It must be among the most rigorous there's been, given up until the summer the UK had largely had identical policies to covid, roughly equal rates of prior transmission, vaccine penetration, demographics and societal norms. For the purposes of forming specifically UK policy on this subject, there can be no more relevant and useful experiment out there.
You're just ignoring it because you've picked a side in the culture wars and like to look down on anyone taking a broader view of the cost/ benefits of mask mandates, because it makes you feel morally and intellectually superior.
The ending was completely outside the rules. Starting to think Merc should have ordered bottas to park up in the middle of the track before the restart - might as well start the court case holding the ball if you're just going to be robbed blind otherwise.
My question is simply this: had they insisted that all the cars unlapped themselves would there have been any race left? My guess is there might have been a mile and a bit of track for Max to give it a go - fair and square under the rules - but again I’m no expert.
Hamilton's 40 on Betfair for SPOTY, which may be eminently hedgeable if he gets given the title.
Be aware that SPotY nominations will be announced tomorrow morning. You are betting that Hamilton will be among them. I've had a couple of quid but that's all.
I write this without prejudice and as a pro-European.
However, any sporting organisation (especially motorsport) run by the French (which seems to be most of them) is institutionally corrupt and it is the plucky Brit that normally takes the spanking.
I learned this lesson as a 4 year old in 1966 when the winning Mini Coopers were disqualified from the Monte Carlo Rally on a lighting infringement. The French scrutineers decided the Minis had the wrong bulbs in the headlights- like that would have any effect on performance! Anyway several other teams were also disqualified over lighting issues before the 1966 Monte Carlo Rally win could be awarded to the Citroen team.
A lesson learned well, and early. Sorry Lewis.
One of many reasons that I find motorsport boring is that it is a sport for lawyers.
The ending was completely outside the rules. Starting to think Merc should have ordered bottas to park up in the middle of the track before the restart - might as well start the court case holding the ball if you're just going to be robbed blind otherwise.
My question is simply this: had they insisted that all the cars unlapped themselves would there have been any race left? My guess is there might have been a mile and a bit of track for Max to give it a go - fair and square under the rules - but again I’m no expert.
No - once they started the penultimate lap behind the safety car, it was impossible to let cars uplap and have a restart within the rules.
It was genuinely all over, and so they started breaking the rules.
Cases up a little on last week, but growth rate on front page has actually fallen as it's a smaller rise than last week. If Omicron is as widespread as Sage keep saying, surely cases should be growing faster than tests by now.
Yes it all looks a bit meh again. The bigger news today will be that from RSA. If they drop again it could be quite interesting.
Formula 1 @F1 BREAKING: Mercedes have protested "against the classification established at the end of the Competition", relating to alleged breaches of Articles 48.8 and 48.12 of the FIA Sporting Regulations
For those who know. How do they know how many omicron cases there are? AIUI only 1 in 10 are sampled and sequenced. Is this just an extrapolation from a statistical sample?
Providing that the sampling is random, and that they adjust estimates appropriately to account for the characteristics of the sampled population, then it ought to be possible to estimate the prevelence accurately.
Thanks. That's what I had assumed. Was just confused by a figure accurate to 4 places. I presume they don't say "estimated" to avoid confusion then.
Sorry, I misunderstood what you were asking. The figures today are for the number of tests where the PCR test shows the S-gene dropout, as some PCR testing can show this and most of them will be Omicron, or where the test has been sequenced. So those are an accurate count.
The randomly sampled tests that are sequenced are used to estimate prevalance, which is where we get the "many times larger" claims from. Those figures are used to esimate how common a variant is if we account for the asymptomatic cases, the untested cases, test errors, and bulk of tests being unsequenced.
So the test count of cases is accurate, and the random sampling for sequencing is also used to estimate prevelance with less accuracy but good enough to work with.
Cases up a little on last week, but growth rate on front page has actually fallen as it's a smaller rise than last week. If Omicron is as widespread as Sage keep saying, surely cases should be growing faster than tests by now.
No, because it out-competes Delta. So as Omicron grows, Delta falls. And it is probably still at a relatively low level so the increased rate of increase is still hidden in the stats.
The ending was completely outside the rules. Starting to think Merc should have ordered bottas to park up in the middle of the track before the restart - might as well start the court case holding the ball if you're just going to be robbed blind otherwise.
My question is simply this: had they insisted that all the cars unlapped themselves would there have been any race left? My guess is there might have been a mile and a bit of track for Max to give it a go - fair and square under the rules - but again I’m no expert.
Nah, safety car would have come in at the end of lap 58, Lewis wins behind the safety car. It's the calculation that Mercedes made when they didn't bring him in on the second SC lap which could still have brought him out in front of Max.
I write this without prejudice and as a pro-European.
However, any sporting organisation (especially motorsport) run by the French (which seems to be most of them) is institutionally corrupt and it is the plucky Brit that normally takes the spanking.
I learned this lesson as a 4 year old in 1966 when the winning Mini Coopers were disqualified from the Monte Carlo Rally on a lighting infringement. The French scrutineers decided the Minis had the wrong bulbs in the headlights- like that would have any effect on performance! Anyway several other teams were also disqualified over lighting issues before the 1966 Monte Carlo Rally win could be awarded to the Citroen team.
A lesson learned well, and early. Sorry Lewis.
That also explains why it was our beef that was banned in 1996 while it went rampaging through the French national herd at an even greater rate amid an official cover-up (that they still get very touchy if you mention).
Comments
Mercedes had the faster car for most of the season, and they have the chance to develop it further. Their best riposte would be to come back and drive into the far distance leaving RB gasping.
If you were confident in your justification that masks shouldn't be mandated, why go around spreading misinformation about mask efficacy? Why lie?
If Masi wanted a spicy finish, he could red flag and have a 3 lap race with everyone on softs. Instead he acted completely outside the rules to hand the victory to the driver in 2nd place.
“...and the message ‘LAPPED CARS MAY MOW OVERTAKE’ has been sent to all competitors...”
“...once the last lapped car has passed the leader...”
The regulations also state the safety car will pit at the end of the lap FOLLOWING the lap on which lapped cars overtook.
Masi completely broke the rules to engineer the result.
I said mask mandates are bad.
There's a difference. I've said that many times now. How many different ways do I need to say it?
What Boris does is a different matter. As I said previous days, I can absolutely see Jan / Feb under stricter restrictions, not called a lockdown, but many of the usual parts of it.
As usual the forces of lockdown appear to be in a headlong race against data proving them wrong. They were beaten by half term last time. Fingers crossed the RSA data continues as is and shows their folly this time before they bully the trolly in to something daft.
https://twitter.com/LukeSmithF1/status/1470055046268309513
'If mask mandates had efficacy, we should surely have studies demonstrating that by now. Where are they?'
You, just in the last few days. I remember older stuff too, but I'm not doing your homework for you a third time.
You've been trying to get people to think masks don't work for several weeks. It would be better if you used honest means to push your agenda. Philip, you've lied repeatedly.
Such treasonous behaviour must be punished.
Now I'm off to watch Titans.
“...the safety car will return to the pits at the end of the FOLLOWING lap.” (my capitals).
There was even a video of education secretary Nadhim Zahawi that actually seemed to be a defence of why the government wasn't recommending the reintroduction of face masks in secondary and college classrooms - even though this is now the norm in schools in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
"Additional mask-wearing can - and I have had reports from a number of MPs - impede or hinder the communication in a classroom," he said.
https://www.tes.com/magazine/analysis/general/omicron-what-plan-b-education-should-have-looked
They're right. And I hope they keep it that way.
There are epidemiological benefits but they are sufficiently damaging in other ways that if we can't keep schools open without them we shouldn't have schools open at all.
(For the avoidance of doubt they should be open.)
Educate those who are bothered wear a properly fitted FFP2 or better mask.
For everyone else, let them get their natural immunity booster if that's what they'd prefer.
Free choice.
Piers on the F1
And Red Bull are a bunch of shits as well...
Once the penultimate lap started with no unlapping, it was impossible to allow unlapping and a restart within the rules.
However we then got the Horner phone call sounding like a disappointed manager talking to a subordinate, and Masi started the cheating.
I'm asking because I don't know.
If not, Red Bull would now be protesting...
It's been a thoroughly ill-tempered season. And far too bloody long. But you can't say it's been dull.
We need a new leader who is willing to say that we have had enough of experts from organisations with acronyms who constantly get things wrong.
Who can that leader be though when Gove has become the experts biggest advocate?
Every marginal decision this season has favoured Max. That’s the issue.
If the LDs win North Shropshire there will probably be a VONC before the New Year, though I would still expect Boris to narrowly win it for now
Oh, wait...
"If mask mandates had efficacy"
They don't. Mask mandates don't work because they suppress the virus for everyone but the virus is still endemic. It doesn't ensure those capable of defeating the virus get immunity. It doesn't suppress the virus away from those vulnerable, since the virus remains endemic.
Mandates don't work. Name any state or nation with mask mandates that has better immunity now than we do?
I like him as a person but he isn't a possible PM. No way is he up to it.
I don't think Masi is the best race director F1 has ever had...
But I take it that the motor race is over, that the fastest driver won, and that the post mortem could be lengthy.
When's the next test match start? I understand the cricket stuff.
Au contraire. At the race when Bottas-Russell crashed, Hamilton was massively aided by a safety car followed by red flag. At Silverstone, Hamilton punted off his title rival to a DNF and got himself a 10s time penalty only. The penalty in Brazil (back of grid) being applied to Hamilton's sprint race and not the actual race grid was hugely beneficial.
One thing I am confident about is that Masi will shortly tire of being the
parental style referee between two squabbling toddlersrace director and head off for something more peaceful and straightforward, like milking alligators.Since they're not cost free from very many perspectives, it is ergo not a worthwhile measure. And would be better replaced by prescribing FFP3 masks to vulnerable category patients, as I suggested to my mp in the summer.
But we've long ago left the station of trying to actively manage this in the most efficient way. It's all just about doing something anything to avoid criticism at the enquiry and using it as a new battle front in the culture wars.
Jesus fucking Christ, how is it possible you cram so much stupid into just one head? You're like a fucking goldfish.
I presume they don't say "estimated" to avoid confusion then.
The clown is already badly tarnished goods in the county, but it will take Tory politicians closer to him some time before they come to the same conclusion.
How shit must you be we kept a clean sheet...even when Castagne tried to gift you one!
Ironically enough, there was a lab study done which seemed to indicate cloth masks INCREASE the amount large particles detected when participants talked/coughed into a tube that was designed to measure droplets etc. The confounding effect was the machine was apparently picking up small fibres which are obviously harmless from a Covid point of view. I didn't include that link because it's been deliberately misused by anti-science jerks to try to show that masks make Covid transmission more likely.
To reiterate, the studies I linked to show real world transmission reductions.
Didn't stop him...
I write this without prejudice and as a pro-European.
However, any sporting organisation (especially motorsport) run by the French (which seems to be most of them) is institutionally corrupt and it is the plucky Brit that normally takes the spanking.
I learned this lesson as a 4 year old in 1966 when the winning Mini Coopers were disqualified from the Monte Carlo Rally on a lighting infringement. The French scrutineers decided the Minis had the wrong bulbs in the headlights- like that would have any effect on performance! Anyway several other teams were also disqualified over lighting issues before the 1966 Monte Carlo Rally win could be awarded to the Citroen team.
A lesson learned well, and early. Sorry Lewis.
Quite incredible that it doesn't seem like Javid has challenged this assumption.
At best they delay but do not stop COVID speeding.
But if we assume that masks themselves do slow the spared a bit, which I think is credible, then by having people chose whether or not they where one, then people are able to chose make a chose as to how much risk they face. as a result people who are at risk because of age or pre-existing condition can mask up while those of us who are not can chose to not mask.
As a result we still keep on having infections till we reach heard immunity, but we the people who have court it are disproportionately those who where happy with the risk, and therefor less vonrable people have caught it, and slightly less hospitalisation and death.
Which is good.
That this is only a very small effect, is simply because masks are not that effective in the big scheme of things.
Under the scandal of party-gate, it seems to have got lost in the noise.
You're just ignoring it because you've picked a side in the culture wars and like to look down on anyone taking a broader view of the cost/ benefits of mask mandates, because it makes you feel morally and intellectually superior.
It was genuinely all over, and so they started breaking the rules.
Formula 1
@F1
BREAKING: Mercedes have protested "against the classification established at the end of the Competition", relating to alleged breaches of Articles 48.8 and 48.12 of the FIA Sporting Regulations
The randomly sampled tests that are sequenced are used to estimate prevalance, which is where we get the "many times larger" claims from. Those figures are used to esimate how common a variant is if we account for the asymptomatic cases, the untested cases, test errors, and bulk of tests being unsequenced.
So the test count of cases is accurate, and the random sampling for sequencing is also used to estimate prevelance with less accuracy but good enough to work with.
Up about 5k cases on last Sunday and about general roughly on trend in terms of up bit over 10% week on week.
https://cdn-1.motorsport.com/static/img/amp/100000/120000/120000/120200/120294/s6_27652/f1-san-marino-gp-2003-giancarlo-fisichella-receives-the-winner-s-trophy-for-the-brazilian.jpg